Reactive Counterspells

[dragoonbuster]

A thought: unlike reactive blocks, reactive counterspells don't really change the power of a spellcaster compared to other PCs, because any 'caster with channeling/evocation would have the ability. This leads to, in my view, more interesting dynamics when you have several opposing spellcasters in play. Wizard ends up countering wizard, and then the physical characters go at it. It's possible this method reduces, to a degree, the common issue of shorter conflicts favoring spellcasters over physical types. Instead of (or in addition to) the Paranet Papers' introduction of reactive blocks as a standard aspect of evocation, why not add reactive counterspells?

I probably wouldn't allow a Warden's sword or other enchanted items to be used reactively this way, only actually-cast spells.


Thoughts?

[Taran]

I like it.  Counterspells almost never get used.  There's still a skill roll involved, otherwise you have to guess at the power, so it probably isn't automatic.

[Sanctaphrax]

It's a decent idea. There are several different ways to implement it, though. Which one did you have in mind?

Also, here's a relevant link.

[dragoonbuster]

There are several different ways to implement it, though. Which one did you have in mind?

"Realistically," a "blind" counterspell, one without an assessment roll, might be more appropriate.

For the sake of fun, which is my main goal here? You can sacrifice your next action to attempt to counter any spell within LoS per the standard method for a counterspell. You may only sacrifice one action per exchange this way.

I like this more than allowing reactive blocks, and think those should still be the realm of a stunt. It's reasonable to require a stunt for reactive counterspells, as that does imply a level of increased skill and training with the technique--but I like the wizard-nulls-wizard dynamic and wanted to introduce that to play.

[Taran]

A blind counter spell?

It doesn't really seem worth losing a turn for.  The risk of not putting up enough power means you auto fail.  Putting up too much means you risk burning out too soon.  Maybe the person you're counter spelling has you completely out matched.  I think wizards have a good handle on the capabilities of other casters

Getting a reactive lore roll seems appropriate to me.  If you fail you can always guess.  I think you'll get more out of the wizard duel if they both know where to aim.   

[dragoonbuster]

Getting a reactive lore roll seems appropriate to me.  If you fail you can always guess.  I think you'll get more out of the wizard duel if they both know where to aim.

I agree, but based on the single "official" counterspell we've seen (or, that I recall), Harry did take more than just a split second to line up his power. BUT - I prefer the whole shebang, including the lore roll.

[Sanctaphrax]

Personally I'd favour having the counterspell work just like a block. I usually tell people straight up what the weapon rating of the attack they're facing is, and I'd rather not have to stop doing that.

And anyway, the block-esque version is simpler.