What do you ready if you want to counterspell?

[Infiniti2000]

Sure you can, but you have to specify your readied action, so you're not really accomplishing anything. The point of the loophole was to leave the readied action unspecified, but you can't do that with Ready. For example, you can't ready an action such as "I cast a spell when he approaches." You ready a specific spell. Likewise, you can't ready to ready (anything), you have to ready to ready to (something specific). So, include as many readied actions as you want, per RAW, but they must be specific.

 

[Sil]

But when would the trigger occur? As I see it, your readied ready has no trigger.

Bah, I didn't see yor post.

 

[Arendhal]

For example, you can't ready an action such as "I cast a spell when he approaches." You ready a specific spell.

Are you really sure about this? Because I think you can.

 

[Arendhal]

Ok

Since mostly all say that b) is the correct answer i take that, while i still can´t see a reasonable difference between readying a spell and then cast dispel magic and readying a counterspell and then cast dispel magic

But since this seems to be the ruling i think next to nobody uses counterspell not because it is so difficult like wotc thinks on their webpage, but because in most cases it is just a better option to just hurt the wizard and hope that he will not make his concentration check.

I mean, which option has the highest probability of success:

1. hope you have exactly the right level spell prepared (or, if you have the improved counterspell feat, a spell from the correct school with spelllevel+1)
2. hope your (greater) dispel magic will do the trick
3. hope one of your damage spells will hurt him enough to fail the concentration check

I would go for 3 all of the time... there goes my pacifistic spellcaster.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Are you really sure about this? Because I think you can.

The Ready action states (my emphasis), per the SRD, "To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it." I admit to a little bit of interpretational error here, so if merely denoting the action type (move action, cast a spell, attack, etc.) is sufficiently specified for you, I'd say okay. In other words, if you argue that "I cast a spell" is specifying the action, then you allow the person to cast any spell, including from a staff or wand. Additionally, "I move" would be okay without saying how (fly, hustle, burrow, etc.) or where (away, towards, down, up). I personally don't view that as 'specifying', and I would argue against that interpretation. Another example, an archer says "If he moves, I attack" and when his opponent moves, can the archer (with a bow in hand) drop the bow, quickdraw his longsword and attack someone else entirely? Sure, if you merely allow "attack" instead of "shoot my bow at the person who moves." The latter is specified, the former is not.

 

[Infiniti2000]

1. hope you have exactly the right level spell prepared (or, if you have the improved counterspell feat, a spell from the correct school with spelllevel+1)

Okay, that's twice I've seen this and commented on it before. What's this 'right level spell' nonsense? You don't need the right level spell. If your opponent casts a maximized magic missile, you can counter it with a normal magic missile.

I would go for 3 all of the time... there goes my pacifistic spellcaster.

Then you don't have an archmage with mastery of counterspelling. You also better hope your opponent gets sufficiently damaged, otherwise his Big Nasty Spell will ruin your whole day. Sometimes stopping the Gate is a better option than a failed damaging attack. Remember, there's no resistance to counterspelling, that is, no anti-counterspelling tactic.

 

[Arendhal]

Okay, that's twice I've seen this and commented on it before. What's this 'right level spell' nonsense?

Sorry, my bad, just meant "the right spell". Level just slipped in because of the improved counterspelling.

Then you don't have an archmage with mastery of counterspelling.

Well, that is exactly one prestige class with one from many class features that makes counterspelling worthwile.

You also better hope your opponent gets sufficiently damaged, otherwise his Big Nasty Spell will ruin your whole day. Sometimes stopping the Gate is a better option than a failed damaging attack. Remember, there's no resistance to counterspelling, that is, no anti-counterspelling tactic.

Yes, but with disspelling you better hope you have the right spell prepared. The chance that i do enough damage is higher than the chance for this i think. I mean, Gate is just one from 24(!) 9th core level spells. The chance you have exactly the right spell prepared and not used it that day is quite small.

 

[Sejs]

Then you don't have an archmage with mastery of counterspelling. You also better hope your opponent gets sufficiently damaged, otherwise his Big Nasty Spell will ruin your whole day. Sometimes stopping the Gate is a better option than a failed damaging attack. Remember, there's no resistance to counterspelling, that is, no anti-counterspelling tactic.

Only one I can think of off the top of my head, would be an appropriatly loaded Ring of Counterspells. But that'd only work once before the ring would need another spell put into it.

 

[Infiniti2000]

A ring of counterspells would not stop a counterspell attempt. It only counterspells a spell on you. Minor side track, my players have a number of rings of counterspells and they find them very useful. They are typically loaded with dispel magic or greater dispel magic. I just need to use monsters with greater dispel magic as spell-like abilities.

 

[Sejs]

Are you sure on the ring of counterspells? The "If the target of your counterspell tries to cast a spell..." leads me to believe that the spell is targeted on you, and thus would qualify for the ring.


Heh, and yeah - I too love 'em loaded with Dispel Magic and the like. Strip my spells will you? No sir I don't think so!