tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post3094174786657903506..comments2024-03-26T15:35:56.004-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: On CounterspellsDeltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-39022330754328229002016-11-27T23:25:41.038-05:002016-11-27T23:25:41.038-05:00In my modified 5e rules, I don't use normal in...In my modified 5e rules, I don't use normal initiative, everything happens in a logical order or simultaneously. If it's important to know whether one action occurred first, then the relevant creatures make an opposed initiative check.<br /><br />It would work really well for this approach - was the Wall of Ice up first or did it just miss the Fireball?<br /><br />I like the 5e approach of the Counterspell spell, that is cast as a reaction, no readying needed. The only thing I haven't decided is whether a specific spell is needed as written, or whether I'd prefer to allow the spellcasters to burn any spell as a counterspell.<br /><br />Although since there's a chance that a counterspell can cause a wild magic surge in my rules, perhaps the risk of any spell makes more sense. Time to rewrite a few things...Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18392489035115793196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-14581695563928320472014-05-11T13:23:50.713-04:002014-05-11T13:23:50.713-04:00Thanks for reminding me about this post! (Because ...Thanks for reminding me about this post! (Because I just wrote another thing for counterspells and forgot about this one.) Honestly, I think I've recently decided to just wipe out counterspells from my game. At least in my game, that doesn't have advance declaration of spells, if I were to use #2 the enemy casters could just skip casting as their round came about.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-3660369577642443952014-05-10T00:17:12.280-04:002014-05-10T00:17:12.280-04:00Option 2 seems like the answer to me. If nothing e...Option 2 seems like the answer to me. If nothing else, it's very simple. Of course vs. drow there's magic resistance to overcome, and I would assume a saving roll as per OED precedence gdbackushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09245941451462450346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-76045927697491967182013-06-05T00:38:34.628-04:002013-06-05T00:38:34.628-04:00That is a really compelling argument, actually. No...That is a really compelling argument, actually. Now I very much want to see your two examples happen in a game.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-52973836964298417732013-06-04T21:17:43.971-04:002013-06-04T21:17:43.971-04:00I like the idea of just letting the magical fur fl...I like the idea of just letting the magical fur fly. Wizard battles in D&D are often more boring and prepatory than they are in fiction.<br /><br />Letting spells resolve semi-simultaneously could make for some fun adjudications if you're into that sort of thing. Can you pop up a <i>wall of ice</i> in front of the <i>fireball</i>?<br /><br />Maybe there could be Separate magic phase at the start of each round, "magic initiative" is D6 + (MU level) + (stat bonus). Slower casters mean you have to declare spells first (if the other side can see.)<br /><br />Spells actually take effect simultaneously, though spells used in a defensive manner it takes precedent. If you see the enemy mage casting fireball, you can teleport away to take no damage, but hitting the enemy mage with magic missile won't save you from getting it by the fireball.<br /><br />Or something..K. Baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06623767121412820113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-55261254062845538402013-06-03T15:12:01.795-04:002013-06-03T15:12:01.795-04:00@David
Excellent. I look forward to it.@David<br /><br />Excellent. I look forward to it.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-61227254855809892762013-06-02T15:43:23.221-04:002013-06-02T15:43:23.221-04:00Interesting, very different. I like the flavor, I ...Interesting, very different. I like the flavor, I think.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-34315362205424572932013-06-01T17:45:32.208-04:002013-06-01T17:45:32.208-04:00Thanks for your interest!
I've got a writeup ...Thanks for your interest!<br /><br />I've got a writeup buried somewhere in one of my old campaign binders - it was a few years back when I last used it (I think it was with D&D Rules Cyclopedia set).<br /><br />If I can dig it up, I'll put it up on line somewhere and let you know on this thread.David Pulverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00857524962421597982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-53728370646885839372013-06-01T10:17:39.241-04:002013-06-01T10:17:39.241-04:00@David
This system sounds very cool. Do you still...@David<br /><br />This system sounds very cool. Do you still have the write-up? I'd be curious to read it in the level of detail at which it was presented to your players.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-31720600309769064722013-06-01T01:02:33.582-04:002013-06-01T01:02:33.582-04:00what I did was to create three spells that were on...what I did was to create three spells that were only usable as counterspells.<br /><br />* one these spells disrupted evocation-type effect like lightning or fireballs or cold rays<br /><br />* one disrupted mental-type attacks like charms or sleep<br /><br />* one disrupted exotic attacks (basically everything else: polymorph, imprisonment, di temporal stasis, etc.)<br /><br />To use a counterspell you had to be in the area of effect of the spell. <br /><br />They were first level spells. They worked on a 5+ on d20 with a +/1 per difference in magic user level (i.e, all the time if 4+ levels higher).<br /><br />A magic user memorized them just like other spells, but they took no time to cast. (If several opposing MUs were in the area of effect, the option to cast went in the turn's initiative order and then highest Dex)<br /><br />Basically, what happened was that higher level mages would usually fill up 5-6 slots with a mix of 2-3 of these spells, so the first few rounds of any magical duel saw an exchange of spell and counter spell.<br /><br />For magical duelling, mages initially stocked up on the counter-evocation spells (called "energy shield") (as these were usually the big party threat) but at mid to high levels would usually memorize at least one or two counter-mind ("mind shield") and counter-exotic spells (called "spell shield")<br /><br />I also created a few higher level versions of the counterspell set that did more interestingly things but were2nd or 3rd or 4th level spells: that reflected spells back on the attacker, or even "captured" the attacker's spell and allowed the mage who blocked it to use it themselves.<br /><br />A counterspell was a fairly decent choice as it gave a roughly 75% chance of a stop against an equal foe.<br /><br />Counterspells were also effective against magic item offensive powers.<br /><br />Counterspells were NOT effective against defensive or harmless spells. Use the regular dispel magic for that.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />David Pulverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00857524962421597982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-11009281442030071802013-05-28T22:55:16.153-04:002013-05-28T22:55:16.153-04:00That latter part is definitely an addition.That latter part is definitely an addition.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-2212005270674324572013-05-28T14:14:31.872-04:002013-05-28T14:14:31.872-04:00Ah, it seemed different to me in that a spellcaste...Ah, it seemed different to me in that a spellcaster could only interrupt another spellcaster. And he could preform the counter spell at any time, he would just take a -5 penalty if he already used his action for the round.Random Wizardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16200875405900408519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-52557489601765617272013-05-28T10:57:15.651-04:002013-05-28T10:57:15.651-04:00I kind of like option 3, but with a non permanent ...I kind of like option 3, but with a non permanent duration. It still allows for some battle field prep and prevention of spells. Of course it begs the question, what if the next spell cast is also Dispell Magic.<br />Everything else seems like it is inelegant, or costs too much to ever be used (3rd edition style)<br /><br />Option 4 also works for me, provided it requires an equal or greater slot? Baquieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08357103428591599364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-61734315806728891702013-05-28T09:51:30.258-04:002013-05-28T09:51:30.258-04:00My problem with that is that I'm not sure it s...My problem with that is that I'm not sure it syncs up with the D&D interpretation of magic spells, that they're Vancian math-like formulae to create a fixed effect. Like, throwing a recipe for acid on someone else's acid doesn't make less of it -- so that's why I'm happier with a specific, separate "dispel" power.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-87890475963663517772013-05-28T01:49:33.573-04:002013-05-28T01:49:33.573-04:00This is sort of what I was thinking too.This is sort of what I was thinking too.Rachel Ghoulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04765944479141792643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-11150121926098209682013-05-27T22:25:32.497-04:002013-05-27T22:25:32.497-04:00I've always liked the idea of having a chance ...I've always liked the idea of having a chance to counter a spell if the mage recognizes that he knows the spell being cast, and doing it at the expense of burning one of his spell slots/spells for the day.The Badger Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09020950272210873449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-40741572766362823482013-05-27T18:58:38.510-04:002013-05-27T18:58:38.510-04:00Yeah, I certainly agree with your instinct. The 3E...Yeah, I certainly agree with your instinct. The 3E ready vs. one foe is just monumentally too expensive on an action-budget basis. And any kind of complication to the turn cycle is very much frowned upon (by me).Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-17780793498982012132013-05-27T18:55:41.282-04:002013-05-27T18:55:41.282-04:00That sounds a lot like the 3E mechanic, and the ro...That sounds a lot like the 3E mechanic, and the roll is equivalent to how dispel magic works there (and in my games by default). Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-78703157904665998042013-05-27T13:55:02.054-04:002013-05-27T13:55:02.054-04:00In my rules, it takes N half-round actions to cast...In my rules, it takes N half-round actions to cast a spell where N is the spell level. So a fireball takes at least one whole round to prepare, and so counterspells as an exception may be cast in a single action to, err, counter spells. You do of course have to prepare counterspell, which is separate from dispel magic and is a rare spell, but if you want to engage in wizardly combat, it's probably worth it.Changling bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17319790792209346325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-73974955764058649252013-05-27T13:06:56.993-04:002013-05-27T13:06:56.993-04:00I don't like any rules that require giving up ...I don't like any rules that require giving up an action for this, because the uncertain nature of the enemy's plans greatly disincentivizes the action. I've tried several versions of this, and have almost never seen them used in play. Requirements for knowing a certain spell also seem to add complications and get in the way. The less friction the better.<br /><br />I would thus go for 4 or 5. 5 is perhaps more elegant, but requires modifying the entire encounter procedure, which may be more difficult to make stick.<br /><br />Here is something like 4 that I have been considering recently:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.necropraxis.com/2013/04/24/reactions/" rel="nofollow">http://www.necropraxis.com/2013/04/24/reactions/</a>Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-18991320604502470972013-05-27T08:53:02.495-04:002013-05-27T08:53:02.495-04:00Suggestion:
1. A spell caster must either be &quo...Suggestion:<br /><br />1. A spell caster must either be "holding" and ready to cast a spell or in the process of already casting a spell to cast a counter-spell.<br /><br />2. If the opposing spell caster gets initiative, a holding spell caster may make a saving throw vs spells to identify the spell being cast, and thus cast an "optimal opposing spell" by element, theme, what have you (ice vs fire, shield vs magic missile, etc). Otherwise, the counter-spelling caster must choose a spell as a counter.<br /><br />3. Both spell casters make a saving throw vs spells; if the counter spell is optimal, the counter spelling caster gets a bonus to the save equal to the spell's level; if not, the original spell caster gets a bonus equal to his spell's level.<br /><br />4a. If both saves fail, both spells go off as normal;<br /><br />4b. If the original caster's save succeeds and the counter-spelling caster's save fails, the original spell is fully cast and the counter-spell fails totally;<br /><br />4c. If the counter-spell caster's save succeeds and the original caster's save fails, the original spell fails (is countered entirely) and the counter-spell has some other minimal effect, 5% per difference between the saves but no greater than 50%.<br /><br />4d. If both saves are successful, the original spell is countered dramatically by the counter spell, and some sort of secondary, unexpected effect occurs (thunderclap, strange summoning, etc) appropriate to the levels and forms of the spells.James Mishlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03510782553325944558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-84451740569417301432013-05-27T08:52:10.924-04:002013-05-27T08:52:10.924-04:00From Decipher's LotR, a spellcaster can cast a...From Decipher's LotR, a spellcaster can cast a counterspell to any spell that he knows. A caster my declare a counter-spell attempt prior to his turn, though it counts toward his action allowance for the round. He can even cast a counterspell if he has finished his round, but he suffers a cumulative -5 test penalty per additional action required.<br />It then becomes a contest of skill between the two casters. Translating that to D&D terms, it would be something like<br />[pc level] + [pc 1d20] - [enemy level] - [enemy 1d20] > 0<br />Random Wizardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16200875405900408519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-26434738458250562332013-05-27T08:28:27.398-04:002013-05-27T08:28:27.398-04:00My initial thought is to do something not D&D ...My initial thought is to do something not D&D like. Dispel magic is a spell you cast to remove magic effects or magical items. And then a new mechanic should be made that deals with a spell caster wanting to counter spell another spell caster.<br />I rather liked Decipher's LotR version of counter spell. I will have to go look it up again and write about it here.<br />Random Wizardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16200875405900408519noreply@blogger.com