Counterspelled Booming Blade

[stoutstien]

Never had an issue with the SCAG Cantrips feeling off.

Counterspell causes the spell to fail and have no effect. Getting an attack is an effect. Hitting on that attack is neither failing nor having no effect.

Think of it this way: you can Quicken BB/GFB. If a Sorc Quickens BB, how does he get the BA attack without using magic? If he then makes a regular BB casting, how does he make two attacks, without magic?

Are you suggesting the Sorc can normally make two attacks without Quicken or Magic? That would seem to be the case if your argument about mundane attacks were to hold.

Wouldn't be a point for why BB doesn't make sense as it uses the caster physical attack ability rather than a magic one. why is it capable of allowing an attack to occur that wouldn't be possible?

I harp on the smite spells due to being random in places but at least they follows a logical path of imbue weapon> hit with weapon> effect occurs.

[RSP]

Wouldn't be a point for why BB doesn't make sense as it uses the caster physical attack ability rather than a magic one. why is it capable of allowing an attack to occur that wouldn't be possible?

It’s not the first spell that allows an attack that otherwise wouldn’t be possible. Haste for one allows it. If your Haste is countered, you don’t still get your free action to make an attack.

[KorvinStarmast]

With SCAGtrips written as poorly as they are (even the updated versions), you're pretty much guaranteed to be stuck in a spot where, whatever your answer to the question is, it will feel "off."

I had made a post as regards "make it more like shillelagh"

Transmutation cantrip
Casting Time: 1 bonus action | Range: Touch | Components: V, S, M (mistletoe, a shamrock leaf, and a club or quarterstaff) | Duration: 1 minute

The wood of a club or quarterstaff you are holding is imbued with nature’s power. For the duration, you can use your spellcasting ability instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of melee attacks using that weapon, and the weapon’s damage die becomes a d8. The weapon also becomes magical, if it isn’t already. The spell ends if you cast it again or if you let go of the weapon.

Try this out for green flame blade:
Green Flame Blade (modified)

Transmutation cantrip
Casting Time: 1 bonus action | Range: Touch | Components: V, S, M (flint and steel, and a bladed weapon) | Duration: 1 minute
Your weapon is imbued with green fire. For the duration, you can use your spellcasting ability instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of melee attacks using that weapon. The damage die becomes a d6. The weapon becomes magical, if it isn’t already, and it now does fire damage. At level 5 the damage becomes 2d6, at 11 3d6, and at 17 4d6. On a hit the weapon also does fire damage equal to your Spell casting ability bonus.

Not as powerful, but effective for a Spell Caster to make a melee weapon attack. And much better for a Warlock.
Alternately, the damage is added, and it goes from d6 to d8 to d10 to d12 as you go up from level 1 to 5 to 7 to 11.

Booming blade would be similar, triggered by the target moving, thunder damage, and the Spell Casting Ability damage goes to the target whether or not it moves.

What do you all think?

People, including myself, have provided explanations for how the narrative can fit the RAW without any sort of confusion around it. Your simply ignoring that doesn't make them go away.

I don't think that the devs thought through the two SCAG trips. Green Ronin. They forgot about Arcane Tricksters and Magic Initiate, and thought of giving this to blade singers and blade locks and sorcerers, I think.

[Witty Username]

It’s not the first spell that allows an attack that otherwise wouldn’t be possible. Haste for one allows it. If your Haste is countered, you don’t still get your free action to make an attack.

Haste isn't a single attack though, but an imbuement of a body with an effect. it even has different targeting criteria, Haste can be twinned and Booming Blade cannot as Booming Blade is an area of effect rather than a single target.

Dispelling a haste wouldn't undo all the previous movement and attacks made prior to the dispelling.

I think the disconnect is if the attack portion of the spell part of its somatic components, the weapon is definitively part of the components as its necessary material. As for Quicken, it doesn't actually help as it would accelerate the verbal and somatic components, if the attack is part of that then sorcerer being able to attack multiple times a round isn't all that weird.

And I agree that countering the spell should stop the attack, but from a what is physically going on, it is unclear. For example, counterspell stopping the attack makes sense because it would have to disrupt the components* or effect the spell afterward.

Sidenote: what are people's opinions of counterspell in response to a material component. Sure subtle spell, but if you see the sorcerer pull out the crystal rod, I feel like you could deduce the lightning bolt incoming

[Schwann145]

People, including myself, have provided explanations for how the narrative can fit the RAW without any sort of confusion around it. Your simply ignoring that doesn't make them go away.

I've already mentioned that these explanations are problematic for me. I care about the entirety of the narrative, not just the specifics of the action in question. You've suggested things like the Counterspell can somehow physically stop you from making the necessary attack, but by doing so you've introduced properties to Counterspell that it otherwise doesn't have, just to qualify how it worked this time.
You've answered the RAW issue, but left the scene feeling muddy and unclear. The answer to the RAW is damaging to the narrative.

What's the argument against it? Clearly time is not a factor. "Because Fireball doesn't say you get to attack?" Well Booming Blade only lets you attack if you Cast a Spell, and you didn't, because it got Counterspelled.

The argument against it is that spells like Fireball don't have you making an attack as part of the spellcasting, and Counterspell doesn't stop you from doing the actual casting, despite the text saying that it "interrupts."
You've committed your action to casting the spell, and when you finish casting the spell it doesn't work as it gets Counterspelled. You don't get the casting time back, so you don't get the time back to decide to use the Attack action instead either.


Edit: For whatever it's worth, I dislike the existence of Counterspell as a reactive spell in the first place. Once upon a time you had to actually hold an action in order to interrupt, because the idea of being able to a) identify, b) cast a spell, and c) do so more quickly than the character who's turn it actually currently is, all within the combat window of 6ish seconds is utterly ridiculous.
But, people didn't like how counterspelling used to work because it was difficult and clunky, so instead it's just a spell now. Easy. Simple. Yet, throws suspension of disbelief into the wind.

[Witty Username]

But, people didn't like how counterspelling used to work because it was difficult and clunky, so instead it's just a spell now. Easy. Simple. Yet, throws suspension of disbelief into the wind.

Eh, it has weirdness but it isn’t all that bad.

I do think I lean towards lighter on the fiction vs I have never seen an actual use case for, but I personally find counterspell the less at fault party here. Where this isn't a problem like say counterspelling a counterspell, which has an issue of time and speed. This is more a issue that things like booming blade and Green flame blade have effects that aren't templated in the same way as other spells.

A smite for example, we know wouldn't have its attack disrupted because it isn't part of the spell in any way. Things like expeditious retreat for another using a action you normally couldn't is the clear intention of the spell.

BB doesn't really work like either of them, it doesn't change your capacity to attack, or require additional time outside of it.
This makes narratively it unclear whether the attack is effect or component.

[Hairfish]

Edit: For whatever it's worth, I dislike the existence of Counterspell as a reactive spell in the first place. Once upon a time you had to actually hold an action in order to interrupt, because the idea of being able to a) identify, b) cast a spell, and c) do so more quickly than the character who's turn it actually currently is, all within the combat window of 6ish seconds is utterly ridiculous.
But, people didn't like how counterspelling used to work because it was difficult and clunky, so instead it's just a spell now. Easy. Simple. Yet, throws suspension of disbelief into the wind.

Have you ever been in a fight? The casting character isn't actually getting their own block of time once every 6 seconds where they can act more quickly than any of the other combatants.

[Schwann145]

This is more a issue that things like booming blade and Green flame blade have effects that aren't templated in the same way as other spells.

Agreed. That's why I started by blaming the writing of those spells.

Have you ever been in a fight? The casting character isn't actually getting their own block of time once every 6 seconds where they can act more quickly than any of the other combatants.

Of course. Consider that everyone is acting within the same 6ish second time window simultaneously. This means that the counterspeller has to:
•Notice that their opponent is attempting to cast a spell.
•Interrupt their own choice of actions.
•Properly form the correct somatic component to cast the Counterspell, which as components are described, is not a typical hand gesture but intricate arcane movements.
•Still somehow take the rest of their turn.
Since they're clearly a spellcaster, maybe they wanted to cast a spell the same round that they're counterspelling. Maybe they wanted to cast Banishment (to be mean and hammer home my point). Now, in addition to the above, they have to:
•Properly speak the weird arcane phrase verbal component.
•Properly form the correct somatic component.
•Fish out an "item that is distasteful to the target" from their component pouch (which means digging around, finding exactly what you need; how does a generic component pouch even cover this? Did you *know* you'd be facing this opponent and did the homework to know what they considered distasteful?)
•You're also potentially doing all of the above while moving. (I said above, "properly" for the verbal and somatic components because, have you ever tried to gesture or speak exactly while also running or moving quickly? Good luck with having your gait not mess one or both of those up!)
In 6 seconds?

[RSP]

Haste isn't a single attack though, but an imbuement of a body with an effect. it even has different targeting criteria, Haste can be twinned and Booming Blade cannot as Booming Blade is an area of effect rather than a single target.

BB and GFB aren’t a single attack either. “You brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting and make a melee attack with it against one creature within 5 feet of you.” You imbue your body with an effect. It’s not an AoE: you have one single attack, like the one granted by Haste’s extra action.

You cannot twin BB/GFB because they’re “Self” range spells, not because they’re AoEs (they aren’t).

Unless you’re suggesting the attack granted by BB/GFB occurs on all creatures within 5’?

Dispelling a haste wouldn't undo all the previous movement and attacks made prior to the dispelling.

Huh? What does Dispelling have to do with any of this? Who claimed dispelling Haste undid any of that? I’m not sure what argument you’re making, but it’s nothing to do with what I’m discussing.

I think the disconnect is if the attack portion of the spell part of its somatic components, the weapon is definitively part of the components as its necessary material.

It’s not part of the somatic components. For the record “Each spell description in chapter 11 begins with a block of information, including the spell’s name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell’s effect.”

The last sentence is bolded for emphasis. Let’s keep that in mind when rereading the above quoted line from BB:

“You brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting and make a melee attack with it against one creature within 5 feet of you.”

So we’re already in the effect of the spell here, per the rules of Casting a Spell. Further, “brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting” is important as its telling you the weapon was already used in the casting: past tense, it’s over.

The effect of a spell only occurs after the casting is completed, and furthermore, the wording here also tells you the attack is done after the casting by stating your using the weapon that was already used in the casting.

•You're also potentially doing all of the above while moving. (I said above, "properly" for the verbal and somatic components because, have you ever tried to gesture or speak exactly while also running or moving quickly? Good luck with having your gait not mess one or both of those up!)
In 6 seconds?

This seems to be going into “how do characters do so much in ~6 seconds?” rather than any argument for BB/GFB being countered.

I believe the timing requirement is found in the Reaction section of Casting Time:

“Some spells can be cast as reactions. These spells take a fraction of a second to bring about and are cast in response to some event. If a spell can be cast as a reaction, the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so.”

Counterspell requires only a Somatic component, so it is a movement that occurs in a fraction of a second.

But again, you seem to be tweaking your complaint to “I dislike D&D’s core sense of timing.”

[Mastikator]

The problem that may arise here is based on what the person imagines Booming Blade to be doing and what the text says it does.

Mind Picture 1 (MP1): The effect of the spell is to temporarily enchant the weapon with magic, then you choose to strike an opponent - a successful hit delivers the spell's magic in addition to the weapon damage.
Mind Picture 2 (MP2): The effect of the spell makes the weapon strike the target - delivering the effects of the spell and the weapon damage on a successful hit.
Mind Picture 3 (MP3): The effect of the spell makes you strike an opponent - a successful hit delivers the spell's magic in addition to the weapon damage.

MP1 is congruent with how a spell like Searing Smite works. You can hold the effect of the spell until you choose to attack in the normal way (or the duration runs out). The key here is that the attacking portion is another action, not an effect of the spell. These spells usually require a Bonus Action to cast, freeing up your Action to attack on the same turn. Counterspelling the spell stops the enchanting process, but you can still attack with your Action afterwards if you choose.

MP2 is congruent with how a spell like Spiritual Weapon works. This uses your spell attack modifier instead of your normal attack modifier. Counterspelling the spell stops the effect from occurring, thus stopping the weapon strike.

MP3 is congruent with how a spell like Booming Blade works. It still uses the normal way of making a melee attack once forced to do so by the spell, so all the limitations of that are still in place, in addition to making you target a creature within 5ft rather than the normal weapon range. Counterspelling the spell stops the effect from occurring, thus stopping the weapon strike. Another spell that does something similar is Crown of Madness, which when cast on someone forces them to make a melee attack on a creature within range of your choice.

Is it weird to use a spell to force yourself to attack? Eh, yeah. Personally, it would make more sense to work like an MP1 spell, but that would likely require it was a Bonus Action instead, which would make the spell too powerful as currently written in additional to seemingly being too much like a Smite spell. In any case, the answer to the question the OP posed is indeed that Counterspelling the spell also stops the attack.

How do you deal with the inevitable problem with different people at the table having different mental images.

I think the obvious answer here is that the DM picks one and the players acquiesce. IMO the DM should pick mental images that are congruent with RAW, not because the rules are sacred but for consistency reasons. The DMs rulings should not be surprising IMO as that erodes the player's trust. You don't want players to end up in a "are you sure you want to do that" situation. The players should know what the consequences of their actions are (at least if it would be obvious to their characters). And it's better if it's based on preexisting rules that they can learn, so that not too much time is spent explaining obvious things while at the table. Those table hours are expensive and precious, I don't want to waste them.

The main flaw I can see with my argument here is that RAW is not always clear, and secondly that players don't always know the rules so there's nothing for them to predict about rulings anyway.

[Aimeryan]

How do you deal with the inevitable problem with different people at the table having different mental images.

I think the obvious answer here is that the DM picks one and the players acquiesce. IMO the DM should pick mental images that are congruent with RAW, not because the rules are sacred but for consistency reasons. The DMs rulings should not be surprising IMO as that erodes the player's trust. You don't want players to end up in a "are you sure you want to do that" situation. The players should know what the consequences of their actions are (at least if it would be obvious to their characters). And it's better if it's based on preexisting rules that they can learn, so that not too much time is spent explaining obvious things while at the table. Those table hours are expensive and precious, I don't want to waste them.

The main flaw I can see with my argument here is that RAW is not always clear, and secondly that players don't always know the rules so there's nothing for them to predict about rulings anyway.

Agreed. There is something to be said for a DM to be able to describe the mental image of what is going on in a way that is congruent with the RAW, as players are more likely to accept something they can wrap their head around. It also helps for the DM to recognise when the players have a different mental image and to show ways the RAW for other spells is congruent with those.

[KorvinStarmast]

•Fish out an "item that is distasteful to the target" from their component pouch (which means digging around, finding exactly what you need; how does a generic component pouch even cover this? Did you *know* you'd be facing this opponent and did the homework to know what they considered distasteful?)

That is for banishment, and it can be subbed for by using a spell casting focus. (Spell casting foci are a sub for material component unless there is a cost/consume component required).

[stoutstien]

Edit: For whatever it's worth, I dislike the existence of Counterspell as a reactive spell in the first place. Once upon a time you had to actually hold an action in order to interrupt, because the idea of being able to a) identify, b) cast a spell, and c) do so more quickly than the character who's turn it actually currently is, all within the combat window of 6ish seconds is utterly ridiculous.
But, people didn't like how counterspelling used to work because it was difficult and clunky, so instead it's just a spell now. Easy. Simple. Yet, throws suspension of disbelief into the wind.

Maybe the default way to interrupt spells, and spell like effects that aren't spells, shouldn't just be a different spell to begin with.

Heck the only one real option for this is on a misnamed ranger subclass( monster hunter) and that is only available after level 10 with the last two features.

[Psyren]

But, people didn't like how counterspelling used to work because it was difficult and clunky, so instead it's just a spell now. Easy. Simple. Yet, throws suspension of disbelief into the wind.

It throws yours into the wind.

For me, disrupting something as complicated as spellcasting with a quick burst of energy makes perfect sense. Like suddenly clapping your hands in the ear of a concert pianist and causing them to screw up an arrangement or phrase.

Where I do agree though is that 2014 Counterspell is too powerful, especially the upcast versions that obliterate counterplay. But they're fixing that.

[Laserlight]

A question came up recently about what happens when a SCAG-trip is Counterspelled. The specific incident is an Arcane Trickster who stacks Booming Blade + Sneak Attack.

So here's the question: does the Counterspell shut the attack down completely, or does the attacker still get a normal attack (+Sneak Attack in this case)? My thought is that the AT didn't take the Attack action, he was making an attack AS PART OF HIS SPELL, so that Counterspell stops both. But I can also see a DM ruling the other way ("The CS stops the magic effect, but not the sword thrust.").

Thoughts?

I'd rule it as "Counterspell breaks the spell, the attack is part of the spell, therefore no attack." Narrate it as you like, but that's the mechanical effect.

[Witty Username]

You cannot twin BB/GFB because they’re “Self” range spells, not because they’re AoEs (they aren’t).

The Tasha's versions use an area effect template for range, 'Self (5 ft radius)' in the PHB that template is for spells as Self as point of origin, 5ft as size of effect, and radius to convey the sphere shape.

If your point was true they would simply say Self, but they don't.

--
We are left with the question, what is the somatic component? Brandishing the weapon is as you said part of the effect, so it cannot be that but that would disqualify most narrative options for the somatic components.

Maybe the default way to interrupt spells, and spell like effects that aren't spells, shouldn't just be a different spell to begin with.

The mage slayer attack being ruled as after the spell is cast was a crime.

Bringing back opportunity attacks against casters would probably just be a good idea.

Where I do agree though is that 2014 Counterspell is too powerful, especially the upcast versions that obliterate counterplay. But they're fixing that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that the counterspell revision was poorly received.
My main point is its being looked at but is not a done deal. As is the case of all playtest material.

[Dr.Samurai]

I actually agree with Schwann that it feels a bit wonky in the narrative, because the spell is what is allowing you to attack.

But I don't think it's so wonky as to not counterspell the attack. I mean... casters are privileged enough already without rationalizing how their spells can still do stuff even when they are counterspelled lol.

[RSP]

We are left with the question, what is the somatic component? Brandishing the weapon is as you said part of the effect, so it cannot be that but that would disqualify most narrative options for the somatic components.

The brandishing and attack are part of the spell effect, the weapon itself is the material component. The somatic component, as with any spell, are “Spellcasting gestures [that] might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures.”

Nothing in S components changes BB, nor are unique to it: BB’s S components are no different than any other spell. I see no issue with why S would be an issue specifically for BB.

[Theodoxus]

The mage slayer attack being ruled as after the spell is cast was a crime.

Bringing back opportunity attacks against casters would probably just be a good idea.

10 trillion percent hard agree. On both.

Mage slayer is a joke of a feat as written.

Casters getting Disad for ranged attacks within 5'? Are you kidding me? Someone making intricate gestures with their hands, in my face, and I can't hack them off? Lame.

WotC went WAY too far on the 'let's simplify OAs for 5E' train. And the one feat that would have at least brought back some parity, didn't. ugh.

[Dr.Samurai]

The year is 2051. Every class is a spellcaster. Every feat, feature, background, and ability check grants and requires spellcasting. You are one of the last remaining martials, hiding in plain sight in a world of autocratic mages. In the cities, your hands and mouth are in a constant state of somatic gestures and verbal components to fit in amongst the rest. In the lush verdant utopia that the brutal wizards and sorcerers have created, you hide in the wilderness, finding others like you.

"Are you a marti--?" You cup your hands against their mouth, "Don't say that word, they can hear us!" An Arcane Eye goes by as you hide under the canopy of a tree, "We have to go deeper into the wilds, where their frail bodies will struggle to keep up." The other's form melts away to reveal an old man, thin and bony, with a long beard, "Even the simplest spells can fool the likes of you," he cackles. But the odor of a creature locked away in a tower for decades scribing spells had alerted you that you were dealing with a wizard, and the other warriors in hiding leap out and one of them stabs at the old man.

"Shield spell!" he laughs out loud through rotted teeth, "HAHAHA! You can't beat us!"

But only one warrior had attacked, the others, including you, had readied an action to attack if the wizard casts a spell. He succumbs to your weapons in an instant, before the protective magic can take effect.

"We need to keep moving, before the arcane eye returns," you say, leading the others into the woods.

This is survival now. This is D&D 6th edition.

[stoutstien]

.

..."Shield spell!" he laughs out loud through rotted teeth, "HAHAHA! You can't beat us!"

But only one warrior had attacked, the others, including you, had readied an action to attack if the wizard casts a spell..

To bad you can't do this because you can't have a OA to trigger before the spell. That only for magic (or the rare high level monster hunter). Apparently resolving simultaneous action is hard...

[JackPhoenix]

We are left with the question, what is the somatic component?

Irrelevant is what it is. What it is not is what's described in the spell's description, just like the verbal component of Command or Suggestion isn't just the order itself. And, presumably for similar reasons: So the act of spellcasting is obvious and unmistakable for anything else.

[Dr.Samurai]

To bad you can't do this because you can't have a OA to trigger before the spell. That only for magic (or the rare high level monster hunter). Apparently resolving simultaneous action is hard...

I thought Readied Actions interrupt the trigger, no? (Doesn't come up often enough I guess.)

[JackPhoenix]

I thought Readied Actions interrupt the trigger, no? (Doesn't come up often enough I guess.)

Reactions come AFTER the trigger, unless the specific ability (Shield, for example) says otherwise.

[Keltest]

Interrupting a spell with a reaction attack is the kind of thing that falls under DM ruling. Logically it should be possible, and especially for martials there's a lot of opportunity cost since you can't unload a full attack action this way, but it's up to the DM whether "starting" to cast a spell means "casting a spell" or "declaring intent to cast a spell."

[Psyren]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that the counterspell revision was poorly received.

Where'd you get that from? It scored above 70% per their survey results video.

My main point is its being looked at but is not a done deal. As is the case of all playtest material.

My main point is that them looking at it at all means they see problems with the 2014 version, regardless of what they eventually land on.

[Witty Username]

Where'd you get that from? It scored above 70% per their survey results video.

I will chalk it up to exaggeration, that sounds like the warlock review numbers I heard that JC got alot of heat for calling mixed.

But the optimization community seemed like it was up in arms for a bit, saying the new version was just bad. This is all impressions though, I wouldn't be surprised about low accuracy.

[Psyren]

I will chalk it up to exaggeration, that sounds like the warlock review numbers I heard that JC got alot of heat for calling mixed.

But the optimization community seemed like it was up in arms for a bit, saying the new version was just bad. This is all impressions though, I wouldn't be surprised about low accuracy.

"The optimization community" is an even smaller subset of the playerbase than the survey-taking crowd, especially if you're basing that on message board posts you've seen. Everything in UA7 got a passing grade except Brawler Fighter and Brutal Critical, both of which came back in UA8.

[stoutstien]

I thought Readied Actions interrupt the trigger, no? (Doesn't come up often enough I guess.)

It doesn't cone up because it's mostly useless unless you don't follow the rules.

This is the real core issue.

If you follow the rules, spells get a huge leg up because they get to do what the say and magic is magic so it can do just about anything and everything. Nonspells options are left feeling anemic. However, if you do allow coloring outside the lines then magic can now do even more so the gap doesn't shrink.

This end up in a game state that you have to enforce one style of rulings for one part of the game (spells can only do what the say they do) that is in direct conflict with the very spirit of TTRPGs in hopes to strike a balance.

[Psyren]

However, if you do allow coloring outside the lines then magic can now do even more so the gap doesn't shrink.

It's not that simple; magic having more interactions doesn't necessarily mean an individual caster becomes stronger. To use your earlier example, ruling that wind wall can stop insect plague means the caster using insect plague now has more counters to deal with.