You do have a couple feats to take with Fireball or lightning bolt I want to point out. Which can make the spells more useful but they are far less mandatory and you get more use out of them if you lean around other elemental spells of similar elements and the like. So it's not necessarily taking for just Fireball or Lightning Bolt.
As for Counter Spell. It's one of those spells where the longer you play. The more you see it really turn great moments in your favor and the more you see at least as many moments where you knew what was coming and wanted to do it but you just couldn't get into that position that would actually allow you to do it for all kinds of various reasons. So it's good when it's good and it's dead weight when it's dead weight. But most are really going to get gung ho about it when they are only thinking about it in terms of the good and all of those clutch moments they hope to get out of it.
As for Ideas of what to use your things on, Depending on your style one suggestion that I might bring up is actually:
Slow. It's not a damage dealing spell but it does shut down a lot of action economy. Not just for melee types that are getting more and more into multiple attacks. But also the fact that they have to choose what kind of actions to perform, get a debuff to ac, get their speed halved, and it has a 50% chance to potentially affect even potent spellcasters by slowing down their ability to cast spells. It's range is 120 feet. And it may or may not actually be on your bard spell list normally because Bard's only get it to my knowledge through the Extended spell list in Tasha's... Which is optional.
Counterspell means one caster auto wins against another caster unless both have the spell. That's incredibly powerful and Dispel Magic can't compete
It's not auto-win, however. Moving first to be > 60 ft away then casting a spell with > 60 ft range tends to become an issue.
The caster still needs to have a reaction available to use counterspell. If the caster is surprised no reaction and no counterspell.
The caster of counterspell is required to see the spell being cast. Improved invisibility from outside of counterspell range before closing in is an issue.
Counterspell means one caster auto wins against another caster unless both have the spell. That's incredibly powerful and Dispel Magic can't compete
It's not auto-win, however. Moving first to be > 60 ft away then casting a spell with > 60 ft range tends to become an issue.
The caster still needs to have a reaction available to use counterspell. If the caster is surprised no reaction and no counterspell.
The caster of counterspell is required to see the spell being cast. Improved invisibility from outside of counterspell range before closing in is an issue.
There's a chance the opposed check fails.
Globe of invulnerability prevents counterspell.
Counterspell can be useful but it's not auto-win.
I'm not only going to back Ashrym on this. I'm going to also point out that Dispel Magic is at least as powerful as Counterspell. They just serve slightly different purposes.
Ashrym hinted at it but Counterspell does not work on spells that have already been cast that may still have active effects up where as Dispel Magic does. These two are another pair of companion spells and have been such for a very long time. They work by similar rules but in companion situations. Dispel magic has a longer range in exchange for only being useful after the spell has been cast and is useful against most active effects that continue turn after turn with the only exception to that rule being a small handful of spells that call them out as exceptions. There are only a real very few of these and most are very high level. Counterspell works purely in the moment and can affect Instantaneous spells but at the cost of distance and requiring an available reaction. Their method for countering these spells is exactly the same. Spell slot you use and below is automatic. Everything above that is a roll that requires your spell casting ability against a DC based upon the spells level being cast to succeed.
Both of these spells are actually something that you should have and consider using in conjunction based upon the situation if you really want to focus on disrupting enemy magic and are on a general level equal with one being more useful and thus "stronger" in specific situations.
For Example. that slow spell I mentioned as an option which you might not have been able to stop with Counterspell because of the spell distance on Slow being double the effective range. You can remove it with Dispel Magic and because it's an active effect in the area being maintained by concentration you can target the slow spell itself to remove it. Or if you have some reason to. (such as one of your own got caught in the slow spell) you could actually just remove it from individuals but you may be removing all of their low level buffs in the process.
For Another Example Dispel magic can deal with that already active Guardian Spirit that is so pesky and so reliable in close range that so many clerics love as well should it be a problem for your team to deal with. Or even that pesky Globe of Invulnerability in Ashryn's example of ways to stop Counterspell.
For Example. that slow spell I mentioned as an option which you might not have been able to stop with Counterspell because of the spell distance on Slow being double the effective range. You can remove it with Dispel Magic and because it's an active effect in the area being maintained by concentration you can target the slow spell itself to remove it. Or if you have some reason to. (such as one of your own got caught in the slow spell) you could actually just remove it from individuals but you may be removing all of their low level buffs in the process.
For Another Example Dispel magic can deal with that already active Guardian Spirit that is so pesky and so reliable in close range that so many clerics love as well should it be a problem for your team to deal with. Or even that pesky Globe of Invulnerability in Ashryn's example of ways to stop Counterspell.
Then they should have written it completely differently. Because it's written contrary to that. Even his answer kind of contradicts itself. He says it targets an effect that your aware of that discretely continues. Then he tries to backtrack in the same sentence to suddenly make a single spell, a single effect that conveniently has multiple targets and is held up by a single concentration ability of a single individual(player, npc, sentient piece of cheese, what have you) that would break it on all targets automatically if it gets dropped or failed mind you, Because he tries to turn it individual again despite it being logically mostly singular to try to tone it down in some way? Even though it already has extra requirements in that you have to be aware of exactly what's going on to even target the effect rather than just generally target an object or person to remove an unknown effect?
So No. I don't buy Jeremy's interpretation of it and that's not actually what the books say about it.
Then they should have written it completely differently. Because it's written contrary to that. Even his answer kind of contradicts itself. He says it targets an effect that your aware of that discretely continues. Then he tries to backtrack in the same sentence to suddenly make a single spell, a single effect that conveniently has multiple targets and is held up by a single concentration ability of a single individual(player, npc, sentient piece of cheese, what have you) that would break it on all targets automatically if it gets dropped or failed mind you, Because he tries to turn it individual again despite it being logically mostly singular to try to tone it down in some way? Even though it already has extra requirements in that you have to be aware of exactly what's going on to even target the effect rather than just generally target an object or person to remove an unknown effect?
So No. I don't buy Jeremy's interpretation of it and that's not actually what the books say about it.
Fair enough. I agree it is poorly worded. I don't agree you interpretation is clear from the text inb PHB, however. It is ambigious. Anyway you definetly shouldn't take for granted that your DM, or any DM, are as eager to disregard the clarification of the the lead rules developer of the game as you are.
When you use dispel magic to target a magical effect within range, you're choosing a discrete effect that you're aware of, often one created by a spell. If a spell has put an ongoing effect on multiple creatures, each of those creatures bears a discrete, targetable effect.
Fateless you are making this out to seem way more convoluted than his actual words are. You misrepresented how he worded his answer.
He spells it out quite clearly in fact. If a spell targets multiple creatures then each creature must be dispelled on an individual basis.
If any of you are familiar with Magic the Gathering and the general strategy of card advantage the difference between counterspell and dispel is like the difference between the magic cards essence scatter and doom blade.
When you essence scatter a creature spell in magic this is an even resource exchange. You are trading one card for one card. The creature spell never resolves and effects the game because of the counter magic.
When you doom blade a creature, it means that creature has already resolved and is on the battlefield. Even if you kill it right away, if it had some sort of effect on the game as soon as it was played, then this is an uneven exchange for the doom blade player. Your opponent got some kind of effect out of their card and you still had to use a card to get rid of it.
Most spells have an immediate effect on the battlefield in DnD. Dispelling after the fact is an unfavorable exchange. That being said, it is not a bad spell, and in fact is excellent. Ideally, you would counterspell every important spell before it ever has any effect but that is just not realistic. For those times when counterspell cannot do the job because of its limitations, dispel is there to be an MVP.
It's something that the DM and I can talk about. But it's not just the individual spell wording that i was working with. There is nowhere else in the book that turning it all individual is actually written out either. That's actually interpretation that we are forced to add in. Rule of thumb when dealing with the book in general is that if it's not actually written there then that's not what it actually does. nothing about spell casting says that it breaks down individually just because it's a continued effect. All that it says that when it is cast if conditions are met then the spell is cast, if it requires concentration to continue you concentrate, and if it has conditions for ending early that are met then either the spell ends or the part of the spell affecting that individual ends. The fact that each person individually can save from it again is the only place that even hints ta the idea that it's a bunch of individual effects but that's not really stated or made clear and there are other things that work opposite to that. And they saved vs it individually at the start of the spell too. Saving doesn't even say it's individual as far a the overall effect is concerned either, just that in specificity you escape some or all of the effect that still affects others and be excluded from it either permanently or temporarily.
When you use dispel magic to target a magical effect within range, you're choosing a discrete effect that you're aware of, often one created by a spell. If a spell has put an ongoing effect on multiple creatures, each of those creatures bears a discrete, targetable effect.
Fateless you are making this out to seem way more convoluted than his actual words are. You misrepresented how he worded his answer.
He spells it out quite clearly in fact. If a spell targets multiple creatures then each creature must be dispelled on an individual basis.
If any of you are familiar with Magic the Gathering and the general strategy of card advantage the difference between counterspell and dispel is like the difference between the magic cards essence scatter and doom blade.
When you essence scatter a creature spell in magic this is an even resource exchange. You are trading one card for one card. The creature spell never resolves and effects the game because of the counter magic.
When you doom blade a creature, it means that creature has already resolved and is on the battlefield. Even if you kill it right away, if it had some sort of effect on the game as soon as it was played, then this is an uneven exchange for the doom blade player. Your opponent got some kind of effect out of their card and you still had to use a card to get rid of it.
Most spells have an immediate effect on the battlefield in DnD. Dispelling after the fact is an unfavorable exchange. That being said, it is not a bad spell, and in fact is excellent. Ideally, you would counterspell every important spell before it ever has any effect but that is just not realistic. For those times when counterspell cannot do the job because of its limitations, dispel is there to be an MVP.
We're not talking about a card game. But even if we were. you may actually be getting an effect out of removing that creature with the 1 card. namely opening up the field so that your attacks with your creatures can get through instead of using one or more of those resources on the board to remove said creature instead. Where you would actually be getting an unfavorable trade is where even with using that card to remove that creature that is already on the field is when you can't actually get anything out of removing it anyway. Where you come up positive is if you can not only take out that card before it can have it's effect but potentially remove more of their resources for that same single card of yours. Such as killing not just one but potentially multiple of their creatures.
As for the Dispel magic issue and dispelling idnividuals. That's fine... if your targeting individuals, Which the spell can do. But the spell allows you to target Effects if you know what they are which is fundamentally different than targeting an individual and has additional requirements to work. having it affect more than one person because your smart enough or clever enough, and the ability to figure out what is happening through either knowing the spell well enough yourself or being skilled enough in arcana to identify the ongoing effect. Then you shuold be rewarded when you use Dispel Magic which the spell and the RAW actually supports and even Jeremy supported in his wording until he changed half way through his sentence to again make it nothing more than targetting the person. Which in that case the spell should either be reworded to either not allow you to target the effect specifically or it should clarify that it can only be used to target continuous area effect spells since targeting an effect to only target an individual is in fact redundant.
Dispel magic uses the more available spells known as opposed to the less available magical secrets.
This is the text...
Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends. For each spell of 4th level or higher on the target, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability. The DC equals 10 + the spell’s level. On a successful check, the spell ends.
Dispel magic targets an individual target, but it ends multiple spell effects on that target if they exist. Concentration rules keep that from coming up much but it's there occasionally.
The range is better, it's potentially multiple effects, it ends ongoing effects after the spell action, and it doesn't require magical secrets. There are definitely advantages to dispel magic over counterspell (and vice versa) for a bard.
Dispel magic uses the more available spells known as opposed to the less available magical secrets.
This is the text...
Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends. For each spell of 4th level or higher on the target, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability. The DC equals 10 + the spell’s level. On a successful check, the spell ends.
Dispel magic targets an individual target, but it ends multiple spell effects on that target if they exist. Concentration rules keep that from coming up much but it's there occasionally.
The range is better, it's potentially multiple effects, it ends ongoing effects after the spell action, and it doesn't require magical secrets. There are definitely advantages to dispel magic over counterspell (and vice versa) for a bard.
Keep in mind Ashrym that the Jeremy Crawford Sage Advice thread they are linking actually says that according to him it doesn't work that way either. He turns it into only affecting one spell on one person for one casting no matter how you target it.
That being Said I'm in agreement with you on the person or object side of how targeting an individual target works based purely upon the way the spell is written.
Dispel magic uses the more available spells known as opposed to the less available magical secrets.
This is the text...
Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends. For each spell of 4th level or higher on the target, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability. The DC equals 10 + the spell’s level. On a successful check, the spell ends.
Dispel magic targets an individual target, but it ends multiple spell effects on that target if they exist. Concentration rules keep that from coming up much but it's there occasionally.
The range is better, it's potentially multiple effects, it ends ongoing effects after the spell action, and it doesn't require magical secrets. There are definitely advantages to dispel magic over counterspell (and vice versa) for a bard.
Keep in mind Ashrym that the Jeremy Crawford Sage Advice thread they are linking actually says that according to him it doesn't work that way either. He turns it into only affecting one spell on one person for one casting no matter how you target it.
I loved battles where our party fought a powerful caster. DM: "Bad guy casts..." Our Wizard: "Counterspell!" DM: "Bad guy Counterspells..." My Warlock: "Counterspell!" DM: "Aw..."
I mean, it can sound dumb, but that's both sides down two spells each, and for a Warlock that's a very limited resource, so it's not like the bad guy got nothing out of it (especially if they're not alone).
To keep it fun though you need to ignore the mechanics of it and think about what's happening in story terms; one bad guy and two casters have just entered an epic duel for control over a spell, leaving both sides drained, and with an element of risk if you had to roll for any of the counterspells.
It can seem weird that there isn't a roll involved as standard (ideally an opposed one) but it's already a mechanic that's slowing down combat (as that's three more spells involved just to stop one spell from resolving).
As with anything is this game: there are great options, like coounterspell, but that doesn't mean you have to pick. Think about what you want for your character and build that way.
Unless you table is super power gamey and you're okay with that, in that case counterspell is going to be one of the best picks on your lsit at 6 if no one else picks it up.
I think the main thing is that it depends on how your DM handles it. I have a player who really likes counterspell, but I don't always make it clear which spell my dudes are casting. I'll tell him "the chap on the right is starting to cast a spell" but unless it's a spell that he has seen a few times or is otherwise very familiar with, he will not know which spell is being cast and thus whether it's worth countering. It keeps the meta gaming to a minimum and to be honest, my players handle spellcasting in a very similar way. It keeps things fun and fresh.
Counterspell means one caster auto wins against another caster unless both have the spell. That's incredibly powerful and Dispel Magic can't compete
It's not auto-win, however. Moving first to be > 60 ft away then casting a spell with > 60 ft range tends to become an issue.
The caster still needs to have a reaction available to use counterspell. If the caster is surprised no reaction and no counterspell.
The caster of counterspell is required to see the spell being cast. Improved invisibility from outside of counterspell range before closing in is an issue.
There's a chance the opposed check fails.
Globe of invulnerability prevents counterspell.
Counterspell can be useful but it's not auto-win.
I'm not only going to back Ashrym on this. I'm going to also point out that Dispel Magic is at least as powerful as Counterspell. They just serve slightly different purposes.
Ashrym hinted at it but Counterspell does not work on spells that have already been cast that may still have active effects up where as Dispel Magic does. These two are another pair of companion spells and have been such for a very long time. They work by similar rules but in companion situations. Dispel magic has a longer range in exchange for only being useful after the spell has been cast and is useful against most active effects that continue turn after turn with the only exception to that rule being a small handful of spells that call them out as exceptions. There are only a real very few of these and most are very high level. Counterspell works purely in the moment and can affect Instantaneous spells but at the cost of distance and requiring an available reaction. Their method for countering these spells is exactly the same. Spell slot you use and below is automatic. Everything above that is a roll that requires your spell casting ability against a DC based upon the spells level being cast to succeed.
Both of these spells are actually something that you should have and consider using in conjunction based upon the situation if you really want to focus on disrupting enemy magic and are on a general level equal with one being more useful and thus "stronger" in specific situations.
For Example. that slow spell I mentioned as an option which you might not have been able to stop with Counterspell because of the spell distance on Slow being double the effective range. You can remove it with Dispel Magic and because it's an active effect in the area being maintained by concentration you can target the slow spell itself to remove it. Or if you have some reason to. (such as one of your own got caught in the slow spell) you could actually just remove it from individuals but you may be removing all of their low level buffs in the process.
For Another Example Dispel magic can deal with that already active Guardian Spirit that is so pesky and so reliable in close range that so many clerics love as well should it be a problem for your team to deal with. Or even that pesky Globe of Invulnerability in Ashryn's example of ways to stop Counterspell.
It's far greater than Dispel Magic, because if they're 60 feet away you can just get closer. And since it's a Wizard & Sorcerer spell, you can also misty step or dimension door whatever distance. Problem solved. If you don't have Counterspell, you're likely don't have movement spells as well, which means the character with counterspell can nuke you with long range spells like fireball.
Another thing, being surprised you can't take any reactions. So what? This is a battle spell, not a surprise spell, being surprised screws most everyone over. You can't use Dispel Magic when surprised either.
Next, Counterspell stops a spell from being cast, not fixes what has already happened. Prevention >>>>> fixing, by any measure of logic. A wizard can have both Counterspell and Dispell Magic, but if you don't have counterspell then you can't even use Dispel Magic within 60 feet (which a wizard or sorcerer can easily rectify).
It's far greater than Dispel Magic, because if they're 60 feet away you can just get closer. And since it's a Wizard & Sorcerer spell, you can also misty step or dimension door whatever distance. Problem solved. If you don't have Counterspell, you're likely don't have movement spells as well, which means the character with counterspell can nuke you with long range spells like fireball.
Another thing, being surprised you can't take any reactions. So what? This is a battle spell, not a surprise spell, being surprised screws most everyone over. You can't use Dispel Magic when surprised either.
Next, Counterspell stops a spell from being cast, not fixes what has already happened. Prevention >>>>> fixing, by any measure of logic. A wizard can have both Counterspell and Dispell Magic, but if you don't have counterspell then you can't even use Dispel Magic within 60 feet (which a wizard or sorcerer can easily rectify).
This is actually incorrect. Because you cannot move as a reaction and you cannot cast counterspell as part of tht movement. You are stuck in place while they are casting the spell and they can easily move out of your reach which has been mentioned many times during this thread. So this point is completely destroyed.
Surprise let's them set up. Dispel can remove what they set up or remove the lingering affect their surprise action leaves behind. Counterspell cannot do this. This is an advantage in Dispel's magic favor. going "Oh well I was surprised neither can be cast this turn doesn't count" is incorrect because being used on the same turn at the same time is not a requirement for Dispel Magic.
Prevention is not always better than fixing what happened. Some things cannot be prevented. There are many ways to accomplish this. Sometimes your only choice is to fix what has been done. This is often something that comes up during adventuring in a whole lot of ways. Prevention is often just not feasible.
Your 60' remark falls apart because Dispel Magic doesn't have to be done within 60' to begin with. And there is no guarantee that enemies have Counterspell or even if they do that they have the spell slots to use it. So there are times where dispel magic can be used within 60' even if you don't have counterspell. So Dispel magic's range is actually much safer where as Counter Spell puts you much closer and a much easier target to all kinds of things. Including being counterspelled yourself.
Finally. Counterspell is not guaranteed despite the way people act about it. Even your posts make it sound like if you can cast it your guaranteed to win against the affect. This is not true. If you fail your counterspell and that leaves a continued effect on the field. Your only solution is to get rid of it with Dispel Magic or let it play out. And Dispel Magic has the bonus that it has a greater chance of knowing what it is your getting rid of. Counterspell does not unless the DM allows it in some way.
This is why CounterSpell and Dispel Magic are companion spells and one is not actually better than the other. Their functions are different but complimentary to each other and they are meant to be something that is possessed together to cover the greatest amount of possibilities. But that being Said. Neither is something that is outright required that a person take and there are many ways to function with only one of them or without either of them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You do have a couple feats to take with Fireball or lightning bolt I want to point out. Which can make the spells more useful but they are far less mandatory and you get more use out of them if you lean around other elemental spells of similar elements and the like. So it's not necessarily taking for just Fireball or Lightning Bolt.
As for Counter Spell. It's one of those spells where the longer you play. The more you see it really turn great moments in your favor and the more you see at least as many moments where you knew what was coming and wanted to do it but you just couldn't get into that position that would actually allow you to do it for all kinds of various reasons. So it's good when it's good and it's dead weight when it's dead weight. But most are really going to get gung ho about it when they are only thinking about it in terms of the good and all of those clutch moments they hope to get out of it.
As for Ideas of what to use your things on, Depending on your style one suggestion that I might bring up is actually:
Slow. It's not a damage dealing spell but it does shut down a lot of action economy. Not just for melee types that are getting more and more into multiple attacks. But also the fact that they have to choose what kind of actions to perform, get a debuff to ac, get their speed halved, and it has a 50% chance to potentially affect even potent spellcasters by slowing down their ability to cast spells. It's range is 120 feet. And it may or may not actually be on your bard spell list normally because Bard's only get it to my knowledge through the Extended spell list in Tasha's... Which is optional.
Counterspell means one caster auto wins against another caster unless both have the spell. That's incredibly powerful and Dispel Magic can't compete
It's not auto-win, however. Moving first to be > 60 ft away then casting a spell with > 60 ft range tends to become an issue.
The caster still needs to have a reaction available to use counterspell. If the caster is surprised no reaction and no counterspell.
The caster of counterspell is required to see the spell being cast. Improved invisibility from outside of counterspell range before closing in is an issue.
There's a chance the opposed check fails.
Globe of invulnerability prevents counterspell.
Counterspell can be useful but it's not auto-win.
I'm not only going to back Ashrym on this. I'm going to also point out that Dispel Magic is at least as powerful as Counterspell. They just serve slightly different purposes.
Ashrym hinted at it but Counterspell does not work on spells that have already been cast that may still have active effects up where as Dispel Magic does. These two are another pair of companion spells and have been such for a very long time. They work by similar rules but in companion situations. Dispel magic has a longer range in exchange for only being useful after the spell has been cast and is useful against most active effects that continue turn after turn with the only exception to that rule being a small handful of spells that call them out as exceptions. There are only a real very few of these and most are very high level. Counterspell works purely in the moment and can affect Instantaneous spells but at the cost of distance and requiring an available reaction. Their method for countering these spells is exactly the same. Spell slot you use and below is automatic. Everything above that is a roll that requires your spell casting ability against a DC based upon the spells level being cast to succeed.
Both of these spells are actually something that you should have and consider using in conjunction based upon the situation if you really want to focus on disrupting enemy magic and are on a general level equal with one being more useful and thus "stronger" in specific situations.
For Example. that slow spell I mentioned as an option which you might not have been able to stop with Counterspell because of the spell distance on Slow being double the effective range. You can remove it with Dispel Magic and because it's an active effect in the area being maintained by concentration you can target the slow spell itself to remove it. Or if you have some reason to. (such as one of your own got caught in the slow spell) you could actually just remove it from individuals but you may be removing all of their low level buffs in the process.
For Another Example Dispel magic can deal with that already active Guardian Spirit that is so pesky and so reliable in close range that so many clerics love as well should it be a problem for your team to deal with. Or even that pesky Globe of Invulnerability in Ashryn's example of ways to stop Counterspell.
That's not how it works, actually. You can only dispel the effect of slow from one target. I guess you could argue the rules aren't clear, but here's a reference to the developers thoughts, if that matters to you: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/2018/10/02/dispel-magic-is-the-intent-that-you-cannot-target-1-effect-per-pc/amp/
Spirit Guardian works, though.
Then they should have written it completely differently. Because it's written contrary to that. Even his answer kind of contradicts itself. He says it targets an effect that your aware of that discretely continues. Then he tries to backtrack in the same sentence to suddenly make a single spell, a single effect that conveniently has multiple targets and is held up by a single concentration ability of a single individual(player, npc, sentient piece of cheese, what have you) that would break it on all targets automatically if it gets dropped or failed mind you, Because he tries to turn it individual again despite it being logically mostly singular to try to tone it down in some way? Even though it already has extra requirements in that you have to be aware of exactly what's going on to even target the effect rather than just generally target an object or person to remove an unknown effect?
So No. I don't buy Jeremy's interpretation of it and that's not actually what the books say about it.
Fair enough. I agree it is poorly worded. I don't agree you interpretation is clear from the text inb PHB, however. It is ambigious. Anyway you definetly shouldn't take for granted that your DM, or any DM, are as eager to disregard the clarification of the the lead rules developer of the game as you are.
The exact quote from JC:
Fateless you are making this out to seem way more convoluted than his actual words are. You misrepresented how he worded his answer.
He spells it out quite clearly in fact. If a spell targets multiple creatures then each creature must be dispelled on an individual basis.
If any of you are familiar with Magic the Gathering and the general strategy of card advantage the difference between counterspell and dispel is like the difference between the magic cards essence scatter and doom blade.
Most spells have an immediate effect on the battlefield in DnD. Dispelling after the fact is an unfavorable exchange. That being said, it is not a bad spell, and in fact is excellent. Ideally, you would counterspell every important spell before it ever has any effect but that is just not realistic. For those times when counterspell cannot do the job because of its limitations, dispel is there to be an MVP.
It's something that the DM and I can talk about. But it's not just the individual spell wording that i was working with. There is nowhere else in the book that turning it all individual is actually written out either. That's actually interpretation that we are forced to add in. Rule of thumb when dealing with the book in general is that if it's not actually written there then that's not what it actually does. nothing about spell casting says that it breaks down individually just because it's a continued effect. All that it says that when it is cast if conditions are met then the spell is cast, if it requires concentration to continue you concentrate, and if it has conditions for ending early that are met then either the spell ends or the part of the spell affecting that individual ends. The fact that each person individually can save from it again is the only place that even hints ta the idea that it's a bunch of individual effects but that's not really stated or made clear and there are other things that work opposite to that. And they saved vs it individually at the start of the spell too. Saving doesn't even say it's individual as far a the overall effect is concerned either, just that in specificity you escape some or all of the effect that still affects others and be excluded from it either permanently or temporarily.
We're not talking about a card game. But even if we were. you may actually be getting an effect out of removing that creature with the 1 card. namely opening up the field so that your attacks with your creatures can get through instead of using one or more of those resources on the board to remove said creature instead. Where you would actually be getting an unfavorable trade is where even with using that card to remove that creature that is already on the field is when you can't actually get anything out of removing it anyway. Where you come up positive is if you can not only take out that card before it can have it's effect but potentially remove more of their resources for that same single card of yours. Such as killing not just one but potentially multiple of their creatures.
As for the Dispel magic issue and dispelling idnividuals. That's fine... if your targeting individuals, Which the spell can do. But the spell allows you to target Effects if you know what they are which is fundamentally different than targeting an individual and has additional requirements to work. having it affect more than one person because your smart enough or clever enough, and the ability to figure out what is happening through either knowing the spell well enough yourself or being skilled enough in arcana to identify the ongoing effect. Then you shuold be rewarded when you use Dispel Magic which the spell and the RAW actually supports and even Jeremy supported in his wording until he changed half way through his sentence to again make it nothing more than targetting the person. Which in that case the spell should either be reworded to either not allow you to target the effect specifically or it should clarify that it can only be used to target continuous area effect spells since targeting an effect to only target an individual is in fact redundant.
Dispel magic uses the more available spells known as opposed to the less available magical secrets.
This is the text...
Dispel magic targets an individual target, but it ends multiple spell effects on that target if they exist. Concentration rules keep that from coming up much but it's there occasionally.
The range is better, it's potentially multiple effects, it ends ongoing effects after the spell action, and it doesn't require magical secrets. There are definitely advantages to dispel magic over counterspell (and vice versa) for a bard.
Keep in mind Ashrym that the Jeremy Crawford Sage Advice thread they are linking actually says that according to him it doesn't work that way either. He turns it into only affecting one spell on one person for one casting no matter how you target it.
That being Said I'm in agreement with you on the person or object side of how targeting an individual target works based purely upon the way the spell is written.
Huh?
He is not saying that at all, Fateless.
I loved battles where our party fought a powerful caster.
DM: "Bad guy casts..."
Our Wizard: "Counterspell!"
DM: "Bad guy Counterspells..."
My Warlock: "Counterspell!"
DM: "Aw..."
Happened all the time...
I mean, it can sound dumb, but that's both sides down two spells each, and for a Warlock that's a very limited resource, so it's not like the bad guy got nothing out of it (especially if they're not alone).
To keep it fun though you need to ignore the mechanics of it and think about what's happening in story terms; one bad guy and two casters have just entered an epic duel for control over a spell, leaving both sides drained, and with an element of risk if you had to roll for any of the counterspells.
It can seem weird that there isn't a roll involved as standard (ideally an opposed one) but it's already a mechanic that's slowing down combat (as that's three more spells involved just to stop one spell from resolving).
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
As with anything is this game: there are great options, like coounterspell, but that doesn't mean you have to pick. Think about what you want for your character and build that way.
Unless you table is super power gamey and you're okay with that, in that case counterspell is going to be one of the best picks on your lsit at 6 if no one else picks it up.
I think the main thing is that it depends on how your DM handles it. I have a player who really likes counterspell, but I don't always make it clear which spell my dudes are casting.
I'll tell him "the chap on the right is starting to cast a spell" but unless it's a spell that he has seen a few times or is otherwise very familiar with, he will not know which spell is being cast and thus whether it's worth countering. It keeps the meta gaming to a minimum and to be honest, my players handle spellcasting in a very similar way. It keeps things fun and fresh.
It's far greater than Dispel Magic, because if they're 60 feet away you can just get closer. And since it's a Wizard & Sorcerer spell, you can also misty step or dimension door whatever distance. Problem solved. If you don't have Counterspell, you're likely don't have movement spells as well, which means the character with counterspell can nuke you with long range spells like fireball.
Another thing, being surprised you can't take any reactions. So what? This is a battle spell, not a surprise spell, being surprised screws most everyone over. You can't use Dispel Magic when surprised either.
Next, Counterspell stops a spell from being cast, not fixes what has already happened. Prevention >>>>> fixing, by any measure of logic. A wizard can have both Counterspell and Dispell Magic, but if you don't have counterspell then you can't even use Dispel Magic within 60 feet (which a wizard or sorcerer can easily rectify).
This is actually incorrect. Because you cannot move as a reaction and you cannot cast counterspell as part of tht movement. You are stuck in place while they are casting the spell and they can easily move out of your reach which has been mentioned many times during this thread. So this point is completely destroyed.
Surprise let's them set up. Dispel can remove what they set up or remove the lingering affect their surprise action leaves behind. Counterspell cannot do this. This is an advantage in Dispel's magic favor. going "Oh well I was surprised neither can be cast this turn doesn't count" is incorrect because being used on the same turn at the same time is not a requirement for Dispel Magic.
Prevention is not always better than fixing what happened. Some things cannot be prevented. There are many ways to accomplish this. Sometimes your only choice is to fix what has been done. This is often something that comes up during adventuring in a whole lot of ways. Prevention is often just not feasible.
Your 60' remark falls apart because Dispel Magic doesn't have to be done within 60' to begin with. And there is no guarantee that enemies have Counterspell or even if they do that they have the spell slots to use it. So there are times where dispel magic can be used within 60' even if you don't have counterspell. So Dispel magic's range is actually much safer where as Counter Spell puts you much closer and a much easier target to all kinds of things. Including being counterspelled yourself.
Finally. Counterspell is not guaranteed despite the way people act about it. Even your posts make it sound like if you can cast it your guaranteed to win against the affect. This is not true. If you fail your counterspell and that leaves a continued effect on the field. Your only solution is to get rid of it with Dispel Magic or let it play out. And Dispel Magic has the bonus that it has a greater chance of knowing what it is your getting rid of. Counterspell does not unless the DM allows it in some way.
This is why CounterSpell and Dispel Magic are companion spells and one is not actually better than the other. Their functions are different but complimentary to each other and they are meant to be something that is possessed together to cover the greatest amount of possibilities. But that being Said. Neither is something that is outright required that a person take and there are many ways to function with only one of them or without either of them.