I have been GMing for 10 years, and we are currently are using Pathfinder with little to no house rules. The only character that has ever used counterspell is when we made a prestige class up that could do it well. Otherwise it never happens. The improved counterspell feat is a poor substitute for other more powerful metamagic feats, etc. 3.5 had Reactive Counterspell but it was a third tier feat.
This option makes it available to anyone (albeit at a penalty). My hope is that combat involving magic becomes more dynamic and more about choosing when to counter or not. It also allows mage duels to function more organically, not that I envision my characters ever doing that.
I am thinking of introducing this rule to a brand new campaign doing rise of the runelords.
Immediate Counterspell (this is a general ability, not a feat): You can take an immediate action to try and counterspell (as long as you are not flat-footed), but you lose your whole next turn no matter if you succeed or not (you can do this only once per round). If you are counterspelling by using dispel, you incur a -5 to the check. Some spells can be countered by using its opposite at the GM’s discretion (fire spells countered by cold ones, etc.).
Improved Counterspell feat: In addition to the benefits listed in the Pathfinder rules, characters who have this feat and who use the immediate counterspell option only lose their next standard action. In addition to this, they can immediate counterspell using dispel with a -2 penalty.
How broken do you think this is? Does it unfairly advantage PCs or NPCs?