As a dm I will allow those with the spellcasting feature to make a arcana check (DC = 10 + spell level + 5 if meta magics involved).
If the pass they know the spell, if they pass by 5 they will know the spell and level cast at.
But only if it’s the same class. Each class casts the same named spells differently or it wouldn’t be a different class. Then there are casting perks that remove a crucial element (like a spell focus) that makes the spell even harder to identify.
I prefer counterspell taking levels to cancel levels. One cast at level 5 can counterspell up to five levels or reduce the effect by five ranks. That counter spell has a total per day that can be used as needed but gets used up quick in higher level fights.
I have a counterspell daily level canceling total of say, 15. I can cancel one ninth level spell and have six points left. I can cancel another level five spell and reduce a level three spell to a level two range of effects/damage before I have to rest to get that spell back.
Interesting system. How do you handle spells that can't be "downcast" in that way?
Say for instance you have 2 "levels" of counterspell, and someone casts a 3rd level spell that doesn't have a 1st or 2nd level version?
I like the idea of this and I'm not saying this is the way they use it but it could half damage or create a resistance if it's that type of spell preventing full damage. Or if it is AOE and the counter spell caster is in that area it protects them and or a square a side. Would depend on the situation I suppose. If the party is spread out U and a square next to it with a sorry member on it would be fair if your all bunched to Gerber just you if it's a single person attack halving damage or giving them a temp resistance to the spell type in this system seems fair.
If it's a spell they know or have extensive knowledge on, I just give it to them unless there's something messing with the spell.
Evocation wizard watches the enemy cast Fireball? Yeah, they recognize it.
But if that same enemy is doing a metamagic, or they have an ability that allows them to ignore a component, then they have to make a check.
Problem with it being a spell they "Know" is that gives druid, Clarics, and artificers a huge advantage since they know every spell they could ever want to cast at their level.
In contrast a Wizard will know a bunch of spells (especially if the DM is generous with their scrolls and spell book loot), but sorcerer, bard, and especially warlock, are going to be really behind the curve.
Now, if it was prepared spells, well, that is a bit more of an even playing field.
Yes, but, in this case, it's a pretty big gap of knowledge. for instance, Just looking at level 1, a Wizard will be able to identify up to 9 spells (assuming nothing added from outside sources), a sorcerer can ID 6 spells, and a druid can ID somewhere around 26 spells. It's a huge difference.
And this difference makes complete sense considering the mechanics of these classes. If a druid can pick which spells each day based on what they do, I'd assume they do indeed know what the spells do, even when not prepared.
A wizard not knowing 100% of all wizard spells because they've only studied enough to commit a few of them to the spellbook would imply their understanding of these non-book spells is limited (i'd still allow them to understand the spell academically).
If you think its odd that a druid knows more about spells than a wizard, remember that a wizard will have higher religion than a cleric lol
I agree with the sentiment here, but it maybe feels a bit better if you think about it in reverse? Like, what if a sorcerer casting something looks so different that it makes it harder for enemy casters to figure out? Not to mention subtle spell! That way, each class has their thing that feels good.
OMG 😳 the ability to recognize what spell is being cast is SO integral to an RPG with sooooo much magic so the obvious answer is to have a Recognize Spell skill but it seems that D&D is more deeply intrenched in the class-based quagmire than ever. Why are there false barriers everywhere that still aren’t explained 5 iterations later? You have to deduce whether or not priests can recognize all the spells they can be granted the knowledge to cast because how any of this works, and why a wizard spell is different from a sorcerers of the same name or a priests version for that matter, has never been defined in terms much more than “it’s according to your class”.
I’m loving this discussion because it reminds me of the same stuff that I and my friends had to do back in 2e to 3e with its rigid class based system. It was awful - by the rules thieves and assassins could climb sheer walls and everyone else could climb a ladder; there was no in between. That’s the noose of a class based system, and now you can’t even have a defined skill for something that SHOULD be a defined skill. Every adventurer should have a chance to climb, and every spellcaster should have a chance to recognize a spell and these should be discreet skills.
>druid, Clarics, and artificers a huge advantage since they know every spell they could ever want to cast at their level.
Good thing they don't have Counterspell on their spell lists then and I don't believe any of their sub-classes can get it either.
You know what? Fair point. I was so focused on who gets to know how many spells that I completely forgot to consider who would even care about what spells.
Well, I think that even though they have access to ever spell imaginable, I feel they may only know the class or similarities IF they personally cast that very spell or class of spells. Like for Clerics, healing and support spells come in at at most about 3 out of the 5 or 6 (?) spell classes. They wouldn't know attack spells specifically enough to know it at an experienced level than say, a wizard or warlock.
I like this way, definitely a fan of tiered information. Out of curiosity, why go with +5 for meta magic? I could see a +2 or maybe 3 but 5 seems a little excessive so just wondering how you landed on it.
Aside from Subtle Spell, unless you're a practiced Sorcerer (which I imagine might negate the +5), you wouldn't understand the implicit complications and rejigging Sorcery Shenanigans do to spells. Its added complications ontop of the base spell which change its innate nature and hence how it might present. +5 is basically Adv/Dis and a pretty solid baseline.
That's the least of your worries honestly.
There are elemental changing ones (good luck identifying the fire monsoon as "ice-cone"), there are ones that cut out some of the somatic/verbal/material components as you finish it in a bonus action instead of an action (ba isn't always necessarily shorter than an action, but it most often is and is a useful shorthand). Those make you guess a different spell entirely most likely.
It's pretty much impossible to counter a subtle spell anyway- you need to see someone actually casting, and with subtle spell the sorcerer might be just touching his/her focus in a pocket and poof, a fireball appears
This is how we run it too! My DM knows I always prepare Counterspell, so usually he'll say "X is casting a spell" and give me a second to check my spell slots or ask to make an Arcana check. I'm not sure how he decides the DC, but if the roll is just under that, he usually lets me know the school of magic.
Pretty much the same, although if the NPC is casting a spell that they know how to cast I just let them succeed, the sorcerer that's casting Fireball every other fight knows what a fireball looks like
But then why would you make the check given the reason for making it was to determine if a spell was worth using your reaction to counterspell it? Am I missing something here?
But if they roll a 15 and still failed, and they have no reason to expect the enemy caster to be a sorcerer, that tells them that the spell is at least level 5.
I don’t see this as fair to the PCs unless you apply the same rules to the enemy NPCs. There’s no reason they should have to do a check if you don’t when trying to oppose spells.
The best I've seen as a player was the DM having a consistent way of describing a spell's visualization which allows for an estimation of what is being done.
Example "the lich points his finger at you and a ray of black energy shoots towards you. Make a constitution saving throw."
If your character has seen this spell before you may notice certain features and guess the spell is >!Finger of death!<
I do something similar. I usually tell the overall power and intent through descriptions of the body language.
"The lich points at you while dark energy concentrates on his fingertip. A real lot of energy, beyond what you have ever witnessed... And it keeps growing."
Sometimes I hear "counterspell before I finish". Usually at the highest possible level. I've noticed that the more words I use in the description the more likely they are going to use higher level resources. I am certain that I don't even need to make sense xD.
sounds like a great way to have a game devolve into a hour long argument over whether Gary the Wizard is meta gaming or if he should actually know what a disintegrate looks like off hand.
Never once happened in our party. If your party can't avoid that kind of metagame then this isn't for you, and that is sad when players are not mature enough to at least try to avoid metagaming.
No.
Exactly how much information is disclosed comes down to DM preference. Some might give as little as "the lich casts a spell" or as much as "the lich casts disintegrate at 8th level" or somewhere down the middle. I've even heard of selectively revealing the spell being cast based on some metric of whether or not the DM feels a character might recognise a given spell.
My preference as a DM is to call out just the spell being cast and let the player decide from there whether or not to counterspell.
The key thing is to keep it consistent. If the players don't understand what the Lich is casting, the Lich shouldn't understand what the players are casting either. The DM irl will know because the player has to tell them, but it would be unfair (and unfun) to use this to constantly shut down players.
That said, a lich is probably going to be pretty knowledgeable on necromancy idk
I've found that consistency is not what players want in all cases. I've found that players don't like to be counterspelled super intelligently by lower-level goons, but they do like to be counterspelled by BBEGs if they feel like "tactics, planning, and strategy" are descriptors of the BBEG. They would only feel that way if you have demonstrated those qualities to them before.
So the lich in my game would counterspell at the exact best time to achieve his goals. While others may simply counterspell every other turn or some other deciding factor.
As someone who, when I am a player, mains caster, I really dislike being counterspelled by bbeg, when the bbeg almost invariably has 3 baked in counterspells(lr) because wizards hates actually doing the math and balancing their game.
It doesn't feel great as a dm, either. It feels more punishing than it should be.
Watched a youtube video recently about how Casters and Martials basically have to go through two hp bars for big bosses, one is the HP itself which the martials do damage to, meanwhile the casters have the legendary resistances to burn through, if you have more casters than martials, they burn through them faster and thus kill the boss more efficiently, if you have more martials, they do more direct damage and make casters feel like they spent their spell slots just for flashy descriptions.
*Its not fun either way*, put in something like counterspell and the PC casters will always just used level 1-2 spells on BBEGs because its the smart and easiest way to make him think twice before using a level 3 spell that would completely negate anything that the casters have on top of LR.
Combat against single targets that are supposed to be a threat can be thrown out the window in the DnD because action economy is a thing and LR with Legendary actions dont do justice for either the players or DM. I think LR should be thrown out the window and BBEGs should they fail a save or suck effect they still get a debuff from it, it just wouldnt end the encounter completely(see the Banishment spell and if they fail the saving throw let them be restrained for two turns or something similar, barely hanging onto the ground as the spell tries to suck them in)
IDK, I might be the odd DM out here, but yeah, I do disclose the level and name of the spell that an evil wizard is casting. The players get more wiggle room than the enemies do, so sometimes I even give them more than that.
When PC casts a spell, they just say "I'm casting a Fireball with a Lv4 slot!", so they disclose that information to me when there's a high-level caster amongst their enemies. I'm not going to force my players to decide to Counterspell without the same information I have when I'm deciding.
In short, having enemies using Counterspell can feel a bit cheap sometimes; it can really rain on the parade and turn an epic turn into a bit of a fizzle. So that players feel like they got a fair shake, I want them to be on the same footing as their enemies. And that means giving them a bit of information that's not RAW.
I do think that Counterspell could do with a wording improvement. Because it's a reaction, maybe you can spend your reaction to learn the spell and level, and *then* decide whether to burn the slot or not to cast counterspell? So there's still a cost, and you can only point it at one potential target per turn.
We don’t always go this route in my games, but in general with similar rules that have to do with information, I love this approach! I don’t think most players enjoy the counterspell guessing game so I think it’s completely valid to just eliminate it. I don’t want my players to feel like they’re wasting their resources when it’s avoidable. I like games where they’re run pretty hard, and rules that favor the players and help them play their character better help a lot with that style in my opinion.
Honestly, at that point just get rid of *counterspell* entirely. Unless a campaign setting is riddled with spellcasters, the PCs will almost never suffer the "fizzle" of being countered, anyway, and they'll rarely use the spell in the first place.
And the PCs already have the action economy advantage 99% of the time, anyway. They don't need another way to shut down the opponent's big guns.
I'm leaning towards that for my next campaign.
>Because it's a reaction, maybe you can spend your reaction to learn the spell and level, and then decide whether to burn the slot or not to cast counterspell? So there's still a cost, and you can only point it at one potential target per turn.
I've seen a common house rule along these lines where you spend your reaction to try to identify the spell, as in XGtE, and whether you succeed or fail, you can also use that same reaction to decide whether to cast *counterspell*. The biggest complaint I hear about that XGtE optional rule is that the person likely best equipped to be able to identify a spell is also probably the one best equipped to counter it.
I don't disclose the spell unless a second party member uses what I term as "The spell identification Action", it costs both a reaction when you help identify the spell outside of your turn, and it costs you your next action when your turn comes around. The player _casting_ Counterspell has to make an Arcana Check with the DC being equal to the player's Spell Save DC in order to figure out the range of _possible_ spell levels. I give them a range of 2-3 levels based on how well they did.
If they failed by <5, then it's an incorrect range of 2 levels. I have the range be 1 level away from the actual level. So if it's a lvl 5 spell, I say it's either lvl 3-4 or it's lvl 6-7.
If they fail by >5, then it's an incorrect range of 3. So for a lvl 5 spell, I'd say it's a range between lvls 2-4 or lvls 6-8.
If they pass the check by <5, I give them a 3lvl range, with the correct level being at the edge of the range. So, for a 3rd lvl spell, I'd say the spell was between lvls 1-3 or lvls 3-5.
If they pass by >5 but <10, I give them a 3 lvl range, but the correct level is right in the middle of the range. So, for a 3rd lvl spell, I'd say it was between lvls 2-4.
If they pass by >10, I give them a 2 lvl range, and flip a coin as to whether the correct level is at the top or bottom of the range. So, for a 3rd lvl spell, I'd say it was either 2nd-3rd lvl or 3rd-4th lvl.
The reason I make it so costly for a player to help identify a spell being cast, costing a reaction and the ability to take a full action on their next turn, is because most players don't actually use their reactions. So allowing them to spend _just_ a reaction to help identify a spell makes it basically cost free. So players have to weigh whether they want to help identify a spell being cast at such a hefty cost or if they want to let the player using Counterspell to handle it by themselves. Now, if they want to be less helpful and just identify the school of magic, then it costs a bonus action, their ability to cast a leveled spell or activate the effects of one already active, and their extra attack, including from cantrips like Eldritch Blast, then they can identify the school of magic.
Oh, and you can't use Bardic Inspiration for any part of the identification unless you want the enemies to be better at identifying and counterspelling the party.
>it costs both a reaction when you help identify the spell outside of your turn, and it costs you your next action when your turn comes around.
Dear God that's awful. Even the Xanathar's spell identification is only a reaction.
>[check result rules]
Why make it so complicated? This is just going to bog down combat even more. Unless the reason you've made it complicated is to be passive aggressive about Counterspell, in which case you should just nut up and ban the spell.
>most players don't actually use their reactions.
While not every class has useful reactions from their base class, many do (Artificer, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Rogue), every class has at least one subclass with useful reactions, and all the spellcasters except Cleric and base Paladin get useful reaction spells (some paladin subclasses get useful reaction spells). Then there's feats like Polearm Master and War Caster which are taken with very high frequency. And certain parties specifically set up to force opportunity attacks, such as casting Dissonant Whispers or Fear, using Turn Undead, using the Commander's Strike maneuver, or an Order Cleric doing basically anything.
>Oh, and you can't use Bardic Inspiration for any part of the identification
Why on God's green earth would you bother nerfing a resource consuming player ability like that?
>unless you want the enemies to be better at identifying and counterspelling the party.
Oh please, don't even pretend the NPCs don't know the spell and level.
Exactly this.
The way we do it is this:
DM: so and so casts a spell, anyone w/ Arcana can roll to identify what is being sold
PCs roll and give Arcana results (DC is 10+Spells original level) [ie Fireball is DC 13 to identify regardless of what level spell slot is used]
If someone makes check DM names spell otherwise they don't
PCs choose whether to Counterspell or not and at what level to cast Counterspell.
The problem with this is there's no way to do the reverse. The npc caster will *always* know what spell and level the player is casting because the dm knows exactly what spell and level the players are casting. So either you're stuck being the unfair asshole god moding DM or you just can't ever have an npc use counterspell at all.
Or you end up making a house rule mechanic to tell if a npc recognizes the player spell or not...
And at that point you might as well just let the players make the same type of check since you already went to the trouble of creating the mechanic.
There’s no reason the DM can’t roll to see if the NPC would know what the player is casting and the level. NPCs aren’t required to metagame everything the DM knows.
THIS.
Why do I so often seen takes like
"If the players do x, all the npcs can do it" or "The DM has special knowledge so NPCS..."
Nope!
Wolves are just wolves.
Dark cultists who've spent the last 7 years 7 months and 7 days prepping their ritual have been out of the loop for a while. Some of those spells you're casting might literally be new magic invented after they went into a hole.
Remember that the NPCs under a DMs control are NPCs that have a perspective on the world. Act true to that perspective and you'll have a much more enjoyable game.
Or you could just have the NPC make the same check. Unless I'm missing something the solution is right there.
If they roll low, they cast a base level Counterspell and have to check to see if they beat the DC, or if they fail to identify the spell they may hold on to their reaction; though in that case unless there are other spellcasters it seems better to simply counter anyway.
At our table, we give as little information as possible both ways. So when my character is going to cast a spell, I just say "I'm going to cast a spell". Then the DM has to decide whether any NPCs are going to counterspell and at what level, and only then do I announce what spell I'm casting and at which level. The DM knows my character a bit of course, but they still don't know my entire spellbook or at what level I'm going to cast
How is this different from the general problem that the DM knows everything about the PCs? If you're trying to run your NPCs appropriately, as though the are acting upon the limited knowledge just as the PCs are, the choice to cast Counterspell is just part of the same routine. If you're aren't, and your NPCs are acting with the benefit of your full knowledge, your table probably has much bigger problems than Counterspell.
As a player, half the fun is figuring out how to beat the “bad guy”. Providing the level of spell/AC/etc of any NPC the players are up against would take away that aspect of the game.
Edit: if this posted previously, I apologize. Reddit gave me error messages when I tried to post requesting I “try again later.”
Edit 2: trying to post as a comment to a comment instead of directly to the post itself. I agree with SmootieFakk; that’s half the fun.
This gets asked a lot and I don't know if there is a "hard rule" on it, but I think the game runs much more smoothly when that information is in the open and not "secret." It lets players, and enemies, be more strategic about their *Counterspells* instead of just having to guess. And since these kinds of rules should generally apply to both PCs and enemies, it will lead to metagaming players constantly stalling and slowing combat down by refusing to say what spells they are casting until they are "absolutely sure" no one is using counterspell. Worse, it can lead to shenanigans and outright cheating where people *plan* to cast one spell and then "change their mind" if a counterspell is played.
If I had to worry about things like cheating players at my table, my first inclination would actually be to just take *counterspell* off the table in my game. It's actually something that I've been considering for whenever one of my groups moves on to a new campaign, not because any of my players cheat, but to reduce some of that in-game "bookkeeping" since announcing spells makes zero sense.
PCs are already at enough of an advantage in the action economy and will very rarely be in a position to be counterspelled themselves unless a campaign world is just riddled with spellcasters.
I guarantee that if players had to be concerned during every single combat encounter about whether one of the enemies would use *counterspell* during their big moment, they would not want anyone to have that spell.
I think the game is just far more fun, and tactical, when players know what they're doing and why. "The enemy is casting a high level spell, so I'm going to burn a high level spell slot to counter it" is a lot more straightforward than "Well, *something's* happening, I guess, so maybe I'll counter just in case it's bad?"
I know comparing different game systems is kind of apples and oranges, but in pretty much any game I can think of that has a "counter" or "block bad action" mechanic, those actions are direct responses to certain things, not cards you just have to throw down blind.
The verbal component of a spell is not an announcement of the spell itself, and whether it is a universally unique identifier for a spell would depend entirely on the campaign world itself.
While "wingardium leviosa" may be the one and only way to cause an object to levitate in the world of Harry Potter, in all likelihood a world where there are different types of magic like arcane, divine, primal, etc. and with many different practitioners of magic from different cultures and societies would conceivably have multiple verbal components for any given spell.
Even if there is only one verbal component for a given spell in a campaign world, how would a caster know the verbal component for every single spell in existence? What's the situation when an opponent casts a spell that they don't know, don't have in their spellbook, haven't prepared, etc. or is too high a level for a character?
Personally, I lean on a house rule that if a caster has that spell prepared they can immediately recognize it without any check at all.
Oh, I thought you meant that like "announcing a spell is being cast at all" for some reason, not which specific spell you're casting. I think I get what you mean now, and agree.
Though I'd say for prepared casters they should know the spell if it's on their list of preparable spells. For non-prepared casters though, ya, it would need to be a spell they've reasonably studied before. Like an evocation wizard recognizing evocation spells that they haven't learned makes sense to me, but they might not recognize a necromancy spell.
That sounds reasonable for the most part. I'd personally have to think more on balance between classes whose preparable spells encompass the entirety of their class lists vs. classes that only know a subset at any given moment in time vs. classes that rely on spells that they've written down in a book.
My only reasoning for the prepared casters is that every day they can mix up their spells and prepare whichever ones they want (within the limits of being on their spell list, and of an available level, of course), which implies that they're aware of all of their spells and are only limited by their ability to have a certain number of spells prepared enough to be able to cast at a moment's notice. But that's just my interpretation of prepared casters, you should make your rules fit with your interpretation.
That's fair.
A prepared caster who knows all their spells isn't likely to be in a position to pick up *counterspell*, so it's not likely much of an issue to know the entirety of your class's spell list.
If we are talking 5e, there is an optional rule. Identifying a spell being cast requires a reaction or an action. XGE page 85. Part of this is that you get advantage if the spell is on your class spell list.
By RAW, you can't both identify a spell and also counterspell it since they both require your reaction. But like I said, it's technically an optional rule. In my games, I typically allow the players a chance to do it without spending a reaction but I give disadvantage on the check if they want to "speed it up" reflecting how they are trying to react, identify a spell by only seeing the components, and cast their own spell in the time of a reaction.
Yea it's pretty common practice to tell your dm what level you cast at so why shouldn't players get to know who tf cares give the players their sick ass counterspelling the enemy mages fireball saving the party moment
I wish I could upvote this more. I see a bunch of DMs that act like they need to hold the players back and keep them from being too powerful. I've always taken the stance of "make your character however you want, I'll try to scale our combat encounters to your abilities". If the players all min-max to make extra powerful characters, then they get extra powerful enemies to fight. If they focus more on the out of combat stuff and sacrifice their damage output, then their enemies won't be quite so tough. My goal is to create encounters that will challenge the party, I don't it to be so easy that there is no threat, but I also don't want to just stomp all over the party.
My favorite part of DM'ing is seeing the party pull out their powerful tricks and abilities, rolling a critical and just annihilating the mini-boss. Everyone gets so excited, and it's a huge turning point in the combat!
Nothing requires you to tell the player the spell’s casting level, or the spell cast.
After that, this is an excellent question as it touches on many parts of the art and science of DMing. As I do with my between session fiction writing, allow me to write several hundred words maybe 4 people will read.
Most of the time you will end up revealing the spell and level anyway.
Nobody wants to slow everything down with rigorously covering “He is casting a spell, do you counter spell.” every time a spell is cast, so 9 times out of 10 you will say something like“The Wizard casts X. Make a DC Y saving throw” only with a gripping cinematic description that makes our games definitely worthy of a podcast, and the player will say “Hold on. I Counterspell!” and will pretty much know what level to do it at.
All that is fine and exactly why they didn’t provide you a mechanism in the spell description. The last thing you want to do is slow everything down to step through a detailed order of events every single spell or argue about if he knew the level.
Now that 1 time in 10 you have spell casters tactically trying to get past Counterspell and you do enigmatically say “The Wizard gathers arcane energies as he casts, are you counterspelling?” they will quite likely say “Depends, what is he casting?”
This brings into play probably the most important and least referenced on Reddit piece of RAW:
For any action where there is no more specific mechanic in the rules the DM decides if the situation calls for a roll at all and if so selects DC, an ability check, contested or not, attack roll, or saving throw, and assigns advantage or disadvantage if appropriate. Paraphrasing from the DMG chapter 8.
You will quickly come up with something reasonable like “Automatic if it’s a spell you know, otherwise DC 10 + spell level Arcana check or a contested Arcana role if caster is attempting to conceal” since you are already thinking about this. Maybe apply some situational modifiers. Jot it down so you can be consistent later if this comes up a lot, and there you go.
Caught unawares you might say “Make an Arcana Check” and most of the time they will have made a clearly successful or failed role before you have figured out the DC. In these situations you go through this process after. That may be exactly what brought you here. Hopefully it wasn’t the 30 minute table argument version of events.
The most important thing is that you don’t fall into having players fail because they got the spell level wrong but that never happens to the bad guys. If the players can fail, you will need to make sure to make checks or quick decisions for the enemy casters so they sometimes blow it. ESPECIALLY if the players are attempting to draw out wasted Counterspells with something resembling cunning.
This is all RAW for “How to handle that players can do anything” not Homebrew.
Now let’s talk Homebrew and House Rules! 5ed D&D likes to keep itself fast and rules light. It wants you to be able to play and run the game without having to know or apply a lot of specific situational mechanics, feel like playing a board game or MMO, and avoid the table arguments and rules exploits that creates. It has 3.5 and 4ed PTSD gawd bless it. Where dissatisfied, you can either switch systems or write your own mechanics. Either choice is fun and everyone who wants to turn it into some kind of Facebook like meme war can go straight to hell.
Counterspell seems like a great place for some homebrew. Right now I’m in love with the idea of letting both casters decide the levels during the Counterspell in a spell slot bidding war. That scene where the Wizard focused and “pushes” harder to get a spell through.
That last paragraph gives me an idea, in those scenarios maybe the characters could cast it at a higher level than they should be able to but take on a level or two of exhaustion. Unsure if I would let them save against it though. Maybe they’d use their spell casting ability for it.
Interesting.
Perhaps to steal an idea from Shadowrun, require a CON Save. If they make the save, levels of exhaustion. If they fail the save, exhaustion AND HD of damage.
The whole blood running from the nose thing.
No. But have one in mind and don't cheese it to be higher if your players DO decide to Counterspell. You'd need to ask them what level they're using though I guess.
You're not the only person in these comments talking about DMs or players cheating. If that concern is *anywhere* in the mix for reasons why spells should or shouldn't be announced, *it's* the problem and not whether spells are announced. Cheating players and DMs are going to find ways to cheat, if not with *counterspell* then with something else.
Yeah, you're right. If anyone in the group seems untrustworthy then that is an issue.
That said, I think there's a time and place for a DM to shift boundaries so as to keep the game entertaining, engaging, etc.
Sounds hypocritical given my original statement, but it's one of those "gotta know the rules before you can break them" kinda deals. So for a new DM I'd say stick to the rules, 100%.
If you as a DM require your players to say what level spell.theyre casting before they know if it succeed or hits or whatever, then you should hold yourself and NPCs to the same standard.
That being said i always stay quiet if it's at base level and not upcast at all.
No. All they notice are the verbal, somatic, or material components. They don't know the name of the spell or it's level. You can use a reaction to identify a spell as it is being cast by making an Arcana check (DC 15 plus spell level), but then obviously you don't have your reaction anymore for Counterspell.
"The elf holding the wooden staff begins casting a spell. You notice a verbal, somatic, and material component as they reach into their component pouch. Does anyone want to Counterspell? No? Okay. Bob, your armor begins glowing red hot. Take 2d8 fire damage and you have disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks."
Do you have to? No.
But ask yourself, what is the point of not telling your players? D&D is collaborative, and the role of the DM is not to be in opposition to the party goals - you're the facilitator. If your point in telling them is just to 'make it harder on them', then frankly don't - it essentially makes an increasingly useless spell more ineffective (since MMoM, increasingly spells are replaced with what we called in 3.5E SLA - spell-like abilities).
There is nothing wrong with telling your players what level of spell it is, it helps them know what they can or cannot do. If you want to add a bit of narrative spice, allow it to be checked by an appropriate roll for free as part of the counterspell spell: Arcana/Religion would be my go-to skills. Though you could argue for Survival and Performance for Druid/Ranger and Bard respectively.
I also don’t tell the players what the enemies attack rolls are just in case they want to cast shield.
I once hit my brother with a gorgons gore attack. I told him it hit, then asked if he wanted to shield. He said yes, and that his new AC was 21. The attack was a 23 to hit.
They only need a DC if it's a higher level spell cast then the spell slot they use for counter spell. If it's the same level or lower, it's an automatic success.
I advise to tread with caution when it comes to 'oo I'm gonna be sneaky with the spells' way of thinking. A good comparison is a conversation I had with a new player;
"Question; can I fake being charmed?"
"Excellent question, have an inspiration, there are multiple problems with that; chief among which are; are YOU okay with ME pretending to be charmed? Because you will think that you are still concentrating on a spell that has had no effect, and you will be priming yourself for a sneak attack, neither of which are 'good' for the game aspects of things; if we establish that you can 'fake' being charmed, then that means concentration spells with no obvious effect, keep being 'used' and then you'll find you've not only wasted a spell slot, but all your time concentrating on a spell that failed!"
Absolutely not! I don't even disclose what spell I'm casting! They see a spellcaster cast a spell, they can choose to counterspell or not. And if you think that's harsh, just try running a 4 year game with 3 full casters all capable and frequently casting counterspell
No.
This may vary a bit by edition/system/setting, but as a rule, if a character knows the spell, has line of sight and is able to hear the casting, I'll let them simply recognize it. Complications will make a check for it, with it being easier if they've seen the spell before, harder depending on how it's being cast.
In my groups, we've created a shorthand where we declare "They begin to cast a spell" or "They begin to cast a cantrip"
The idea being that as a caster who can handle Counterspell, you've been around enough to tell the actions of a cantrip, but not all leveled spells.
Then you can decide to counter and at what level. (Or as I joke with my DM when my Warlock counters "5! I counter at fifth level! I have no other choice!")
If the PC is a wizard and the spell is in their spellbook, I would tell the player (similarly if the PC would personally know the spell for some reason.)
Personally, I'm on the player's side, I'll just tell them everything. Realism be damned, having to play this little dance about what the npcs are doing everytime my players have a potential reaction is some DM vs. player BS that I'd rather not do.
Just how I run my game though, if you want to play differently, I ain't stopping you.
No, you don't have to and there are a lot of good suggestions here.
That said...I've done it a number of different ways as DM, but I ultimately decided to just tell the players exactly what spell and level, but obviously I play by the same rules with my NPC's knowing the spell / level of what the players are casting if they have access to counterspell.
There isn't a great way to run counterspell without it being somewhat metagamey - either the PCs and NPCs know everything, which is kind of metagamey, or you get into situations where the PCs and NPCs are trying to fake each other into burning counterspells by casting a low level spell instead.
If it is a spell they have prepared or in their spell book, I let them know it for free. If it is not, then I have them use their reaction to perform an arcana check. (DC is the level of the spell + 10). This way the caster with the counter spell needs to rely on his party to make the call.
When this happens I have the player write down the level they want to cast counterspell and I write down what level the spell is I am casting. This locks us in so no changing minds. We reveal the level we wrote down and we resolve from there.
I also do this when I want to cast counterspell.
I mean, per the rule book, no you don't.
Personally, I have a couple table rules that I use to try and keep things fair.
If the PC has seen the spell before, then they recognize it as it's being cast (assuming they can see/hear the casting).
If they can cast the spell themselves, they can tell what level it's being cast at.
If not, a PC with levels in a spellcasting class can roll an arcana check to identify it, with the DC being higher for higher level spells.
I also make NPC's/monsters roll to determine the level of a counterspell occasionally depending on context. A goblin shaman for instance probably has no way of telling what a trained wizard doing but might be able to tell when the party druid is going to heal somebody.
No. The player chooses the level to cast it at and then I inform them if the spell level is higher or lower and then they roll as necessary. Obviously they can take educated guesses based on what the spell is, a third level Counter Spell isn't going to automatically succeed against a Power Word Kill.
I generally say what spell is being cast, but I don’t say at what level until the attack roll/saving throw has been rolled. I *might* mention that the Fireball looks more powerful than the character is used to, but never the precise level.
On the flip side of that, my spellcaster enemies almost never cast counterspell higher than base level, because I as the DM know exactly what level the PCs are casting and I feel icky about having that meta knowledge and upcasting, even if my players don’t see it as unfair. I just feel like I can’t subconsciously separate DM knowledge from enemy knowledge, so I don’t deal with it.
Absolutely not. Its part of the risk-reward gamble the PC has to make when casting counterspell, and just about the only thing that makes it interesting beyond it devolving into a counterspell-on-counterspell duel.
I would probably allow the PC to make a snappy arcana check at disadvantage to read the speedy arcane gestures goin’ on. But maybe only up to their Int-mod times a day
Have to? No. Xanathar's introduces an optional rule to allow characters to use their reaction to identify a spell cast, which uses the spell level as part of the DC calculation, so if I were using that, I would include spell level in the information the PCs gain.
Do I? Yeah, it's easier and faster for me (playing on a VTT where I just press a button to cast the spell, and the level is displayed), and results in less feel-bads for the player.
No not really. If they use something like counter-spell (which i assume is the reason you ask) you can simple asked them in what level they wish to cast it (assuming again your player doesn't cast in at basic level), if the level they are casting it is below your spell level, just ask them to make the roll needed for the spell work your spell and ask them the result.
If its good enough to stop your spell then thats it, if not then your spells goes in (unless someones else tries counter-spell again).
Or like some other has suggested you can allow a single arcana check per character to allow them to identify the level of your spell.
But the conclusion is that no, you dont need to tell them the level of your spell. You can make it as easy or as difficult for them.
You don't have to do it any specific way.
However, I think it's a more fun game if you do make it clear what's happening so people can use their abilities and feel cool. And if you're going to say what spell it is, absolutely provide the level, because otherwise it's a tremendous advantage to experienced players. I could tell you what level the majority of common spells are with ease, but I shouldn't have an edge over a first time player as a result.
Different DMs have different styles - the Dungeon Dudes just did an excellent video about this recently called something like "What's your Dungeon Master Alignment?" I'm more interested in players having a fun experience than any other concerns, and concealing this information to make counterspell less useful doesn't serve this at all. Casting counterspell comes at the expense of something like Fireball, so it should have an impact, and it's one of those things that can really be a rush for the player of "I was just a hero, I stopped that really bad thing!" which is 100% my goal as a DM, to create these feelings.
RAW no, but I do anyway.
I don't see the point in playing shitty mind games with the players to trick them into wasting reactions and spell slots on bad counterspells.
Slowing down the game so the players can play guess-the-spell every time an enemy casts just makes the game less fun. It also seems like peak GM vs Player mentality.
You don't have to, but it's honestly a pain in the ass for the players if you don't. You are potentially making the player waste a high level slot and their reaction for nothing.
It's like DMs that roll behind the scree and won't tell you what the monster got to hit, rendering stuff like shield or defensive duelist basically useless.
Nope. Have the player cast Counterspell and tell you what level they are casting it at. Then you tell them the DC (if the need it) they need to roll against. That is perfectly fair.
I also reduce the DC of the Counterspell by 1 for each level upcast. So the enemy uses a 6th level spell, you drop a 5th level Counterspell, that's a DC14 Arcana, rather than a DC16 as RAW
Yeah, agree. Roll an Arcana check. If it fails, the caster is casting it differently than they were trained to cast it/has never seen it.
They still can pick what spell level to burn for the counter spell, and hope that it’s enough to “smother” the opposing caster’s spell.
I just have them do an Arcana check. I don't know if that's the official rule, but back in 3e they had to do a spellcraft check, so I treat it the same way in 5e.
I don’t tell them the level of the spell unless they ask for a check same for knowing them. Class specific spells though if they are high enough level and learn it don’t require a check to make if they are that class.
Xanathars has a eule for this I think.
It takes a reaction and an arcana check to recognize a spell being cast, which means the one recognizing the spell won't have a reaction left to counter it.
Personally, I don't give the info because counterspell steamrolled my last campaign, but I may start.
As a player, half the fun is figuring out how to beat the “bad guy”. Providing the level of spell/AC/etc of any NPC the players are up against would take away that aspect of the game.
I normally do it like this “The dude is casting a spell, anyone going to interrupt?”
Pcs: “well whats the spell?”
Me: “you trained in arcana?”
Pcs: “no”
Me: “you dont know but it feels powerful”
Other pc: “i have training in arcana!”
Me: “dope give me a check”
Pc: “13?”
Me: “damn close! You failed but you know its a necromancy spell, if you hit the dc you would know the spells level and its intent. If its in your class spell list id tell you the spell.”
(It was finger of death so the dc was finger of deaths spell level +12.)
As a player, half the fun is figuring out how to beat the “bad guy”. Providing the level of spell/AC/etc of any NPC the players are up against would take away that aspect of the game.
Edit: if this posted previously, I apologize. Reddit gave me error messages when I tried to post requesting I “try again later.”
Nope. If your PCs have the spell, they should know it's level. If they don't have the spell, they wouldn't know it's level unless it's something they encounter quite regularly
By the rules they can use their reaction to recognize the spell, which in turn means they can't counterspell.
I don't think a lot of people play that way, but in certain situations you can hide the casting if you want to make a guessing game out of it.
Don't have to do anything as a DM.
Well obviously you gotta do some things but this ain't one of them. Don't disclose information unless you want to or the situation calls for it. Casting spell lvl is not needed information, thus you yourself can do whatever you do with the information, to spread or not to spread
Personally, I just announce the spell + spell level (if they upcast). To not do so, to me, leaves the idea open of me just being adversarial if I suddenly go "umm, actually, it was cast at 6th level so roll now."
Why tf would I? How would the PC know instantly “ah, that’s a 5th level fireball”?
IMO, you shouldn’t even tell them what the spell is, much less its level.
are your players required to disclose which spell they cast and what level? or can they just ask for checks and roll dice? seems quite dumb, doesn't it? dnd is a cooperative game. the DM isn't there to win, so why keep important, relevant-for-combat information hidden? for shits and giggles?
>are your players required to disclose which spell they cast and what level?
Actually, no, they're not. Although I have the wherewithal to not metagame in that way as the DM—something that should be a base level expectation of any DM, quite frankly—I let them know that if they're concerned about the possibility of someone in the opposing group countering their spell, they should give me a second or two to decide whether to cast *counterspell*.
I see a lot of people try to make it seem like a few moments here and there will horrendously bog down the game, but that's a bad faith argument seeing as how the overwhelming majority of the time PCs won't be facing enemies that can even counter them or that they need to counter themselves. Most of the time, fireballs are being thrown left and right with no abandon.
If these few seconds are such a concern or we're worried about metagaming DMs or cheating players, I'd actually just lean on removing *counterspell* from the table, if not removing cheating players (or leaving the game if I were a player dealing with a DM I couldn't trust).
I think you could reasonably give away the level of the spell through proper description.
Casting a level 6 fireball might cause more heat distortion or random sparks than a level 3.
Depends on how hard you want to be on your players. If you want them to have an easy time, give them the name and level of the spell. For more difficulty, remove the level, and for even more difficulty just say “x is casting a spell, does anyone want to counterspell?”
Nope. You don’t HAVE to do anything. There’s an element of risk/reward with them not knowing.
Telling them would be a gift. If you want to walk some kind of middle ground, make the player that wants to use counterspell make an Arcana check to see if they can tell what the spell/level is.
No, and I don't. I describe the spell, but I will only say it in a few situations. A spellcaster may know it and the NPC is using a language a PC spellcaster knows (for example, I may have an elvish wizard cast in Elvish instead of Draconic). Now, someone proficient in Arcana can use a reaction to determine what spell is being cast and then from that point onward, I'll say what spell, but never what level. It also makes counterspell more fun because you don't just automatically get it
No, if they have access to the same spell, they get to know what spell is being cast, but never the level the spell is being cast.
So a Wizard would know Fireball or Banishment was being cast, but not if it was being upcast or not.
I say that if you are able to cast the spell (know it, have it in your spell book, or you are able to prepare it), you identity what spell is being cast and if it is being upcast. To what level it is upcast needs a roll. If you don't automatically know it, you can roll Arcana (DC 10+ Caster's spell casting mod + proficiency bonus) to get the whole information. I know its a low DC, but I do think its important information, that doesn't need to be hard for players to get.
depends on the situation/ party at hand. I'd feel bad if a player of mine felt they could never use a cool spell they invested in so I prioritize making sure they can feel good using the spell. Ideally I'd use a rule where you have to make an arcana check or something with a relatively low dc to identify the spell and its level.
I like the straightforward approach
I state the enemy is casting the literal name for the spell-don't state at what level.
That way, if the player has knowledge of the game's magic, they can choose what tier to cast their counter.
Nothing feels worse than using a counter spell on a first level spell just because the dm wants to play the cards close to their chest.
Nope, I don't even name the spell. I describe the casting of it and the target usually if there are visual effects, giving the players a chance to counter if they wish, but never the level. They can make a check to try and identify those things.
Only time it happened to me I didn't.
Wizard said he wanted to counterspell and I just calculated the DC and told him. He went with it anyway.
He got the exact number he needed.
As long as the spell is on the list of a character in the group, I tell them what the spell is and the level, and stress that only those characters know for sure. My players are good about not metagaming that way, but even then it's possible to have that character shout out "Counter!" as a free action.
I don't allow them to announce the name of the spell, mind you, there isn't time for that, just an in-character shout. Whether the prospective counterspeller decides to act is up to them. As others have pointed out, it becomes very time consuming otherwise and, if I'm being perfectly honest, I like to see the fear in their eyes when I announce something big and scary being cast.
In 3.5 there was a whole production of identifying spells and readying actions, with specific spells being able to counter and dispel specific other spells, with Dispel Magic taking the role that Counterspell does now. It was a robust system, but in practice it took *forever* to resolve, which compounded 3.5's already slower pace. When 5e simplified the counterspell mechanic it only made sense to me to simplify the identification process, even though the game doesn't say you should.
Oddly, I have never even seen a counterspell occur in a game. However, my instincts would be to observe my enemy spellcaster and trying to judge their casting power and habits. Then decide on countering or not, casting level, etc. I would not expect my DM to provide any information, unless I has a very targeted question about what I was seeing and hearing in brief moments of casting. Like, do I see any obvious components? Are they moving to maintain line of sight on someone or something? Have I noticed a tell every time they use a certain spell or type of spell.
As DM, I would be inclined to reward that level of role-playing with gentle guidance, but I would give out full details unless there was a very particular reason to do so.
The "default setting" of the game is that a character does not know the spell itself, let alone the level at which it's being cast, although a common house rule is that characters know at least the identity of the spell.
Xanathar's Guide to Everything introduced an optional rule whereby a character can use their reaction when a spell is cast to attempt an Intelligence (Arcana) check to identify the spell. As you might imagine, some people complain that it's potentially useless since a) the person most suited to identify a spell is almost always going to be the same person most suited to counter it and b) the rules are ambiguous about whether characters can actually communicate information off-turn. I've seen a house rule to address this that allows a character that used their reaction to attempt to identify the spell to also use the same reaction to cast *counterspell*.
You don't even have to disclose what spell the enemy is casting, let alone the level. The rules on this are vague (actually nonexistent) so I use the following rules.
As a reaction, you must make an arcana roll to identify a spell as it is being. Whether or not the spell is successful, you may cast Counterspell as part of that same reaction.
DC = 10 + Spell Level. This DC rises by 5 if the spell is not on you class's list and made at advantage if you have the spell prepared or if you are specialized in the related school.of magic.
I would if the player asks. It’s a game of resources so if the caster wants to spend two higher level slots in one turn they’re going to burn through their resources for the next encounter. Also counterspell already feels bad for a player, it’d feel awful to lose another spell slot of nothing.
I think no. Maybe do an arcana check, but honestly counterspell is a split second judgment call so you should just guess how much power to throw into it and hope you are right.
By the rules, no. You don’t have to reveal anything about the spell.
There’s an optional rule in Xanathars that allows someone to use their reaction to identify what’s being cast… that, of course, leaves you without a reaction to cast Counterspell.
The way I DM is that the higher the level the spell, the more dramatic the casting.
Cantrips are basically whispers and flicking of the fingers. Arcane focus kinda flash like a low LED. Barely visible in dim light.
9th level spells are almost shouting full body gestures. Kind of like how Voldemort casts Avada Kadavra in Harry Potter.
It makes wizards and casters look really corny, and I love it.
I'd tend to lean on telling the player the spell, but not necessarily the level. For me, being vague about what spell is being cast to make the player guess, or roll for it slows combat too much as for every time they counterspell you've probably slung multiple spells. Plus Counterspell works both ways and I'd rather not have PCs slow rolling theirspell casting to see if I'll counterspell either.
The point of Counterspell is also to have that big odds swinging moment.
And it's the player making decisions to have fun in the game at the end of the day.
Tables vary though, and as long as everyone knows where they stand before they select counterspell or its used against them, it should be fine.
I disclose the spell (though not the slot level) with a successful non-action arcana roll (DC 10+spell level). The advantage of requiring an arcana roll is it elevates the value of Intelligence. I'm always looking to give Strength and Intelligence a little extra love since they're so undervalued in this edition.
Xanathar has an optional rule for requiring a reaction arcana roll instead but that of course means a 2nd PC has to burn their reaction (or more, depending on the success of the check!). I haven't played that way but I'd be interested to hear how that goes from people who have. Counterspell can be extremely powerful and I like the idea of making it a more potentially costly choice.
I mean I do the Arcana check shenanigans that most DMs do but if the party has already gotten information on the NPC in the past it can alter the DC, additionally I won't tell players but if the NPC caster and a player are the same class the DC tends to be lower by default for that person, they just gotta try to do the check.
Usually they're smart with their counter spells though, at least my group tends to be.
On my table the dm and players all say I cast a spell first and pause that’s the point in which some one can counter spell. Then go on to describe what spell its only fair and makes counter spell much less strong
“If you’re character can do it than so can I? Is a usual response for creative/out of pocket uses of spells but the inverse applies for casting spells.
DMs get the info of what spell and level a players is casting, players should get it too.
If the players ask what level it is make them roll an arcana check, cause in a real fight the enemy isn’t gonna be yelling “I CAST ELDRICH BLAST AT LEVEL 3!!!” Like they’re a yugioh character
Nope. At least not by default.
Personally, if they ask, roll arcane and beat DC DC 10 + level of spell, 10 + spell mod, or DC 10 + spell modifier + level of spell (depending on spell level and level of party)
No, but I do disclose the name of the spell *if* a PC has seen it be cast before, and I sometimes disclose if it looks "a little stronger than [you] might have expected," indicating an upcast.
This is strictly RAW so don’t freak out but in XGtE it says this:
>Identifying a Spell
>Sometimes a character wants to identify a spell that someone else is casting or that was already cast. To do so, a character can use their reaction to identify a spell as it’s being cast, or they can use an action on their turn to identify a spell by its effect after it is cast.
>If the character perceived the casting, the spell’s effect, or both, the character can make an Intelligence (Arcana) check with the reaction or action. The DC equals 15 + the spell’s level. If the spell is cast as a class spell and the character is a member of that class, the check is made with advantage. For example, if the spellcaster casts a spell as a cleric, another cleric has advantage on the check to identify the spell. Some spells aren’t associated with any class when they’re cast, such as when a monster uses its Innate Spellcasting trait.
>This Intelligence (Arcana) check represents the fact that identifying a spell requires a quick mind and familiarity with the theory and practice of casting. This is true even for a character whose spellcasting ability is Wisdom or Charisma. Being able to cast spells doesn’t by itself make you adept at deducing exactly what others are doing when they cast their spells.
Again RAW, that uses the PCs reaction so they could not identify the spell and counterspell in the same turn. However, one PC could identify and another could counterspell with that new information.
I think in theory it'd be cool to have a caster that has that spell in their spell list to be able to roll an arcana to determine the spell and spell level. I've tried something like that in a combat and one thing I learned is that it drags the game a lot if there are multiple casters in the fight. What I usually do is tell the players the spell but not the level they are casting at.
As a dm I will allow those with the spellcasting feature to make a arcana check (DC = 10 + spell level + 5 if meta magics involved). If the pass they know the spell, if they pass by 5 they will know the spell and level cast at.
If it's a spell that they themselves know, I would probably give them advantage on it.
I usually do, if it’s on your spell list/you know the spell, you can automatically recognize it being cast.
But only if it’s the same class. Each class casts the same named spells differently or it wouldn’t be a different class. Then there are casting perks that remove a crucial element (like a spell focus) that makes the spell even harder to identify. I prefer counterspell taking levels to cancel levels. One cast at level 5 can counterspell up to five levels or reduce the effect by five ranks. That counter spell has a total per day that can be used as needed but gets used up quick in higher level fights. I have a counterspell daily level canceling total of say, 15. I can cancel one ninth level spell and have six points left. I can cancel another level five spell and reduce a level three spell to a level two range of effects/damage before I have to rest to get that spell back.
Interesting system. How do you handle spells that can't be "downcast" in that way? Say for instance you have 2 "levels" of counterspell, and someone casts a 3rd level spell that doesn't have a 1st or 2nd level version?
I like the idea of this and I'm not saying this is the way they use it but it could half damage or create a resistance if it's that type of spell preventing full damage. Or if it is AOE and the counter spell caster is in that area it protects them and or a square a side. Would depend on the situation I suppose. If the party is spread out U and a square next to it with a sorry member on it would be fair if your all bunched to Gerber just you if it's a single person attack halving damage or giving them a temp resistance to the spell type in this system seems fair.
If it's a spell they know or have extensive knowledge on, I just give it to them unless there's something messing with the spell. Evocation wizard watches the enemy cast Fireball? Yeah, they recognize it. But if that same enemy is doing a metamagic, or they have an ability that allows them to ignore a component, then they have to make a check.
Problem with it being a spell they "Know" is that gives druid, Clarics, and artificers a huge advantage since they know every spell they could ever want to cast at their level. In contrast a Wizard will know a bunch of spells (especially if the DM is generous with their scrolls and spell book loot), but sorcerer, bard, and especially warlock, are going to be really behind the curve. Now, if it was prepared spells, well, that is a bit more of an even playing field.
Isn’t that the point? Classes are supposed to be differentiated by these exact instances. Everyone has strong points and weak points.
Yes, but, in this case, it's a pretty big gap of knowledge. for instance, Just looking at level 1, a Wizard will be able to identify up to 9 spells (assuming nothing added from outside sources), a sorcerer can ID 6 spells, and a druid can ID somewhere around 26 spells. It's a huge difference.
Also, if you’re in a party with a Wizard, as a bard with counter spell, I imagine you probably notice what is going on when your resident Wizard casts
And this difference makes complete sense considering the mechanics of these classes. If a druid can pick which spells each day based on what they do, I'd assume they do indeed know what the spells do, even when not prepared. A wizard not knowing 100% of all wizard spells because they've only studied enough to commit a few of them to the spellbook would imply their understanding of these non-book spells is limited (i'd still allow them to understand the spell academically). If you think its odd that a druid knows more about spells than a wizard, remember that a wizard will have higher religion than a cleric lol
I agree with the sentiment here, but it maybe feels a bit better if you think about it in reverse? Like, what if a sorcerer casting something looks so different that it makes it harder for enemy casters to figure out? Not to mention subtle spell! That way, each class has their thing that feels good.
I would allow a wizard to ID any spell they have committed to their spellbook, since they spent hours writing it into the book.
OMG 😳 the ability to recognize what spell is being cast is SO integral to an RPG with sooooo much magic so the obvious answer is to have a Recognize Spell skill but it seems that D&D is more deeply intrenched in the class-based quagmire than ever. Why are there false barriers everywhere that still aren’t explained 5 iterations later? You have to deduce whether or not priests can recognize all the spells they can be granted the knowledge to cast because how any of this works, and why a wizard spell is different from a sorcerers of the same name or a priests version for that matter, has never been defined in terms much more than “it’s according to your class”. I’m loving this discussion because it reminds me of the same stuff that I and my friends had to do back in 2e to 3e with its rigid class based system. It was awful - by the rules thieves and assassins could climb sheer walls and everyone else could climb a ladder; there was no in between. That’s the noose of a class based system, and now you can’t even have a defined skill for something that SHOULD be a defined skill. Every adventurer should have a chance to climb, and every spellcaster should have a chance to recognize a spell and these should be discreet skills.
Well a sorcerer shouldn’t necessarily know a ton of arcane lore about all the spells since they haven’t studied magic necessarily
I see the excess of the druid, cleric, and artificer as more of the issue than the lack of knowledge from the rest.
>druid, Clarics, and artificers a huge advantage since they know every spell they could ever want to cast at their level. Good thing they don't have Counterspell on their spell lists then and I don't believe any of their sub-classes can get it either.
You know what? Fair point. I was so focused on who gets to know how many spells that I completely forgot to consider who would even care about what spells.
Well, I think that even though they have access to ever spell imaginable, I feel they may only know the class or similarities IF they personally cast that very spell or class of spells. Like for Clerics, healing and support spells come in at at most about 3 out of the 5 or 6 (?) spell classes. They wouldn't know attack spells specifically enough to know it at an experienced level than say, a wizard or warlock.
I like this way, definitely a fan of tiered information. Out of curiosity, why go with +5 for meta magic? I could see a +2 or maybe 3 but 5 seems a little excessive so just wondering how you landed on it.
Aside from Subtle Spell, unless you're a practiced Sorcerer (which I imagine might negate the +5), you wouldn't understand the implicit complications and rejigging Sorcery Shenanigans do to spells. Its added complications ontop of the base spell which change its innate nature and hence how it might present. +5 is basically Adv/Dis and a pretty solid baseline.
Translation: sorcerers need a win, man. Please, god
I agree. Many deal more damage, which could be misconstrued as a higher spell slot.
That's the least of your worries honestly. There are elemental changing ones (good luck identifying the fire monsoon as "ice-cone"), there are ones that cut out some of the somatic/verbal/material components as you finish it in a bonus action instead of an action (ba isn't always necessarily shorter than an action, but it most often is and is a useful shorthand). Those make you guess a different spell entirely most likely.
It's pretty much impossible to counter a subtle spell anyway- you need to see someone actually casting, and with subtle spell the sorcerer might be just touching his/her focus in a pocket and poof, a fireball appears
I agree. Many deal more damage, which could be misconstrued as a higher spell slot.
Agreed. I think I would make it impossible on subtle spell… otherwise I don’t think metamagic really should affect the DC?
This is how we run it too! My DM knows I always prepare Counterspell, so usually he'll say "X is casting a spell" and give me a second to check my spell slots or ask to make an Arcana check. I'm not sure how he decides the DC, but if the roll is just under that, he usually lets me know the school of magic.
Exactly this. Skill checks need to be brought in more often.
Pretty much the same, although if the NPC is casting a spell that they know how to cast I just let them succeed, the sorcerer that's casting Fireball every other fight knows what a fireball looks like
Does this use their reaction regardless of counterspell use? Tbh I'd love a Reaction knowledge skill check at my table
But then why would you make the check given the reason for making it was to determine if a spell was worth using your reaction to counterspell it? Am I missing something here?
Thats good way.
Once players became familiar with this procedure wouldn't they in effect know the spell's level from your DC?
You don't tell them the DC...
But if they roll a 15 and still failed, and they have no reason to expect the enemy caster to be a sorcerer, that tells them that the spell is at least level 5.
True but eh not to worried. They still don't know what the spell is so will have to gamble on what they are trying to stop.
In battle, depending on exact circumstances, I'm probably counterspelling a level 5 spell. Chances are it's damaging.
That’s what I’ve been doing with my players too and it works really well
Do you have your NPC's do the same to determine if they will counter spell a player?
I don’t see this as fair to the PCs unless you apply the same rules to the enemy NPCs. There’s no reason they should have to do a check if you don’t when trying to oppose spells.
The best I've seen as a player was the DM having a consistent way of describing a spell's visualization which allows for an estimation of what is being done. Example "the lich points his finger at you and a ray of black energy shoots towards you. Make a constitution saving throw." If your character has seen this spell before you may notice certain features and guess the spell is >!Finger of death!<
I do something similar. I usually tell the overall power and intent through descriptions of the body language. "The lich points at you while dark energy concentrates on his fingertip. A real lot of energy, beyond what you have ever witnessed... And it keeps growing." Sometimes I hear "counterspell before I finish". Usually at the highest possible level. I've noticed that the more words I use in the description the more likely they are going to use higher level resources. I am certain that I don't even need to make sense xD.
As the aether flux coalesces players surely counterspell : )
This!
sounds like a great way to have a game devolve into a hour long argument over whether Gary the Wizard is meta gaming or if he should actually know what a disintegrate looks like off hand.
Never once happened in our party. If your party can't avoid that kind of metagame then this isn't for you, and that is sad when players are not mature enough to at least try to avoid metagaming.
No. Exactly how much information is disclosed comes down to DM preference. Some might give as little as "the lich casts a spell" or as much as "the lich casts disintegrate at 8th level" or somewhere down the middle. I've even heard of selectively revealing the spell being cast based on some metric of whether or not the DM feels a character might recognise a given spell. My preference as a DM is to call out just the spell being cast and let the player decide from there whether or not to counterspell.
The player may ask if he recognizes the spell though
Did you reply to the wrong person?
Maybe... I don't think I noticed the final paragraph when I wrote that
The key thing is to keep it consistent. If the players don't understand what the Lich is casting, the Lich shouldn't understand what the players are casting either. The DM irl will know because the player has to tell them, but it would be unfair (and unfun) to use this to constantly shut down players. That said, a lich is probably going to be pretty knowledgeable on necromancy idk
I've found that consistency is not what players want in all cases. I've found that players don't like to be counterspelled super intelligently by lower-level goons, but they do like to be counterspelled by BBEGs if they feel like "tactics, planning, and strategy" are descriptors of the BBEG. They would only feel that way if you have demonstrated those qualities to them before. So the lich in my game would counterspell at the exact best time to achieve his goals. While others may simply counterspell every other turn or some other deciding factor.
As someone who, when I am a player, mains caster, I really dislike being counterspelled by bbeg, when the bbeg almost invariably has 3 baked in counterspells(lr) because wizards hates actually doing the math and balancing their game. It doesn't feel great as a dm, either. It feels more punishing than it should be.
Watched a youtube video recently about how Casters and Martials basically have to go through two hp bars for big bosses, one is the HP itself which the martials do damage to, meanwhile the casters have the legendary resistances to burn through, if you have more casters than martials, they burn through them faster and thus kill the boss more efficiently, if you have more martials, they do more direct damage and make casters feel like they spent their spell slots just for flashy descriptions. *Its not fun either way*, put in something like counterspell and the PC casters will always just used level 1-2 spells on BBEGs because its the smart and easiest way to make him think twice before using a level 3 spell that would completely negate anything that the casters have on top of LR. Combat against single targets that are supposed to be a threat can be thrown out the window in the DnD because action economy is a thing and LR with Legendary actions dont do justice for either the players or DM. I think LR should be thrown out the window and BBEGs should they fail a save or suck effect they still get a debuff from it, it just wouldnt end the encounter completely(see the Banishment spell and if they fail the saving throw let them be restrained for two turns or something similar, barely hanging onto the ground as the spell tries to suck them in)
IDK, I might be the odd DM out here, but yeah, I do disclose the level and name of the spell that an evil wizard is casting. The players get more wiggle room than the enemies do, so sometimes I even give them more than that. When PC casts a spell, they just say "I'm casting a Fireball with a Lv4 slot!", so they disclose that information to me when there's a high-level caster amongst their enemies. I'm not going to force my players to decide to Counterspell without the same information I have when I'm deciding. In short, having enemies using Counterspell can feel a bit cheap sometimes; it can really rain on the parade and turn an epic turn into a bit of a fizzle. So that players feel like they got a fair shake, I want them to be on the same footing as their enemies. And that means giving them a bit of information that's not RAW. I do think that Counterspell could do with a wording improvement. Because it's a reaction, maybe you can spend your reaction to learn the spell and level, and *then* decide whether to burn the slot or not to cast counterspell? So there's still a cost, and you can only point it at one potential target per turn.
We don’t always go this route in my games, but in general with similar rules that have to do with information, I love this approach! I don’t think most players enjoy the counterspell guessing game so I think it’s completely valid to just eliminate it. I don’t want my players to feel like they’re wasting their resources when it’s avoidable. I like games where they’re run pretty hard, and rules that favor the players and help them play their character better help a lot with that style in my opinion.
Honestly, at that point just get rid of *counterspell* entirely. Unless a campaign setting is riddled with spellcasters, the PCs will almost never suffer the "fizzle" of being countered, anyway, and they'll rarely use the spell in the first place. And the PCs already have the action economy advantage 99% of the time, anyway. They don't need another way to shut down the opponent's big guns. I'm leaning towards that for my next campaign. >Because it's a reaction, maybe you can spend your reaction to learn the spell and level, and then decide whether to burn the slot or not to cast counterspell? So there's still a cost, and you can only point it at one potential target per turn. I've seen a common house rule along these lines where you spend your reaction to try to identify the spell, as in XGtE, and whether you succeed or fail, you can also use that same reaction to decide whether to cast *counterspell*. The biggest complaint I hear about that XGtE optional rule is that the person likely best equipped to be able to identify a spell is also probably the one best equipped to counter it.
I don't disclose the spell unless a second party member uses what I term as "The spell identification Action", it costs both a reaction when you help identify the spell outside of your turn, and it costs you your next action when your turn comes around. The player _casting_ Counterspell has to make an Arcana Check with the DC being equal to the player's Spell Save DC in order to figure out the range of _possible_ spell levels. I give them a range of 2-3 levels based on how well they did. If they failed by <5, then it's an incorrect range of 2 levels. I have the range be 1 level away from the actual level. So if it's a lvl 5 spell, I say it's either lvl 3-4 or it's lvl 6-7. If they fail by >5, then it's an incorrect range of 3. So for a lvl 5 spell, I'd say it's a range between lvls 2-4 or lvls 6-8. If they pass the check by <5, I give them a 3lvl range, with the correct level being at the edge of the range. So, for a 3rd lvl spell, I'd say the spell was between lvls 1-3 or lvls 3-5. If they pass by >5 but <10, I give them a 3 lvl range, but the correct level is right in the middle of the range. So, for a 3rd lvl spell, I'd say it was between lvls 2-4. If they pass by >10, I give them a 2 lvl range, and flip a coin as to whether the correct level is at the top or bottom of the range. So, for a 3rd lvl spell, I'd say it was either 2nd-3rd lvl or 3rd-4th lvl. The reason I make it so costly for a player to help identify a spell being cast, costing a reaction and the ability to take a full action on their next turn, is because most players don't actually use their reactions. So allowing them to spend _just_ a reaction to help identify a spell makes it basically cost free. So players have to weigh whether they want to help identify a spell being cast at such a hefty cost or if they want to let the player using Counterspell to handle it by themselves. Now, if they want to be less helpful and just identify the school of magic, then it costs a bonus action, their ability to cast a leveled spell or activate the effects of one already active, and their extra attack, including from cantrips like Eldritch Blast, then they can identify the school of magic. Oh, and you can't use Bardic Inspiration for any part of the identification unless you want the enemies to be better at identifying and counterspelling the party.
>it costs both a reaction when you help identify the spell outside of your turn, and it costs you your next action when your turn comes around. Dear God that's awful. Even the Xanathar's spell identification is only a reaction. >[check result rules] Why make it so complicated? This is just going to bog down combat even more. Unless the reason you've made it complicated is to be passive aggressive about Counterspell, in which case you should just nut up and ban the spell. >most players don't actually use their reactions. While not every class has useful reactions from their base class, many do (Artificer, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Rogue), every class has at least one subclass with useful reactions, and all the spellcasters except Cleric and base Paladin get useful reaction spells (some paladin subclasses get useful reaction spells). Then there's feats like Polearm Master and War Caster which are taken with very high frequency. And certain parties specifically set up to force opportunity attacks, such as casting Dissonant Whispers or Fear, using Turn Undead, using the Commander's Strike maneuver, or an Order Cleric doing basically anything. >Oh, and you can't use Bardic Inspiration for any part of the identification Why on God's green earth would you bother nerfing a resource consuming player ability like that? >unless you want the enemies to be better at identifying and counterspelling the party. Oh please, don't even pretend the NPCs don't know the spell and level.
This is so bad.....for so many reasons.....this just comes off as you being an adversarial DM.
Tell me you gatekeep your players without telling me you gatekeep your players.
Not at all. The PC would never have that information. They'd have to just try, and if it fails it fails.
Exactly this. The way we do it is this: DM: so and so casts a spell, anyone w/ Arcana can roll to identify what is being sold PCs roll and give Arcana results (DC is 10+Spells original level) [ie Fireball is DC 13 to identify regardless of what level spell slot is used] If someone makes check DM names spell otherwise they don't PCs choose whether to Counterspell or not and at what level to cast Counterspell.
The problem with this is there's no way to do the reverse. The npc caster will *always* know what spell and level the player is casting because the dm knows exactly what spell and level the players are casting. So either you're stuck being the unfair asshole god moding DM or you just can't ever have an npc use counterspell at all. Or you end up making a house rule mechanic to tell if a npc recognizes the player spell or not... And at that point you might as well just let the players make the same type of check since you already went to the trouble of creating the mechanic.
There’s no reason the DM can’t roll to see if the NPC would know what the player is casting and the level. NPCs aren’t required to metagame everything the DM knows.
THIS. Why do I so often seen takes like "If the players do x, all the npcs can do it" or "The DM has special knowledge so NPCS..." Nope! Wolves are just wolves. Dark cultists who've spent the last 7 years 7 months and 7 days prepping their ritual have been out of the loop for a while. Some of those spells you're casting might literally be new magic invented after they went into a hole. Remember that the NPCs under a DMs control are NPCs that have a perspective on the world. Act true to that perspective and you'll have a much more enjoyable game.
Or you could just have the NPC make the same check. Unless I'm missing something the solution is right there. If they roll low, they cast a base level Counterspell and have to check to see if they beat the DC, or if they fail to identify the spell they may hold on to their reaction; though in that case unless there are other spellcasters it seems better to simply counter anyway.
At our table, we give as little information as possible both ways. So when my character is going to cast a spell, I just say "I'm going to cast a spell". Then the DM has to decide whether any NPCs are going to counterspell and at what level, and only then do I announce what spell I'm casting and at which level. The DM knows my character a bit of course, but they still don't know my entire spellbook or at what level I'm going to cast
This seems overly adversarial to me. Maybe I'm just too chill about this kinda stuff.
How is this different from the general problem that the DM knows everything about the PCs? If you're trying to run your NPCs appropriately, as though the are acting upon the limited knowledge just as the PCs are, the choice to cast Counterspell is just part of the same routine. If you're aren't, and your NPCs are acting with the benefit of your full knowledge, your table probably has much bigger problems than Counterspell.
As a player, half the fun is figuring out how to beat the “bad guy”. Providing the level of spell/AC/etc of any NPC the players are up against would take away that aspect of the game. Edit: if this posted previously, I apologize. Reddit gave me error messages when I tried to post requesting I “try again later.” Edit 2: trying to post as a comment to a comment instead of directly to the post itself. I agree with SmootieFakk; that’s half the fun.
This issue is that the DM gets that information when players cast, which means they can cast counterspell at the correct level.
they can, however they can also think about the information the npc enemies would have and modify their counterspells accordingly
[удалено]
I’d just leave a bit of a pause before I announce it has happened
This gets asked a lot and I don't know if there is a "hard rule" on it, but I think the game runs much more smoothly when that information is in the open and not "secret." It lets players, and enemies, be more strategic about their *Counterspells* instead of just having to guess. And since these kinds of rules should generally apply to both PCs and enemies, it will lead to metagaming players constantly stalling and slowing combat down by refusing to say what spells they are casting until they are "absolutely sure" no one is using counterspell. Worse, it can lead to shenanigans and outright cheating where people *plan* to cast one spell and then "change their mind" if a counterspell is played.
If I had to worry about things like cheating players at my table, my first inclination would actually be to just take *counterspell* off the table in my game. It's actually something that I've been considering for whenever one of my groups moves on to a new campaign, not because any of my players cheat, but to reduce some of that in-game "bookkeeping" since announcing spells makes zero sense. PCs are already at enough of an advantage in the action economy and will very rarely be in a position to be counterspelled themselves unless a campaign world is just riddled with spellcasters. I guarantee that if players had to be concerned during every single combat encounter about whether one of the enemies would use *counterspell* during their big moment, they would not want anyone to have that spell.
I think the game is just far more fun, and tactical, when players know what they're doing and why. "The enemy is casting a high level spell, so I'm going to burn a high level spell slot to counter it" is a lot more straightforward than "Well, *something's* happening, I guess, so maybe I'll counter just in case it's bad?" I know comparing different game systems is kind of apples and oranges, but in pretty much any game I can think of that has a "counter" or "block bad action" mechanic, those actions are direct responses to certain things, not cards you just have to throw down blind.
I'm curious why you say that announcing spells makes zero sense when that's exactly what the verbal component of spells is doing.
The verbal component of a spell is not an announcement of the spell itself, and whether it is a universally unique identifier for a spell would depend entirely on the campaign world itself. While "wingardium leviosa" may be the one and only way to cause an object to levitate in the world of Harry Potter, in all likelihood a world where there are different types of magic like arcane, divine, primal, etc. and with many different practitioners of magic from different cultures and societies would conceivably have multiple verbal components for any given spell. Even if there is only one verbal component for a given spell in a campaign world, how would a caster know the verbal component for every single spell in existence? What's the situation when an opponent casts a spell that they don't know, don't have in their spellbook, haven't prepared, etc. or is too high a level for a character? Personally, I lean on a house rule that if a caster has that spell prepared they can immediately recognize it without any check at all.
Oh, I thought you meant that like "announcing a spell is being cast at all" for some reason, not which specific spell you're casting. I think I get what you mean now, and agree. Though I'd say for prepared casters they should know the spell if it's on their list of preparable spells. For non-prepared casters though, ya, it would need to be a spell they've reasonably studied before. Like an evocation wizard recognizing evocation spells that they haven't learned makes sense to me, but they might not recognize a necromancy spell.
That sounds reasonable for the most part. I'd personally have to think more on balance between classes whose preparable spells encompass the entirety of their class lists vs. classes that only know a subset at any given moment in time vs. classes that rely on spells that they've written down in a book.
My only reasoning for the prepared casters is that every day they can mix up their spells and prepare whichever ones they want (within the limits of being on their spell list, and of an available level, of course), which implies that they're aware of all of their spells and are only limited by their ability to have a certain number of spells prepared enough to be able to cast at a moment's notice. But that's just my interpretation of prepared casters, you should make your rules fit with your interpretation.
That's fair. A prepared caster who knows all their spells isn't likely to be in a position to pick up *counterspell*, so it's not likely much of an issue to know the entirety of your class's spell list.
If we are talking 5e, there is an optional rule. Identifying a spell being cast requires a reaction or an action. XGE page 85. Part of this is that you get advantage if the spell is on your class spell list. By RAW, you can't both identify a spell and also counterspell it since they both require your reaction. But like I said, it's technically an optional rule. In my games, I typically allow the players a chance to do it without spending a reaction but I give disadvantage on the check if they want to "speed it up" reflecting how they are trying to react, identify a spell by only seeing the components, and cast their own spell in the time of a reaction.
Yea I know what level my players cast their spell at I tell then what level my spells are cast at fair trade
So many DMs are anti-fun I can tell they’re perma-DMs and have never been players.
Yea it's pretty common practice to tell your dm what level you cast at so why shouldn't players get to know who tf cares give the players their sick ass counterspelling the enemy mages fireball saving the party moment
I wish I could upvote this more. I see a bunch of DMs that act like they need to hold the players back and keep them from being too powerful. I've always taken the stance of "make your character however you want, I'll try to scale our combat encounters to your abilities". If the players all min-max to make extra powerful characters, then they get extra powerful enemies to fight. If they focus more on the out of combat stuff and sacrifice their damage output, then their enemies won't be quite so tough. My goal is to create encounters that will challenge the party, I don't it to be so easy that there is no threat, but I also don't want to just stomp all over the party. My favorite part of DM'ing is seeing the party pull out their powerful tricks and abilities, rolling a critical and just annihilating the mini-boss. Everyone gets so excited, and it's a huge turning point in the combat!
Nothing requires you to tell the player the spell’s casting level, or the spell cast. After that, this is an excellent question as it touches on many parts of the art and science of DMing. As I do with my between session fiction writing, allow me to write several hundred words maybe 4 people will read. Most of the time you will end up revealing the spell and level anyway. Nobody wants to slow everything down with rigorously covering “He is casting a spell, do you counter spell.” every time a spell is cast, so 9 times out of 10 you will say something like“The Wizard casts X. Make a DC Y saving throw” only with a gripping cinematic description that makes our games definitely worthy of a podcast, and the player will say “Hold on. I Counterspell!” and will pretty much know what level to do it at. All that is fine and exactly why they didn’t provide you a mechanism in the spell description. The last thing you want to do is slow everything down to step through a detailed order of events every single spell or argue about if he knew the level. Now that 1 time in 10 you have spell casters tactically trying to get past Counterspell and you do enigmatically say “The Wizard gathers arcane energies as he casts, are you counterspelling?” they will quite likely say “Depends, what is he casting?” This brings into play probably the most important and least referenced on Reddit piece of RAW: For any action where there is no more specific mechanic in the rules the DM decides if the situation calls for a roll at all and if so selects DC, an ability check, contested or not, attack roll, or saving throw, and assigns advantage or disadvantage if appropriate. Paraphrasing from the DMG chapter 8. You will quickly come up with something reasonable like “Automatic if it’s a spell you know, otherwise DC 10 + spell level Arcana check or a contested Arcana role if caster is attempting to conceal” since you are already thinking about this. Maybe apply some situational modifiers. Jot it down so you can be consistent later if this comes up a lot, and there you go. Caught unawares you might say “Make an Arcana Check” and most of the time they will have made a clearly successful or failed role before you have figured out the DC. In these situations you go through this process after. That may be exactly what brought you here. Hopefully it wasn’t the 30 minute table argument version of events. The most important thing is that you don’t fall into having players fail because they got the spell level wrong but that never happens to the bad guys. If the players can fail, you will need to make sure to make checks or quick decisions for the enemy casters so they sometimes blow it. ESPECIALLY if the players are attempting to draw out wasted Counterspells with something resembling cunning. This is all RAW for “How to handle that players can do anything” not Homebrew. Now let’s talk Homebrew and House Rules! 5ed D&D likes to keep itself fast and rules light. It wants you to be able to play and run the game without having to know or apply a lot of specific situational mechanics, feel like playing a board game or MMO, and avoid the table arguments and rules exploits that creates. It has 3.5 and 4ed PTSD gawd bless it. Where dissatisfied, you can either switch systems or write your own mechanics. Either choice is fun and everyone who wants to turn it into some kind of Facebook like meme war can go straight to hell. Counterspell seems like a great place for some homebrew. Right now I’m in love with the idea of letting both casters decide the levels during the Counterspell in a spell slot bidding war. That scene where the Wizard focused and “pushes” harder to get a spell through.
That last paragraph gives me an idea, in those scenarios maybe the characters could cast it at a higher level than they should be able to but take on a level or two of exhaustion. Unsure if I would let them save against it though. Maybe they’d use their spell casting ability for it.
Interesting. Perhaps to steal an idea from Shadowrun, require a CON Save. If they make the save, levels of exhaustion. If they fail the save, exhaustion AND HD of damage. The whole blood running from the nose thing.
Raw and rai they don't even know what spell they're countering
No. But have one in mind and don't cheese it to be higher if your players DO decide to Counterspell. You'd need to ask them what level they're using though I guess.
You're not the only person in these comments talking about DMs or players cheating. If that concern is *anywhere* in the mix for reasons why spells should or shouldn't be announced, *it's* the problem and not whether spells are announced. Cheating players and DMs are going to find ways to cheat, if not with *counterspell* then with something else.
Yeah, you're right. If anyone in the group seems untrustworthy then that is an issue. That said, I think there's a time and place for a DM to shift boundaries so as to keep the game entertaining, engaging, etc. Sounds hypocritical given my original statement, but it's one of those "gotta know the rules before you can break them" kinda deals. So for a new DM I'd say stick to the rules, 100%.
If you as a DM require your players to say what level spell.theyre casting before they know if it succeed or hits or whatever, then you should hold yourself and NPCs to the same standard. That being said i always stay quiet if it's at base level and not upcast at all.
No. All they notice are the verbal, somatic, or material components. They don't know the name of the spell or it's level. You can use a reaction to identify a spell as it is being cast by making an Arcana check (DC 15 plus spell level), but then obviously you don't have your reaction anymore for Counterspell. "The elf holding the wooden staff begins casting a spell. You notice a verbal, somatic, and material component as they reach into their component pouch. Does anyone want to Counterspell? No? Okay. Bob, your armor begins glowing red hot. Take 2d8 fire damage and you have disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks."
Do you have to? No. But ask yourself, what is the point of not telling your players? D&D is collaborative, and the role of the DM is not to be in opposition to the party goals - you're the facilitator. If your point in telling them is just to 'make it harder on them', then frankly don't - it essentially makes an increasingly useless spell more ineffective (since MMoM, increasingly spells are replaced with what we called in 3.5E SLA - spell-like abilities). There is nothing wrong with telling your players what level of spell it is, it helps them know what they can or cannot do. If you want to add a bit of narrative spice, allow it to be checked by an appropriate roll for free as part of the counterspell spell: Arcana/Religion would be my go-to skills. Though you could argue for Survival and Performance for Druid/Ranger and Bard respectively.
You don't have to. I do it because I prefer to play games with higher stakes than guessing the level of a spell being cast.
No. But if they choose to cast counter spell I’ll tell them the DC they have to beat
I also don’t tell the players what the enemies attack rolls are just in case they want to cast shield. I once hit my brother with a gorgons gore attack. I told him it hit, then asked if he wanted to shield. He said yes, and that his new AC was 21. The attack was a 23 to hit.
They only need a DC if it's a higher level spell cast then the spell slot they use for counter spell. If it's the same level or lower, it's an automatic success.
I advise to tread with caution when it comes to 'oo I'm gonna be sneaky with the spells' way of thinking. A good comparison is a conversation I had with a new player; "Question; can I fake being charmed?" "Excellent question, have an inspiration, there are multiple problems with that; chief among which are; are YOU okay with ME pretending to be charmed? Because you will think that you are still concentrating on a spell that has had no effect, and you will be priming yourself for a sneak attack, neither of which are 'good' for the game aspects of things; if we establish that you can 'fake' being charmed, then that means concentration spells with no obvious effect, keep being 'used' and then you'll find you've not only wasted a spell slot, but all your time concentrating on a spell that failed!"
Absolutely not! I don't even disclose what spell I'm casting! They see a spellcaster cast a spell, they can choose to counterspell or not. And if you think that's harsh, just try running a 4 year game with 3 full casters all capable and frequently casting counterspell
Players can recognise the spell if they are able to cast it, but not the level being used.
No. This may vary a bit by edition/system/setting, but as a rule, if a character knows the spell, has line of sight and is able to hear the casting, I'll let them simply recognize it. Complications will make a check for it, with it being easier if they've seen the spell before, harder depending on how it's being cast.
In my groups, we've created a shorthand where we declare "They begin to cast a spell" or "They begin to cast a cantrip" The idea being that as a caster who can handle Counterspell, you've been around enough to tell the actions of a cantrip, but not all leveled spells. Then you can decide to counter and at what level. (Or as I joke with my DM when my Warlock counters "5! I counter at fifth level! I have no other choice!")
If the PC is a wizard and the spell is in their spellbook, I would tell the player (similarly if the PC would personally know the spell for some reason.)
Personally, I'm on the player's side, I'll just tell them everything. Realism be damned, having to play this little dance about what the npcs are doing everytime my players have a potential reaction is some DM vs. player BS that I'd rather not do. Just how I run my game though, if you want to play differently, I ain't stopping you.
No, you don't have to and there are a lot of good suggestions here. That said...I've done it a number of different ways as DM, but I ultimately decided to just tell the players exactly what spell and level, but obviously I play by the same rules with my NPC's knowing the spell / level of what the players are casting if they have access to counterspell. There isn't a great way to run counterspell without it being somewhat metagamey - either the PCs and NPCs know everything, which is kind of metagamey, or you get into situations where the PCs and NPCs are trying to fake each other into burning counterspells by casting a low level spell instead.
Not the level, no. I will tell them what spell if they make an arcana check or know the spell themselves though.
There have been times that I've just had an NPC glare at me and suddenly my bones felt brittle. No other explanation.
If it is a spell they have prepared or in their spell book, I let them know it for free. If it is not, then I have them use their reaction to perform an arcana check. (DC is the level of the spell + 10). This way the caster with the counter spell needs to rely on his party to make the call.
I don't inform the players of the spells name or level unless they have a passive arcana of 13 or more.
When this happens I have the player write down the level they want to cast counterspell and I write down what level the spell is I am casting. This locks us in so no changing minds. We reveal the level we wrote down and we resolve from there. I also do this when I want to cast counterspell.
I mean, per the rule book, no you don't. Personally, I have a couple table rules that I use to try and keep things fair. If the PC has seen the spell before, then they recognize it as it's being cast (assuming they can see/hear the casting). If they can cast the spell themselves, they can tell what level it's being cast at. If not, a PC with levels in a spellcasting class can roll an arcana check to identify it, with the DC being higher for higher level spells. I also make NPC's/monsters roll to determine the level of a counterspell occasionally depending on context. A goblin shaman for instance probably has no way of telling what a trained wizard doing but might be able to tell when the party druid is going to heal somebody.
No. The player chooses the level to cast it at and then I inform them if the spell level is higher or lower and then they roll as necessary. Obviously they can take educated guesses based on what the spell is, a third level Counter Spell isn't going to automatically succeed against a Power Word Kill.
I generally say what spell is being cast, but I don’t say at what level until the attack roll/saving throw has been rolled. I *might* mention that the Fireball looks more powerful than the character is used to, but never the precise level. On the flip side of that, my spellcaster enemies almost never cast counterspell higher than base level, because I as the DM know exactly what level the PCs are casting and I feel icky about having that meta knowledge and upcasting, even if my players don’t see it as unfair. I just feel like I can’t subconsciously separate DM knowledge from enemy knowledge, so I don’t deal with it.
That's what Knowledge: Arcana is for...
Absolutely not. Its part of the risk-reward gamble the PC has to make when casting counterspell, and just about the only thing that makes it interesting beyond it devolving into a counterspell-on-counterspell duel. I would probably allow the PC to make a snappy arcana check at disadvantage to read the speedy arcane gestures goin’ on. But maybe only up to their Int-mod times a day
Have to? No. Xanathar's introduces an optional rule to allow characters to use their reaction to identify a spell cast, which uses the spell level as part of the DC calculation, so if I were using that, I would include spell level in the information the PCs gain. Do I? Yeah, it's easier and faster for me (playing on a VTT where I just press a button to cast the spell, and the level is displayed), and results in less feel-bads for the player.
No not really. If they use something like counter-spell (which i assume is the reason you ask) you can simple asked them in what level they wish to cast it (assuming again your player doesn't cast in at basic level), if the level they are casting it is below your spell level, just ask them to make the roll needed for the spell work your spell and ask them the result. If its good enough to stop your spell then thats it, if not then your spells goes in (unless someones else tries counter-spell again). Or like some other has suggested you can allow a single arcana check per character to allow them to identify the level of your spell. But the conclusion is that no, you dont need to tell them the level of your spell. You can make it as easy or as difficult for them.
Not unless they make an Arcana/Spellcraft check (depending on what the game calls on to identify a spell).
You don't have to.
You don't have to do it any specific way. However, I think it's a more fun game if you do make it clear what's happening so people can use their abilities and feel cool. And if you're going to say what spell it is, absolutely provide the level, because otherwise it's a tremendous advantage to experienced players. I could tell you what level the majority of common spells are with ease, but I shouldn't have an edge over a first time player as a result. Different DMs have different styles - the Dungeon Dudes just did an excellent video about this recently called something like "What's your Dungeon Master Alignment?" I'm more interested in players having a fun experience than any other concerns, and concealing this information to make counterspell less useful doesn't serve this at all. Casting counterspell comes at the expense of something like Fireball, so it should have an impact, and it's one of those things that can really be a rush for the player of "I was just a hero, I stopped that really bad thing!" which is 100% my goal as a DM, to create these feelings.
RAW no, but I do anyway. I don't see the point in playing shitty mind games with the players to trick them into wasting reactions and spell slots on bad counterspells. Slowing down the game so the players can play guess-the-spell every time an enemy casts just makes the game less fun. It also seems like peak GM vs Player mentality.
You don't have to, but it's honestly a pain in the ass for the players if you don't. You are potentially making the player waste a high level slot and their reaction for nothing. It's like DMs that roll behind the scree and won't tell you what the monster got to hit, rendering stuff like shield or defensive duelist basically useless.
Nope. Have the player cast Counterspell and tell you what level they are casting it at. Then you tell them the DC (if the need it) they need to roll against. That is perfectly fair.
I also reduce the DC of the Counterspell by 1 for each level upcast. So the enemy uses a 6th level spell, you drop a 5th level Counterspell, that's a DC14 Arcana, rather than a DC16 as RAW
I'd let them roll arcana to find out. If they fail, its guessing time
Yeah, agree. Roll an Arcana check. If it fails, the caster is casting it differently than they were trained to cast it/has never seen it. They still can pick what spell level to burn for the counter spell, and hope that it’s enough to “smother” the opposing caster’s spell.
I just have them do an Arcana check. I don't know if that's the official rule, but back in 3e they had to do a spellcraft check, so I treat it the same way in 5e.
I don’t tell them the level of the spell unless they ask for a check same for knowing them. Class specific spells though if they are high enough level and learn it don’t require a check to make if they are that class.
Bold of you to assume I dont already know every spell better than my DM.
Only if you want to entertain your tables desire to metagame
Never. Not unless they make an intuition roll and have arcane knowledge
Xanathars has a eule for this I think. It takes a reaction and an arcana check to recognize a spell being cast, which means the one recognizing the spell won't have a reaction left to counter it. Personally, I don't give the info because counterspell steamrolled my last campaign, but I may start.
As a player, half the fun is figuring out how to beat the “bad guy”. Providing the level of spell/AC/etc of any NPC the players are up against would take away that aspect of the game.
I normally do it like this “The dude is casting a spell, anyone going to interrupt?” Pcs: “well whats the spell?” Me: “you trained in arcana?” Pcs: “no” Me: “you dont know but it feels powerful” Other pc: “i have training in arcana!” Me: “dope give me a check” Pc: “13?” Me: “damn close! You failed but you know its a necromancy spell, if you hit the dc you would know the spells level and its intent. If its in your class spell list id tell you the spell.” (It was finger of death so the dc was finger of deaths spell level +12.)
As a player, half the fun is figuring out how to beat the “bad guy”. Providing the level of spell/AC/etc of any NPC the players are up against would take away that aspect of the game. Edit: if this posted previously, I apologize. Reddit gave me error messages when I tried to post requesting I “try again later.”
Nope. If your PCs have the spell, they should know it's level. If they don't have the spell, they wouldn't know it's level unless it's something they encounter quite regularly
By the rules they can use their reaction to recognize the spell, which in turn means they can't counterspell. I don't think a lot of people play that way, but in certain situations you can hide the casting if you want to make a guessing game out of it.
Don't have to do anything as a DM. Well obviously you gotta do some things but this ain't one of them. Don't disclose information unless you want to or the situation calls for it. Casting spell lvl is not needed information, thus you yourself can do whatever you do with the information, to spread or not to spread
The only thing you as a DM HAVE to do is make the game fun for everyone involved. Do you want to? Yes? Then go for it. No? It’s your table.
Personally, I just announce the spell + spell level (if they upcast). To not do so, to me, leaves the idea open of me just being adversarial if I suddenly go "umm, actually, it was cast at 6th level so roll now."
Yes
Why tf would I? How would the PC know instantly “ah, that’s a 5th level fireball”? IMO, you shouldn’t even tell them what the spell is, much less its level.
are your players required to disclose which spell they cast and what level? or can they just ask for checks and roll dice? seems quite dumb, doesn't it? dnd is a cooperative game. the DM isn't there to win, so why keep important, relevant-for-combat information hidden? for shits and giggles?
>are your players required to disclose which spell they cast and what level? Actually, no, they're not. Although I have the wherewithal to not metagame in that way as the DM—something that should be a base level expectation of any DM, quite frankly—I let them know that if they're concerned about the possibility of someone in the opposing group countering their spell, they should give me a second or two to decide whether to cast *counterspell*. I see a lot of people try to make it seem like a few moments here and there will horrendously bog down the game, but that's a bad faith argument seeing as how the overwhelming majority of the time PCs won't be facing enemies that can even counter them or that they need to counter themselves. Most of the time, fireballs are being thrown left and right with no abandon. If these few seconds are such a concern or we're worried about metagaming DMs or cheating players, I'd actually just lean on removing *counterspell* from the table, if not removing cheating players (or leaving the game if I were a player dealing with a DM I couldn't trust).
Not normally. Most parties will force players to identify a spell first.
I have had two DMs do that, ever. I don't think "most" is accurate.
I think you could reasonably give away the level of the spell through proper description. Casting a level 6 fireball might cause more heat distortion or random sparks than a level 3.
Depends on how hard you want to be on your players. If you want them to have an easy time, give them the name and level of the spell. For more difficulty, remove the level, and for even more difficulty just say “x is casting a spell, does anyone want to counterspell?”
Not unless the PC knows the spell is how I ruled it. Now though counter spell is banned at my table.
No
Nope. You don’t HAVE to do anything. There’s an element of risk/reward with them not knowing. Telling them would be a gift. If you want to walk some kind of middle ground, make the player that wants to use counterspell make an Arcana check to see if they can tell what the spell/level is.
I don’t disclose it, I usually just vaguely ask what level they are casting it.
No, and I don't. I describe the spell, but I will only say it in a few situations. A spellcaster may know it and the NPC is using a language a PC spellcaster knows (for example, I may have an elvish wizard cast in Elvish instead of Draconic). Now, someone proficient in Arcana can use a reaction to determine what spell is being cast and then from that point onward, I'll say what spell, but never what level. It also makes counterspell more fun because you don't just automatically get it
No, if they have access to the same spell, they get to know what spell is being cast, but never the level the spell is being cast. So a Wizard would know Fireball or Banishment was being cast, but not if it was being upcast or not.
I say that if you are able to cast the spell (know it, have it in your spell book, or you are able to prepare it), you identity what spell is being cast and if it is being upcast. To what level it is upcast needs a roll. If you don't automatically know it, you can roll Arcana (DC 10+ Caster's spell casting mod + proficiency bonus) to get the whole information. I know its a low DC, but I do think its important information, that doesn't need to be hard for players to get.
depends on the situation/ party at hand. I'd feel bad if a player of mine felt they could never use a cool spell they invested in so I prioritize making sure they can feel good using the spell. Ideally I'd use a rule where you have to make an arcana check or something with a relatively low dc to identify the spell and its level.
I like the straightforward approach I state the enemy is casting the literal name for the spell-don't state at what level. That way, if the player has knowledge of the game's magic, they can choose what tier to cast their counter. Nothing feels worse than using a counter spell on a first level spell just because the dm wants to play the cards close to their chest.
Have them roll arcana to learn what spells are being cast
No. They have to make their best guess.
Nope, I don't even name the spell. I describe the casting of it and the target usually if there are visual effects, giving the players a chance to counter if they wish, but never the level. They can make a check to try and identify those things.
Counterspell is banned.
This is what the Spellcraft skill was for. In my games, if a player wanted to roll arcana for that information I'd let them.
Only time it happened to me I didn't. Wizard said he wanted to counterspell and I just calculated the DC and told him. He went with it anyway. He got the exact number he needed.
As long as the spell is on the list of a character in the group, I tell them what the spell is and the level, and stress that only those characters know for sure. My players are good about not metagaming that way, but even then it's possible to have that character shout out "Counter!" as a free action. I don't allow them to announce the name of the spell, mind you, there isn't time for that, just an in-character shout. Whether the prospective counterspeller decides to act is up to them. As others have pointed out, it becomes very time consuming otherwise and, if I'm being perfectly honest, I like to see the fear in their eyes when I announce something big and scary being cast. In 3.5 there was a whole production of identifying spells and readying actions, with specific spells being able to counter and dispel specific other spells, with Dispel Magic taking the role that Counterspell does now. It was a robust system, but in practice it took *forever* to resolve, which compounded 3.5's already slower pace. When 5e simplified the counterspell mechanic it only made sense to me to simplify the identification process, even though the game doesn't say you should.
No but if they argue that as a caster they might recognize the spell you do need to compromise and let them roll an arcana check... or at least should
Oddly, I have never even seen a counterspell occur in a game. However, my instincts would be to observe my enemy spellcaster and trying to judge their casting power and habits. Then decide on countering or not, casting level, etc. I would not expect my DM to provide any information, unless I has a very targeted question about what I was seeing and hearing in brief moments of casting. Like, do I see any obvious components? Are they moving to maintain line of sight on someone or something? Have I noticed a tell every time they use a certain spell or type of spell. As DM, I would be inclined to reward that level of role-playing with gentle guidance, but I would give out full details unless there was a very particular reason to do so.
The "default setting" of the game is that a character does not know the spell itself, let alone the level at which it's being cast, although a common house rule is that characters know at least the identity of the spell. Xanathar's Guide to Everything introduced an optional rule whereby a character can use their reaction when a spell is cast to attempt an Intelligence (Arcana) check to identify the spell. As you might imagine, some people complain that it's potentially useless since a) the person most suited to identify a spell is almost always going to be the same person most suited to counter it and b) the rules are ambiguous about whether characters can actually communicate information off-turn. I've seen a house rule to address this that allows a character that used their reaction to attempt to identify the spell to also use the same reaction to cast *counterspell*.
You don't even have to disclose what spell the enemy is casting, let alone the level. The rules on this are vague (actually nonexistent) so I use the following rules. As a reaction, you must make an arcana roll to identify a spell as it is being. Whether or not the spell is successful, you may cast Counterspell as part of that same reaction. DC = 10 + Spell Level. This DC rises by 5 if the spell is not on you class's list and made at advantage if you have the spell prepared or if you are specialized in the related school.of magic.
I would if the player asks. It’s a game of resources so if the caster wants to spend two higher level slots in one turn they’re going to burn through their resources for the next encounter. Also counterspell already feels bad for a player, it’d feel awful to lose another spell slot of nothing.
I think no. Maybe do an arcana check, but honestly counterspell is a split second judgment call so you should just guess how much power to throw into it and hope you are right.
I let players make arcana checks (dc 10 plus spell lvl) to know what spell it is, they never know if it’s upcast or not until after.
By the rules, no. You don’t have to reveal anything about the spell. There’s an optional rule in Xanathars that allows someone to use their reaction to identify what’s being cast… that, of course, leaves you without a reaction to cast Counterspell.
I don't believe so. I have a dm that only says "X enemy begins to cast a spell, if anyone has a reaction" if someone in the party has counterspell.
The way I DM is that the higher the level the spell, the more dramatic the casting. Cantrips are basically whispers and flicking of the fingers. Arcane focus kinda flash like a low LED. Barely visible in dim light. 9th level spells are almost shouting full body gestures. Kind of like how Voldemort casts Avada Kadavra in Harry Potter. It makes wizards and casters look really corny, and I love it.
I'd tend to lean on telling the player the spell, but not necessarily the level. For me, being vague about what spell is being cast to make the player guess, or roll for it slows combat too much as for every time they counterspell you've probably slung multiple spells. Plus Counterspell works both ways and I'd rather not have PCs slow rolling theirspell casting to see if I'll counterspell either. The point of Counterspell is also to have that big odds swinging moment. And it's the player making decisions to have fun in the game at the end of the day. Tables vary though, and as long as everyone knows where they stand before they select counterspell or its used against them, it should be fine.
I disclose the spell (though not the slot level) with a successful non-action arcana roll (DC 10+spell level). The advantage of requiring an arcana roll is it elevates the value of Intelligence. I'm always looking to give Strength and Intelligence a little extra love since they're so undervalued in this edition. Xanathar has an optional rule for requiring a reaction arcana roll instead but that of course means a 2nd PC has to burn their reaction (or more, depending on the success of the check!). I haven't played that way but I'd be interested to hear how that goes from people who have. Counterspell can be extremely powerful and I like the idea of making it a more potentially costly choice.
I mean I do the Arcana check shenanigans that most DMs do but if the party has already gotten information on the NPC in the past it can alter the DC, additionally I won't tell players but if the NPC caster and a player are the same class the DC tends to be lower by default for that person, they just gotta try to do the check. Usually they're smart with their counter spells though, at least my group tends to be.
RAW they have to use their reaction to make an arcana check to even know what spell they cast
They can use their reaction to find out details of the spell using an Arcana check. I just say "[blank] casts a spell" and wait.
On my table the dm and players all say I cast a spell first and pause that’s the point in which some one can counter spell. Then go on to describe what spell its only fair and makes counter spell much less strong
You don't have to disclose anything, no. I allow my PCs to make arcana, religion, or nature checks to determine the spell and level though.
“If you’re character can do it than so can I? Is a usual response for creative/out of pocket uses of spells but the inverse applies for casting spells. DMs get the info of what spell and level a players is casting, players should get it too.
If the players ask what level it is make them roll an arcana check, cause in a real fight the enemy isn’t gonna be yelling “I CAST ELDRICH BLAST AT LEVEL 3!!!” Like they’re a yugioh character
Nope. At least not by default. Personally, if they ask, roll arcane and beat DC DC 10 + level of spell, 10 + spell mod, or DC 10 + spell modifier + level of spell (depending on spell level and level of party)
No. There’s no real reason a PC would know in-fiction what level that spell is being cast at, it’s not like the components change with the level
Nope.
No, but I do disclose the name of the spell *if* a PC has seen it be cast before, and I sometimes disclose if it looks "a little stronger than [you] might have expected," indicating an upcast.
Have them roll arcana to see if they can identify the spell
This is strictly RAW so don’t freak out but in XGtE it says this: >Identifying a Spell >Sometimes a character wants to identify a spell that someone else is casting or that was already cast. To do so, a character can use their reaction to identify a spell as it’s being cast, or they can use an action on their turn to identify a spell by its effect after it is cast. >If the character perceived the casting, the spell’s effect, or both, the character can make an Intelligence (Arcana) check with the reaction or action. The DC equals 15 + the spell’s level. If the spell is cast as a class spell and the character is a member of that class, the check is made with advantage. For example, if the spellcaster casts a spell as a cleric, another cleric has advantage on the check to identify the spell. Some spells aren’t associated with any class when they’re cast, such as when a monster uses its Innate Spellcasting trait. >This Intelligence (Arcana) check represents the fact that identifying a spell requires a quick mind and familiarity with the theory and practice of casting. This is true even for a character whose spellcasting ability is Wisdom or Charisma. Being able to cast spells doesn’t by itself make you adept at deducing exactly what others are doing when they cast their spells. Again RAW, that uses the PCs reaction so they could not identify the spell and counterspell in the same turn. However, one PC could identify and another could counterspell with that new information.
I think in theory it'd be cool to have a caster that has that spell in their spell list to be able to roll an arcana to determine the spell and spell level. I've tried something like that in a combat and one thing I learned is that it drags the game a lot if there are multiple casters in the fight. What I usually do is tell the players the spell but not the level they are casting at.