D&D (2024) Is Counterspell less frustrating now?

[tetrasodium]

That depends entirely on what part of the game's life cycle you are in and what books are allotted to you. A Human Wizard gets 2 feats at first level, and you get them every 3 levels, plus bonus Wizard feats every 5. There aren't many choice Wizard feats that you can't get with that; without metamagic reducers, it comes down to spell focus and item creation, and even then, not all of those are worth talking about (Craft Staff for example, is a huge waste of time).

That's the game as it was originally designed, so spending an early feat on a skill focus to increase your survivability is not a big deal. What else were you going to take? Dodge? A case might be made for Improved Initiative, but I digress.

Add more books? Well now you have Steady Concentration so you can take 10 on those checks.

I understand that different tables played the game differently, and if you're trying to qualify for your Dweomerkeeper/Incantatrix with Initiate of Mystra, feats are in high demand, but by that point, you can make custom items that grant a +10 competence bonus to skill checks (say, Concentration) for 5000 gp (since you made it yourself), though that's likely overkill, and the vastly cheaper +5 for 1250 gp is a steal.

So no, I'm not ignoring system differences; if you wanted to make not having to worry about losing spells happen in 3e, you totally could and it wasn't difficult to do, by the rules presented, nor were the sacrifices really that big of a deal. Like say, playing a human. Vs. what? No PHB races had caster stat bonuses, Elf costs you hit points, and so the only serious contender for Human is maybe Dwarf. OTOH, if your table is allowing Lesser Aasimar or LA buy off for your anthropomorphic bat Druid, then yeah, maybe that is an issue, but when you're playing the game at that level, as I said, there are plenty of other options to look at.

And as for readying an attack? That's your standard action. Most everything has multiple attacks per turn, so it's far better to just attack and try to stop the spellcaster the old fashioned way. By reducing hit points to zero.

"But what if we aren't all living in the year 2023" is hardly an argument that changes the fact that you are talking about an edge case . being better at casting defensively would absolutely not make a wizard "increase survivability" either, shield needed a proactive casting & with no armor proficiency alongside a d4 hit die the attacks were far more concerning than the loss of spell. If survivability was your greatest concern there were many better routes. Some of those routes would even make a notable impact too.

 

[Stalker0]

There has been a way to interrupt casters while casting spells at least since 2e, it existed in 3.5 too. It just happened to come in the form of taking damage while casting. Counterspell is the only way to prevent a spell being cast in 5e, and it's necessary.

readied action silence still works in a lot of cases

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There has been a way to interrupt casters while casting spells at least since 2e, it existed in 3.5 too. It just happened to come in the form of taking damage while casting. Counterspell is the only way to prevent a spell being cast in 5e, and it's necessary.

No.

Absolutely not.

You're proving my point, if anything. We should be going back to there being ways to interrupt casting as a NON CASTER, not tripling down on a terrible boring spell that only lets Sorcerers, Warlocks, Wizards and the nerdiest of Bards interrupt spells (oh and two of rarest Paladin Oaths, look out).

Reject Counterspell. Return to interrupting spells the real way, by hitting casters in the face.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

No.

Absolutely not.

You're proving my point, if anything. We should be going back to there being ways to interrupt casting as a NON CASTER, not tripling down on a terrible boring spell that only lets Sorcerers, Warlocks, Wizards and the nerdiest of Bards interrupt spells (oh and two of rarest Paladin Oaths, look out).

Reject Counterspell. Return to interrupting spells the real way, by hitting casters in the face.

Counterspell isn't boring to me. I like the new one. YMMV.

Why not have both as an option to opt into?

Though, I don't think spellcasting should trigger OAs as a baseline. That hurts players more than monsters. I don't mind the functionality opening as the result of a Mage Slayer feat though. As it is, Counterspell is also still only an option.

 

[Scribe]

Return to interrupting spells the real way, by hitting casters in the face.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Counterspell isn't boring to me. I like the new one. YMMV.

Why not have both as an option to opt into?

Though, I don't think spellcasting should trigger OAs as a baseline. That hurts players more than monsters. I don't mind the functionality opening as the result of a Mage Slayer feat though. As it is, Counterspell is also still only an option.

If it's a Feat for martials it should be at least a Feat for casters. If it's just a spell for casters, martials should have easy access to it - even easier because they have to be in melee to interrupt. The idea that you should need Mage Slayer but others can just pick a spell to do it is just ridiculous.

And just don't give it to monsters. It's not hard. There isn't a man with a gun making you.

 

[Scribe]

If it's a Feat for martials it should be at least a Feat for casters. If it's just a spell for casters, martials should have easy access to it - even easier because they have to be in melee to interrupt. The idea that you should need Mage Slayer but others can just pick a spell to do it is just ridiculous.

And just don't give it to monsters. It's not hard. There isn't a man with a gun making you.

'Everyone' says Wizards/Casters have it too good, well, there you go, something to bring Casters in a notch. I dont see a problem.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

'Everyone' says Wizards/Casters have it too good, well, there you go, something to bring Casters in a notch. I dont see a problem.

They're largely not overpowered in combat.

This has been discussed at length - the place they get out of hand is outside combat. So I don't think that'd be necessary or increase fun overall.

 

[Scribe]

They're largely not overpowered in combat.

This has been discussed at length - the place they get out of hand is outside combat. So I don't think that'd be necessary or increase fun overall.

Fair enough. The concept to me is sound.

 

[mellored]

I'll also point out that grapple, shove, and prone are also saving throws now.

And thus can be blocked by legendary resistance.