D&D General When Did Counterspell First Appear?

[Garthanos]

It would kind of depend on the stuff I was thinking I might face. If it looked like it was a lot of evil wizards, well then it sounds better. If its a bunch of monsters, most of them don't cast spells.

Hence in a game where you want countering a wizards spell to just be a thing (highlighting the class or the concept of it takes a wizard to defeat a wizard --> not necessarily desired) then making the highly situational ability into a class feature like they did in Chainmail makes sense. A bit like the turn undead cleric feature in a sense.(though undead being a large category is potentially less situational).
Both are a bit game world/campaign/story specific... in a sense to me.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Hence in a game where you want countering a wizards spell to just be a thing (highlighting the class or the concept of it takes a wizard to defeat a wizard --> not necessarily desired) then making the highly situational ability into a class feature like they did in Chainmail makes sense. A bit like the turn undead cleric feature in a sense.(though undead being a large category is potentially less situational).
Both are a bit game world/campaign/story specific... in a sense to me.

Well, that COULD be, OTOH there's already a rather flexible spell casting mechanism, though that argument would be more cogent if 5e had common class mechanics across all/most classes. As it is, I don't really have an opinion. If it was 4e, then it darn well needs to be a power of some sort...

 

[Bacon Bits]

I don't mind Counterspell as a near-zero-cast-time spell in itself, but with that said:

--- all spells should have casting times a la 1e-2e, even if that time is near zero in a few cases, and be interruptable during that time
--- Counterspell should never be able to counter another Counterspell*. This isn't M:tG with its silly last-in first-out stack, it's D&D where things (should!) progress in linear time, meaning that by the time you finish casting your Counterspell mine has already gone off. Intended end result: no counter-counter wars like you see in M:tG.
--- casting Counterspell uses a spell slot (2nd level in my game) just like any other spell, meaning you only get so many in a day; but if your timing is right it's guaranteed to work. Note that in my game you can only cast spells of a level by using a slot of that level, meaning if you're out of 2nd level slots you can't cast any more 2nd level spells for the day, period.

* - or any other zero-cast-time spell, of which Featherfall, Command, and a few Power-Word spells are the only ones I can think of quickly.

I think this is a consistent view, and one that leans into the realism of the game world. The real criticism is that, for the amount of effort you need to put in, cast times don't add much to the game. They're like weapon type vs armor type modifiers. Realistic. Fair. But as far as a game mechanic, they're expensive. A fair bit of mechanical weight for almost no mechanical effect.

I'd much rather the game just drop counterspell entirely. The type of play patterns that emerge from the spell existing are really not very compelling. Having two wizards facing off against each other and gesturing wildly while nothing happens and they attrition each other out isn't particularly fun or interesting. It's boring. In reality, you essentially never get the Scanlan counterspell (having only a 9th level spell slot left and needing to choose between using counterspell to save the whole party at the cost of being unable to later save one from his foretold fate in dramatic and memorable fashion). It's so seldom, and the cost of it existing otherwise is not something I'm interested in reasonably preserving.

 

[Staffan]

I think this is a consistent view, and one that leans into the realism of the game world. The real criticism is that, for the amount of effort you need to put in, cast times don't add much to the game. They're like weapon type vs armor type modifiers. Realistic. Fair. But as far as a game mechanic, they're expensive. A fair bit of mechanical weight for almost no mechanical effect.

That's a good point. It sort of reminds me of 2e psionic combat.

In 2e, any psionic creature (other than a wild talent) would have a "closed mind", meaning you couldn't affect them with telepathic powers. In order to do so, you needed to use psionic combat to pry their mind open. Psionic combat made use of five different attack modes and five different defense modes, with a chart detailing modifiers for how they'd interact with one another. For example, using Mind Thrust versus a Mind Blank would have a +5 modifier, but a -4 modifier against an Intellect Fortress. The Dark Sun psionic supplement The Will & The Way expanded on this, providing four "harbingers" for each attack mode and four "constructs" for each defense, essentially creating a 20x20 matrix of modifiers. That was flavorful as heck, but not very interesting to anyone who wasn't a psionicist.

Similarly, a wizard duel can be cool as heck, but it's not much fun for those who aren't involved.

 

[jgsugden]

Thanks for sharing these ideas! Care to share full spell details for all of them?

I think I have some of them up and public on D&DBeyond - but really, beyond the ones that required a lot of clarifying text, they're pretty much as stated. If you're going to introduce them, I encourage you to make your own and then let your PCs discover them. I try to keep 1/3 of the spells my PCs face be homebrew/stolen to keep it interesting for them and make the world seem less (choose your option) and more (explore the unknown).

 

[jmartkdr2]

It would be interesting to see ideas on a better version of Counterspelling, whether that is different spell mechanics, a different mechanic than a spell, or something else.

Ideas I've seen:

• As 5E, except you can only counterspell something that would impact you.
• As 5E, except you can counterspell only spells of a level equal to or lower than the level at which you cast counterspell, or a spell you have prepared/known. There is no roll to counter higher level spells.
• Instead of being a spell, you enter a stance. The stance requires your action and lasts until the start of your next turn. You can't move more than 5 feet during a round without leaving a stance. While in the stance, you can cast the 5E version of counterspell as a reaction without using a spell slot (at 3rd level, always).
• As 5E, except you need to be in a defensive stance before you can cast it. While in a defensive stance you can't move more than 5 feet in a round. Entering a defensive stance requires an action.

My favorite change: you always need to roll to counterspell (there's no auto-success), but you can add the level of the spell slot used to the check. Thus if you spend a 3rd-level slot you make a roll of d20 + spellcasting ability mod + 3, DC is 10 + the targeted spell's level. It's never guaranteed. On the other hand, if you do want to burn a 9th-level slot it's probably a +14 (at least) to the check.

I've also seen a suggestion that it should be a class feature / feat rather than just a spell. I could also see it as a metamagic or invocation (and it can be more than one). Wizards should probably have it standard, and maybe bards, but I can see limiting it beyond those classes.

Last idea I've liked is for it to only work on spells that require at least an action - no counterspelling counterspells. I'm not totally sure about this - counterspell chains are rare and usually happen in high-stakes situations, so they're generally tense in a fun way - but if it's coming up too often in your games this is a quick way to shut it down.

In my setting I have a dozen spells related to Counterspell. Some examples...

• Deflection is 4th level, has similar mechanics, but you have the option of changing the target rather than counterspelling the spell.
• Stealspell is 6th level, has similar mechanics, but you absorb the spell and can cast it the following round.
• Hamperspell is 1st level and has similar mechanics, but instead of countering the spell it reduces the effectiveness (targets get advantage on saves, attack rolls are at disadvantage, durations are reduced to 10% (rounded up to the nearest round).
• Echospell is 4th level, has similar mechanics, but instead of countering it you cast the same spell immediately with your reaction.
• Delayspell is 2nd level, has similar mechanics, but requires your concentration. Instead of countering the spell, the spell is suspended until you stop concentrating, then takes effect (if possible). You determine the validity of targets when the spell is cast, which has generated a lot of clarifying errata.
• Distant Echospell is 7th level, but requires an action and allows you to copy a spell cast in the last round if the spellcaster is now within range of your spell (90 ft).

 

[Thunderfoot]

This is why thieves used slings. Hard to cast a spell with a rock between your eyes. Assuming you hadn't got a 'killer' backstab on your first shot. (all editions prior to 3e)

 

[Raduin711]

In 3e it wasn't a spell, it was a thing you could try to do if you had the right spell prepared: either the same spell being cast, a spell that specifically counters it, or dispel magic. IIRC, you also had to ready your action.

So to counter a fireball spell, you need to have fireball prepared, and then guess which turn the enemy will cast it, and use your turn before to ready an action to counter it. If the enemy doesn't try to cast fireball, you wasted your turn.

If you have dispel magic prepared, you could ready you action to counter any spell, but then you get into an odd metagame situation where the dm needs to decide if the lich knows what you're doing and can respond with that knowledge or not.

I ran a character that specialized in counterspells, and I recall it looking something like this:

I ready an action to counter the opponent's spell. Opponent begins casting a spell, triggering my readied action. I roll spellcraft to identify the spell as he is casting it.

If I identify it, and have the spell prepared, I cross it off my list, the spell is countered.

If I fail to identify the spell, or do not have the spell prepared, then I substitute a Dispel Magic and follow the rules for that.

If you don't have Dispel Magic or a suitable spell prepared, your character is a hack, try this wand of magic missiles instead.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I ran a character that specialized in counterspells, and I recall it looking something like this:

I ready an action to counter the opponent's spell. Opponent begins casting a spell, triggering my readied action. I roll spellcraft to identify the spell as he is casting it.

If I identify it, and have the spell prepared, I cross it off my list, the spell is countered.

If I fail to identify the spell, or do not have the spell prepared, then I substitute a Dispel Magic and follow the rules for that.

If you don't have Dispel Magic or a suitable spell prepared, your character is a hack, try this wand of magic missiles instead.

I do remember theorycrafting a counterspell-based wizard after some relevant feats got published. It seemed to situational to be a good character though.

 

[Garthanos]

Well, that COULD be, OTOH there's already a rather flexible spell casting mechanism, though that argument would be more cogent if 5e had common class mechanics across all/most classes. As it is, I don't really have an opinion. If it was 4e, then it darn well needs to be a power of some sort...

In 4e a spell cast atleast a ranged one triggers an opportunity attack which is atleast a foundation. Generically have that disrupt or cancel the action. Which could also as a power trigger a charge to reach someone casting or making that ranged attack.(and have being damaged while ranged action disrupt that attack not necessarily lose the power just cancel the action unless maybe it gets a crit or has a power backing it like counter spell or a special parry),

Yes it would definitely require a power to expend the power as a balance thing but it has better foundations than in 5e where spell casting is comparatively trivial seemingly requiring no focus at all.