26
\$\begingroup\$

Counterspell
1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell.

Can I Counterspell a creature that completely eliminates component requirement?

Subtle Spell
When you cast a spell, you can spend 1 sorcery point to cast it without any somatic or verbal components.

If the spell is subtle then can I see it’s being cast in order to counterspell it?

\$\endgroup\$
36
\$\begingroup\$

No, you can't counterspell spells with no components

Subtle spell is meant to protect against counterspelling.

Subtle Spell is meant to protect a spell w/o material components from counterspell, since you can't see the casting.

(from a tweet from Jeremy Crawford)

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk says reinstate Monica May 7 '18 at 4:11
  • 9
    \$\begingroup\$ I think your answer would be much improved if it referenced the text as well as JC. From XGE "If the need for a spell’s components has been removed by a special ability, such as the sorcerer’s Subtle Spell feature or the Innate Spellcasting trait possessed by many creatures, the casting of the spell is imperceptible." \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose May 7 '18 at 11:19
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ That also means that casting spells from magic items can't be counterspelled… as they don't require any components per the DMG... interesting. \$\endgroup\$ – Slagmoth Jul 22 at 2:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Slagmoth more reason to use that spell scrolls if there are counterspell-ers on enemy team. \$\endgroup\$ – Vylix Jul 22 at 4:05
7
\$\begingroup\$

Spells with no components cannot be counterspelled

Counterspell says that it is cast as a reaction

which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell

So a spell must be visibly being cast in order to qualify for counterspelling.

The components of a spell are what make the casting visible since a spell can have no effects (visible or otherwise) until its casting is complete. So removing those components completely will indeed make a spell's casting imperceptible.

This is confirmed by a section of optional guidance in Xanathar's Guide to Everything which says:

If the need for a spell’s components has been removed by a special ability, such as the sorcerer’s Subtle Spell feature or the Innate Spellcasting trait possessed by many creatures, the casting of the spell is imperceptible.

Thus, if using Subtle Spell on a spell would result in it having no components left as part of the casting, that casting would be immune to counterspell. Specifically this works for spells that have no material component. Spells with a material component would still be visible and counterspellable even after using Subtle Spell.

Rules as Intended seem to agree

Jeremy Crawford also unofficially agrees in a Tweet:

Subtle Spell is meant to protect a spell w/o material components from counterspell, since you can't see the casting.

\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.