D&D Next - 5e Discussion

Thats pretty similar to what 3e (and iirc older) counterspell did. You had to cast the same spell in reverse to counter a spell. So to counter spell a fireball, you had to have a fireball prepared and "counterspell cast" your fireball. That said, there was some action economy problems in 3e that made it not worth it (you had to use an action to 'ready' a counterspell on a specific target, when the target cast a spell, you had to roll to identify the spell, and if they cast a spell you didnt know or have prepared, you were out of luck)

I would probably make spells easier to interrupt like they were in 3e.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm

These two things were key:

• Casting a spell provokes an opportunity attack
• Taking any damage requires a check or you lose the spell

Now casting when the orc warlord is up in your face is a lot riskier.

I think I get why they got rid of this system. It was more to think about, and I think they wanted the game to generally be easier so more players could enjoy it. Certain classes of player don't want to think about tactics and positioning. They want to cast fireball. But as a result, the whole game is kind of shallower sometimes.

For mages countering mages, I'd probably give it a rework. It shouldn't just be its own spell. It should be an action. Maybe have a separate check to identify the spell, or maybe just tell the player to skip double rolls. Then make some sort of opposed check. Use the spell level delta (and if you had them roll to identify, how thematically opposite the spell is. Like a fire and ice spell, or shield v magic missile).

If remember correctly, DC20 does something similar but instead of the same spell you must use some other spell that would be a reasonable counter effect against the effect that the spell is trying to produce.