The NPC counterspell casters should already have no idea what spells the PCs are casting before it is already too late, and the fact that the DM always knows what these spells are is metagame knowledge and should not be treated as a factor in NPC tactical decisions. I'm going to break with the majority opinion here and say that a deception roll opposed by either a static DC or enemy insight check is probably just fine, and there are no complications from it that aren't already part and parcel of the counterspell mechanics. So, does the spellcaster or the spell itself know if a spell is really being cast? Or, is it dependent on the perception of the caster, which can be fooled?
"You attempt to interrupt a creature in the process of casting a spell." "Casting Time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell." But, if no spell is actually being cast, would the rival mage's Counterspell actually go off, using up at least the Reaction and possibly the spell slot as well? On the one hand, I think anyone can act like a wizard and make common folk think they're casting spells - think a con artist casting fake Divination spells or something. Then, the real spellcaster can cast the actual spell, without fear of interruption. The idea being, the "fake caster" starts clearly "casting" a big and dangerous spell (like Fireball), in the hopes that the rival mage tries to Counterspell, thus using up their Reaction. Bonus points if they work with a friendly mage to learn somatic and verbal components to Fireball. Wouldn't have to be an AT, really anyone with a solid Deception skill and some arcane knowledge could try it.
Hopefully the title sort of made sense, but I had a thought: Could an Arcane Trickster with a good enough Deception roll convince a rival spellcaster to want to try and Counterspell?
0 kommentar(er)
