PDA

View Full Version : Counterspelling



Surrealistik
11-13-2009, 12:17 PM
Concept: Adapts and modernizes the Counterspelling mechanic from DnD to DDO real-time.


Details:

#1: Caster enters Counterspelling Mode by activating it via active feat icon. Counterspelling Mode is gained for free with the first spells acquired.


#2: Caster selects an opposing caster by right clicking and targeting one.


#3: Whenever the selected caster attempts to cast a spell, the counterspelling caster will immediately attempt a counterspell, interrupting any of his ongoing activities. A counterspell takes the exact same amount of time to complete as the initially cast spell. Note that the time required to execute a counterspell can be modified by such things as Quicken, or the Sorcerer's innately faster casting times. A counterspelling attempt provokes an opposed caster level check. If the counterspeller wins this opposed check, the counterspelling attempt is successful.

Multiple creatures/characters can attempt to counterspell the same target.

Quickened spells cannot be countered unless the counterspeller has the Quicken metamagic active while counterspelling. A Quickened counterspell consumes additional SP as if the Quicken metamagic had been applied to it.

Lastly, a spell cannot be countered if it is of a higher level than the highest level spell the counterspeller can cast, and/or if the counterspeller does not have an amount of SP equal to the base SP cost of the spell to be countered.


#4: If the counterspelling attempt is successful, the countered spell fizzles in a pretty eruption of multicoloured sizzling sparks, otherwise the spell is cast as normal. A successfully counterspelled opponent must also make a Will save against the DC of his spell (use the DC it would have if it does not feature a save) or be stunned for 6 seconds, and a Fortitude save against the same DC, or be knocked down for 6 seconds.

For each point that the counterspeller's caster level roll exceeds the target's caster level roll beyond the first, the duration of the stun and knockdown effects are increased by 0.5 seconds.

If the counterspeller's caster level roll exceeds the target's caster level roll by 5 or more, the next (as in the one about to start immediately after the successful counterspelling) cooldown duration for the countered spell is doubled.

If the counterspeller's caster level roll exceeds the target's caster level roll by 10 or more, the spell is redirected onto the caster (if harmful) or onto the counterspeller (if beneficial). In both cases, the counterspeller assumes control over the redirected spell.


#5: Successful or not, an amount of SP is spent equal to the base SP cost of the cast spell (regardless of metamagic applied to the countered spell, barring Quicken).


#6: Certain spells are antithetical to others, thus making them ideal counterspells (Haste vs Slow as an example). If such a spell is prepared/known and costs less SP to cast than a normal counterspell, it will automatically be "used" to counter a spell it is antithetical to. When using an antithetical spell to counter another, the counterspeller enjoys a +2 bonus to his caster level for the counterspelling's opposed caster level check, and only spends SP equal to the base cost of the antithetical spell (plus any Metamagic costs if applicable).


Enhancements:

1 AP: Superior Counterspelling I (Each rank adds +1 to your caster level for the purposes of Counterspelling)
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 0
2 AP: Superior Counterspelling II
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 10
3 AP: Superior Counterspelling III
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Improved Counterspelling, AP 21
4 AP: Superior Counterspelling IV
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Greater Counterspelling, AP 33


1 AP: Efficient Counterspelling I (Counterspells cost 20% SP less for each rank)
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 0
2 AP: Efficient Counterspelling II
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 10
3 AP: Efficient Counterspelling III
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Improved Counterspelling, AP 21
4 AP: Efficient Counterspelling IV
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Supreme Counterspelling, AP 33


1 AP: Punishing Counterspell I (Each rank increases the damage, healing, effects and duration of redirected spells by 10%, and the DC for resisting the stun and knockdown effects of a successful counterspelling by 1.)
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 0
2 AP: Punishing Counterspell II
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 10
3 AP: Punishing Counterspell III
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Improved Counterspelling, AP 21
4 AP: Punishing Counterspell IV
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Supreme Counterspelling, AP 33


1 AP: Suppressing Counterspell I (Each rank increases the next cooldown duration of successfully countered spells by 25%, and temporarily disables a successfully countered opponent's spellcasting for 0.5 seconds for each point your caster level check exceeds his.)
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 0
2 AP: Suppressing Counterspell II
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 10
3 AP: Suppressing Counterspell III
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Improved Counterspelling, AP 21
4 AP: Suppressing Counterspell IV
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Supreme Counterspelling, AP 33


1 AP: Rapid Counterspelling I (Each rank reduces counterspelling times by 15%, and reduces the cost of Quicken Metamagic when used in conjunction with Counterspelling by 1 SP).
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 0
2 AP: Rapid Counterspelling II
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, AP 10
3 AP: Rapid Counterspelling III
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Improved Counterspelling, AP 21
4 AP: Rapid Counterspelling IV
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, Supreme Counterspelling, AP 33


Feats:

Improved Counterspelling:
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode
Effect: Your Counterspelling caster level and the DCs for secondary Counterspell effects each increase by a further +1.


Supreme Counterspelling:
Prerequisites: Counterspell Mode, able to cast Level 6 spells, Improved Counterspelling
Effect: Your Counterspelling caster level and the DCs for secondary Counterspell effects each increase by a further +1.

Shandi
11-13-2009, 12:20 PM
it's a good idea in theory but unless I am mistaken don't mobs cast as if they were always quickened?

SoulDecay
11-13-2009, 12:25 PM
The idea is cute, but the mechanic is horrible, and no one in their right mind would ever take it. Ironically, much like counterspelling in PnP.

You can't be moving, attacking, casting, or using an item. So... IF you remember to turn it on... and IF you just stand there doing *nothing*, and IF you win the roll, you get one spell (Which is probably negligible.) for the SP that the caster spent? (and if you fail, you spend the SP anyway.)

So... I could cast Wall of Fire, BB, FoD, DBF, Etc... and have it go where I want, and get all my clickies, gear, and enhancements... Or I could counterspell the dude, do nothing, and hope he casts something useful and that I get lucky with good positioning. Oh, and that he's the one who casts it, not the other guy standing next to him.

Maybe if the spell was free (I mean, you gotta be standing there doing nothing anyway), or maybe if you stunned them for a moment, or something.

And even then, I think it'd be pretty bad.

Surrealistik
11-13-2009, 12:29 PM
Yeah, I am erring on the side of caution with regards to balance. To revise the idea, perhaps it could be adjusted so that if you have the counterspelling mode active, you will interrupt your current activities to begin a counterspell.

I do like the idea of dazing/stunning for a round on a successful counterspell attempt.


EDIT: Alright, updated the concept so that a successful counterspell forces both a Will and Fortitude save against the DC of the cast spell (using the DC it would have if it doesn't feature a save). Success at the Will save negates a 6 second stun. Success at the Fortitude save negates a 6 second knockdown.

Counterspelling can be done while taking other actions, though it will interrupt any ongoing actions at the time of the Counterspelling.

MysterX
11-13-2009, 12:31 PM
If it was ever implemented it would be used way more by mobs against PCs than by PCs against mobs. Which is why I can conveniently ignore the absence of counterspelling without being too disappointed by it... Especially since mobs have unlimited mana points so they would eventually win a counterspell duel by attrition.

Impaqt
11-13-2009, 12:33 PM
it's a good idea in theory but unless I am mistaken don't mobs cast as if they were always quickened?


I've never noticed a mob with Quicken... they simply dont have to make Concentration checks.

Surrealistik
11-13-2009, 12:41 PM
If it was ever implemented it would be used way more by mobs against PCs than by PCs against mobs. Which is why I can conveniently ignore the absence of counterspelling without being too disappointed by it... Especially since mobs have unlimited mana points so they would eventually win a counterspell duel by attrition.

In light of unlimited mob mana, counterspelling should be restricted only to certain enemies.

Maxelcat
11-13-2009, 12:43 PM
Not true, some where in the forums it does state that they make concentration checks but only if they take a % of their Max HP in damage in one shot...

(least i think that's how it was worded... i cant find the thread, it was deep in a discussion)

Personally, I'm ok with mobs having unlimited SP... just make them actually make Concentration checks.

Shandi
11-13-2009, 12:50 PM
I've never noticed a mob with Quicken... they simply dont have to make Concentration checks.

true and they are also uninteruptable (hold, trip, stun, facinate, fts a mob in its casting animation and the spell goes off only thing that stops it is killing it) and cast fog / blade barrier way faster than we could ever hope


Not true, some where in the forums it does state that they make concentration checks but only if they take a % of their Max HP in damage in one shot...

What mobs are these? I've hit casters on for 1,000-1,500+ polar rays and they still hit me at the sametime with their dbf or acid rain

Impaqt
11-13-2009, 12:51 PM
Not true, some where in the forums it does state that they make concentration checks but only if they take a % of their Max HP in damage in one shot...

(least i think that's how it was worded... i cant find the thread, it was deep in a discussion)

Personally, I'm ok with mobs having unlimited SP... just make them actually make Concentration checks.


The only mobs I've ever seen subject to this mechanic are arcane skeletons.

Missing_Minds
11-13-2009, 12:54 PM
Not true, some where in the forums it does state that they make concentration checks but only if they take a % of their Max HP in damage in one shot...

No, that isn't a concentration check you are thinking of. That is did they take enough damage to flinch. Flinching disrupts the action of all mobs in the game. Spellcasting included. So long as you hit them at the start, other wise the server already states that the action had finished before flinching occured.

You had the concept right, just not the right name. Mobs do not have concentration checks.

Shandi
11-13-2009, 12:55 PM
arcane skeletons ah that explains it, not many arcane skeletons out there can survive a DBF crit esp those that are the ice-type skeletons out in the necrop :)

Surrealistik
11-13-2009, 02:51 PM
So basically it would work on mobs. Even if mobs had a passive Quicken effect perpetually active though, an exception could, and should be made for them, so counterspelling works as normal against them.

Surrealistik
11-20-2009, 09:48 PM
Any other recommendations for improvement? What should be added, subtracted or modified to/from the present concept?

Arlith
11-20-2009, 10:23 PM
So basically it would work on mobs. Even if mobs had a passive Quicken effect perpetually active though, an exception could, and should be made for them, so counterspelling works as normal against them.

Are we reading the same thread?

Surrealistik
11-21-2009, 12:24 AM
Are we reading the same thread?

I'm not sure what you're trying to imply; prior to the post you are quoting there was discussion over whether mobs would be applicable targets for a counterspelling mechanic given the terms of the original post. Evidently it seems as though that while mobs are not subject to concentration checks, they aren't necessarily under the effects of a permanent quicken metamagic effect, and are thus (normally) susceptible to the counterspelling mechanic. Further, even if the mobs did enjoy perpetual Quicken, the behaviour of Counterspelling should take this into account and work normally in spite of this property in a PvM context.

So, ideas for improving the current premise and mechanics?

Individual
11-21-2009, 12:41 AM
I've never noticed a mob with Quicken... they simply dont have to make Concentration checks.

Correct. On the subject of mobs that cast spells(and range);

Casting mobs have an agro mechanic where they retreat when you enter melee range on them, so often times rays and similar spells will be shot in the wrong direction as they turn away from you to gain distance. Even when they should have to face the opponent to cast that spell, such as Ray of Enfeeblement, assuming they have you targeted.

Angelus_dead
11-21-2009, 10:41 AM
So, ideas for improving the current premise and mechanics?
Start with the basics:

* Aside from D&D fidelity for it's own sake, why would counterspelling be desirable for gameplay? Would it be effective? Would it be fun?

* Given the caster levels of enemies in DDO, how useful would counterspelling be against ordinary monsters and powerful caster bosses? Would the bonuses for highly exceeding the check ever apply?

* Effects which deny actions to an enemy are crowd control, so counterspelling is essentially a crowd control that only works on casters. The proposed counterspelling mechanic is like giving player characters a slotless crowd control spell which only works against casters, and which involves a penalty of the player's actions being interrupted according to the behavior of the targetted monster. Thus it's a form of mutual crowd control, where two enemies cancel out each others' actions.

* Given the game design motivations that lead important bosses to be immune to crowd control, would the developers allow caster-oriented bosses to lose their actions to counterspelling?

* Considering the limited circumstances that counterspelling might be useful, would players be attracted to spending a bunch of AP to improve it? Even if a player did think it was effective to boost counterspelling in that way, would it be fun? Compare against other CC effects in DDO, and look at whether any of them have AP enhancements to improve their functionality across several different axes.

* Putting aside the substantial effort required by software engineers (who are not available anyway), how reasonable is it for a game design to devote so much rule complexity to a feature of marginal value?

Angelus_dead
11-21-2009, 10:54 AM
I ask the above questions having myself designed an implementation of Counterspelling mechanics for DDO. It was done as part of my suggestion to improve Dispel Magic (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=160536) in DDO, more than a year ago.

In the end I did not include it in the posted suggestion, because that amount of complexity for a marginally useful feature would have detracted from the main thrust of the changes. Improving Dispel Magic would have made a broader and clearer improvement to gameplay.

The basics of my counterspelling concept were as follows:
The Dispel Magic family of spells are given another option in the popup box while casting them: Counterspell version. Using that version on a targeted enemy debuffs his spellcasting for a brief time. If you win a caster level check and the opponent doesn't have red-named CC immunity, then the spell fails entirely. Otherwise the spell proceeds but with a -4 penalty to caster level and save DC. As an optional embellishment, casting a Dispel Magic in that mode does not deduct spellpoints immediately; they're only spent if the enemy actually attempts to cast. Enhancements which improve your use of the Dispel Magic family would also apply to the counterspelling mode.

Note that the way it partially reduces the effect even if the enemy succeeds to cast the spell is a crucial step to make it workable in a game featuring the disparities in enemy quantities and speed found in DDO, which are a result of the game's fundamental nature as realtime with prolonged sessions.

Surrealistik
11-21-2009, 11:12 AM
Start with the basics:

* Aside from D&D fidelity for it's own sake, why would counterspelling be desirable for gameplay? Would it be effective? Would it be fun?

Absolutely. Counterspelling an opponent, watching his own spell erupt in his face in a flash of showy fireworks, while simultaneously taking him out of commission for a considerable duration, or even turning that same spell against him is both effective and entertaining.

* Given the caster levels of enemies in DDO, how useful would counterspelling be against ordinary monsters and powerful caster bosses? Would the bonuses for highly exceeding the check ever apply?

I imagine the bonuses would apply versus trash mobs, and not so much versus caster bosses. That said, the CL levels for a character properly outfitted and prepared for a quest should permit an appreciable chance to counter a spell against the latter.

* Effects which deny actions to an enemy are crowd control, so counterspelling is essentially a crowd control that only works on casters. The proposed counterspelling mechanic is like giving player characters a slotless crowd control spell which only works against casters, and which involves a penalty of the player's actions being interrupted according to the behavior of the targetted monster. Thus it's a form of mutual crowd control, where two enemies cancel out each others' actions.

The mutual cancellation is not symmetrical though, as evidenced by the supplementary benefits of counterspelling; stun and knockdown, cooldown prolonging and spell reflection, to say nothing of the fact that the countered spell goes on cooldown, while none of yours do. These benefits can be enhanced and compounded by use of the various supplementing enhancements and feats to a substantial degree.

* Given the game design motivations that lead important bosses to be immune to crowd control, would the developers allow caster-oriented bosses to lose their actions to counterspelling?

Within reason, I don't see that being especially problematic.

* Considering the limited circumstances that counterspelling might be useful, would players be attracted to spending a bunch of AP to improve it? Even if a player did think it was effective to boost counterspelling in that way, would it be fun? Compare against other CC effects in DDO, and look at whether any of them have AP enhancements to improve their functionality across several different axes.

Given the ubiquity of enemy casters and the potential inherent in counterspelling to disrupt them in an effective and efficient manner, as well as the degree to which the enhancements improve its mechanics, I would certainly say that it proves attractive, and a worthwhile investment of AP. That said, if an enhancement would prove a worthwhile, balanced investment of AP, its inclusion posits no issues.

* Putting aside the substantial effort required by software engineers (who are not available anyway), how reasonable is it for a game design to devote so much rule complexity to a feature of marginal value?


I completely dispute the assertion that it is of "marginal" value. Now, it obviously is not a top priority given the litany of things that need to be improved and fixed, but it is absolutely something that merits attention and dev time nonetheless.

HallowedOne
11-21-2009, 11:37 AM
I used to play Neverwinter NIghts before discovering DDO, and I say counterspelling was a VERY important ability for a mage there, since it can totally neutralize mage activity while your companions dish out everyone else. Think of a party that doesnt need to worry about Irresistable dances, displaments, glitterdusts and so on - thats what a counterspeller would provide.

Although the mechanics of DDO would make a counterspeller a lot stronger. Back on NwN, a wizard had limited spell preparation and sorcs had at most 8-9 spells of each lvl, whereas here you have mana, thus allowing a lot more counterspells than the usual since you have no limit of casting universal counterspells like Mordenkainen's Disjuncions, Dispel Magics or Greater Displ Magics.

And it would be awesome for pvp too :D

Angelus_dead
11-21-2009, 11:52 AM
Absolutely. Counterspelling an opponent, watching his own spell erupt in his face in a flash of showy fireworks, while simultaneously taking him out of commission for a considerable duration, or even turning that same spell against him is both effective and entertaining.
User narrative. Can you name some example situations where it would work as you describe? That means the names of specific monsters and the dungeons they live in.

Surveying the situations that exist in DDO, I can't really find places where it would help, except in a way that's too powerful for the developers to permit. It comes down to trash mobs, elite trash mobs, and boss mobs.

1. Trash mob casters. You have around a 50% chance to beat a caster level check and prevent the enemy spell. You could instead have spent the same or fewer spellpoints to neutralize an equal or greater number of enemies, including non-casters, with more reliability and without waiting for them to try casting.

2. Elite trash mob casters. As above, except that the chance of it working goes down to around 25% or even 0%. The elite monsters also improve their resistance to conventional CC attacks, but less so.

3. Caster bosses. Opponents such as Jorgundahl, Abbot, and Horoth use spells that are exceptionally important to the encounter presenting the desired challenge. As demonstrated by the non-functionality of Purging The Pantheon, the developers cannot allow their spells to be interrupted with any kind of reliability. If their caster levels weren't already too high for counterspelling to be effective, they'll be made that high, or the boss will get protection in some other form.

As a sanity check: What level of enemy casters do you think a level X player character generally faces?

Surrealistik
11-21-2009, 12:11 PM
Here are a couple pieces of advice:
1. Read the rules for this forum. You are in very direct violation, and anyone who feels like it can click on your name and submit you for banning.

I don't think so.

2. Evaluate your own behavior. It's not complicated: start at the top, read down, and look for the first sentence that hyperbolically insults someone or otherwise shows signs of being overcome by emotion. There is only one person who has written that way in this thread. It's pretty obvious that there was not a problem in this thread until you created one.

No Angy, see the difference between my statements and yours, is that your posts make the simple, readily transparent pretense of being impartial, though I certainly applaud your persistence in attempting to maintain a level of plausible deniability.

3. Compare against the formulation of some of my statements. Notice the crucial difference between these two phrases: "someone like you" or "someone acting like you are". The first makes a claim as to the nature of a person's core being, which is a far-reaching statement that implies a great deal of intimate interaction, or at least prolonged study. The second is simply passing judgment on a activities over a relatively brief period of time, which not only is easier to support logically, but which also isn't prohibited by forum rules.

I'm pretty indifferent as to the implications. From what I've seen thus far, I stand by the complete accuracy of my statements.

User narrative. Can you name some example situations where it would work as you describe? That means the names of specific monsters and the dungeons they live in.

Surveying the situations that exist in DDO, I can't really find places where it would help, except in a way that's too powerful for the developers to permit. It comes down to trash mobs, elite trash mobs, and boss mobs.

1. Trash mob casters. You have around a 50% chance to beat a caster level check and prevent the enemy spell. You could instead have spent the same or fewer spellpoints to neutralize an equal or greater number of enemies, including non-casters, with more reliability and without waiting for them to try casting.

Since when does counterspelling require you to explicitly wait? You are free to act as you please and toss around spells. It's only when the enemy caster actually tries to cast something that you intervene and attempt to stop him.

2. Elite trash mob casters. As above, except that the chance of it working goes down to around 25% or even 0%. The elite monsters also improve their resistance to conventional CC attacks, but less so.

Context specific behaviour can be used to make CSing viable should Enhancements not prove able to.

3. Caster bosses. Opponents such as Jorgundahl, Abbot, and Horoth use spells that are exceptionally important to the encounter presenting the desired challenge. As demonstrated by the non-functionality of Purging The Pantheon, the developers cannot allow their spells to be interrupted with any kind of reliability. If their caster levels weren't already too high for counterspelling to be effective, they'll be made that high, or the boss will get protection in some other form.

Preventing bosses from having their spells interrupted with consistency is perfectly fine, and as you've mentioned, consistent with design goals. At the same, CSing should at least prove useful, if not entirely reliable, and that can be achieved with context specific tweaks.

The bottom line is that context specific tweaks to CSing opposed caster level check modifiers can be used to account for inflated/disproportionate mob caster levels so that Counterspelling approaches the sweet spot of viability between over and underpowered in virtually any context without modifying existing content in a universal way that impacts other areas such as manually tweaking caster levels.

Angelus_dead
11-21-2009, 12:31 PM
The bottom line is that context specific tweaks to CSing opposed caster level check modifiers can be used to account for inflated/disproportionate mob caster levels so that Counterspelling approaches the sweet spot of viability between over and underpowered in virtually any context without modifying existing content in a universal way that impacts other areas such as manually tweaking caster levels.
That's not a very useful kind of response, as it is similar to saying: "There's a way to make this idea work and it isn't difficult to figure out, but I can't explain it in detail and won't even provide one example". To say that doesn't mean it's impossible to provide examples, but it certainly doesn't reinforce the suggestion either.

As you may remember, this is handwavey design: expecting the details to be worked out by some unspecified person. It is common for game designers to complain of game producers who engage in such behavior. To be fairly productive, it helps to start with one or two solid concrete examples of how the desired system could work, so that there is at least an objective to aim towards.

For example, consider a quest where enemy spells are a substantial portion of the threat, such as Irestone Inlet or Offering of Blood.
1. Your party is in Irestone Inlet and you approach a group of 7 goblinoids, including 3 spellcasters. The sorcerer player starts to counterspell. How effective is it (success chance and duration), how fun is that, and what happens when they come back on elite?

2. Your party is in Offering of Blood and you open a door to reveal 6 scorrow and drow, including 2 spellcasters. The sorcerer player starts to counterspell. How effective is it, how fun is that, and what happens when they come back on elite and epic?

Aspenor
11-21-2009, 12:51 PM
It's not worth the development time. Just as in PnP, a spellcaster has better things to do with their time than counterspell. It would be a ton of work with little to no benefit given.

Angelus_dead
11-21-2009, 01:10 PM
It's not worth the development time. Just as in PnP, a spellcaster has better things to do with their time than counterspell. It would be a ton of work with little to no benefit given.
There are ways you could make something along the idea of Counterspell work reasonably, in a small handful of specific situations, and hopefully without undue developer effort or widespread rule complexity. The core concept is fine: "A crowd control effect which only works against spellcasters"

For example, look back at my old counterspell concept: preparing Dispel Magic (or similar) gives you an additional icon choice when casting it. The counterspell mode temporarily debuffs the casting of one enemy so that his spells either fail, or have reduced effectiveness.

Something like that shouldn't be too hard to program (it comes down to a -X penalty for Y seconds), and would be pretty handy say in Enter The Kobold for the Cleric to throw on a Living Meteor Swarm as soon as it spawns.

Surrealistik
11-22-2009, 02:02 PM
That's not a very useful kind of response, as it is similar to saying: "There's a way to make this idea work and it isn't difficult to figure out, but I can't explain it in detail and won't even provide one example". To say that doesn't mean it's impossible to provide examples, but it certainly doesn't reinforce the suggestion either.

As you may remember, this is handwavey design: expecting the details to be worked out by some unspecified person. It is common for game designers to complain of game producers who engage in such behavior. To be fairly productive, it helps to start with one or two solid concrete examples of how the desired system could work, so that there is at least an objective to aim towards.

For example, consider a quest where enemy spells are a substantial portion of the threat, such as Irestone Inlet or Offering of Blood.
1. Your party is in Irestone Inlet and you approach a group of 7 goblinoids, including 3 spellcasters. The sorcerer player starts to counterspell. How effective is it (success chance and duration), how fun is that, and what happens when they come back on elite?

2. Your party is in Offering of Blood and you open a door to reveal 6 scorrow and drow, including 2 spellcasters. The sorcerer player starts to counterspell. How effective is it, how fun is that, and what happens when they come back on elite and epic?

In the sense that are details to be worked out, sure, that's obviously a given. I don't have the experience or empirical data to say with a measure of certainty the exact nature of the tweaks required; it is clearly impossible without playtesting which naturally yields the answers. The overall system and concept is solid, the rest is experimentation to determine what precisely is necessary to arrive at a golden mean. The rep hit is also as aesthetically appreciated as it is otherwise irrelevant to me; I find red a far more flattering colour.


It's not worth the development time. Just as in PnP, a spellcaster has better things to do with their time than counterspell. It would be a ton of work with little to no benefit given.

Counterspelling as laid out in my initial post involves asymmetrical control that much more severely impacts your opponent than you, can be highly time efficient (Quicken and/or Rapid Counterspelling), mana efficient (Efficient Counterspelling), and the preexisting penalties for being successfully counterspelled can be easily and substantially compounded (Suppressing/Punishing Counterspell). Further, you don't have to actively wait on an opponent in order to counterspell him; as long as the mode is active, you are free to act as you wish, though you will immediately begin to counter a selected opponent when he starts casting. That all said, it is supremely useful in many situations in the event that difficulties with reconciling bloated monster CLs can be worked out via context specific tweaks.

As for the rule complexity itself, it actually isn't that involved, and the coding would not be particularly difficult, requiring a simple nesting of several true/false checks, with accompanying behaviours. Targeted opponent begins casting a spell -> Is opponent using Quicken? If no, or if yes and counterspeller is using Quicken -> Is Counterspell mode active? Is sufficient SP available? If yes to both, stop current actions, deduct appropriate amount of SP, perform counterspelling animation, perform opposed CL check (apply appropriate context specific modifiers for difficulty setting/boss). -> Is CL check successful? If yes, terminate countered spell, play failure animation/sfx at counterspelled opponent, execute penalties. End.