I was looking over the core rulebook today and noticed something. Concentration seems gone. No listing of it in the skill lists. No reference to it as a class skill in either cleric, wizard or sorcerer classes. There is a disruptive feat on page 122 to increase the DC of casting defensively by 4, and on page 185 i see that casting on the defensive is now harder DC 15+ 2x spell level versus just 15+spell level. But with no class skill casters no longer get a +3 to the check and indeed without it being a skill seems no ranks are even possible.
This tells me that its impossible to cast a spell higher than 2nd level in combat and even that is impossible if your facing a 6th level fighter with the feat.
Concentration is not a skill anymore, but IIRC, you just do a level check instead.
Exactly like if you had automatically maxed the skill.
Does it give you your level +3 + stat modifier? I don't recall a built in +3.
You now use your caster level instead of your rank in concentration.
Core rulebook, page 207
Meaning you can spend those skill points on something else...
Edit : ninja-ed!
No +3, but combat casting is now an interresting feat (was not in 3.5 compared to skill focus : concentration)
Concentration
To cast a spell, you must concentrate. If something interrupts your concentration while you're casting, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell. When you make a concentration check, you roll d20 and add your caster level and the ability score modifier used to determine bonus spells of the same type. Clerics, druids, and rangers add their Wisdom modifier. Bards, paladins, and sorcerers add their Charisma modifier. Finally, wizards add their Intelligence modifier. The more distracting the interruption and the higher the level of the spell you are trying to cast, the higher the DC (see Table: Concentration Check DCs). If you fail the check, you lose the spell just as if you had cast it to no effect.
|
The problem with the Concentration skill was that it was basically a skill tax. Your caster HAD to have it or be handicapped otherwise. And once you added enough bonuses together, you hardly ever failed.
The check being caster level plus ability mod helps this. While you can get plenty of buffs to your caster level, it's not as easy as skill bonuses. I can't speak for it from playtesting, but I feel it is an improvement overall.
Cursed ninjas.
then i may be houseruling it back in as a skill and just increasing casters skill points to 3 instead of 2. Should either increase the DC a bit, OR put in ways for people to counter a caster. not both at once. Seems a bit heavy handed.
perhaps its a help for those who never took the skill, but now its MUCH harder at the levels where you need the most help. Sure, its now easier at higher levels (possibly, though i still debate that with the two feats to counter spellcasters) but at lower levels the bonus for class skill plus skill ranks made casting on the defensive easier.
would have been a far simpler thing to increase skill ranks than to completely change around spellcasting in melee.
*gets out the houserule document and sighs*
Hmm, no, you don't have the +3Does it give you your level +3 + stat modifier? I don't recall a built in +3.Concentration is not a skill anymore, but IIRC, you just do a level check instead.
Exactly like if you had automatically maxed the skill.
Then it isn't quite the same as maxed out in class skill, or one which you can use skill focus on and combat casting.
You could in the past buff your DC roll so high it was likely in all situations it costs you half your base skill points plus two of your feats, but it was possible. Now you can only spend one feat on it, and there are two feats(or more) enemys can spend to make it harder.
then i may be houseruling it back in as a skill and just increasing casters skill points to 3 instead of 2. Should either increase the DC a bit, OR put in ways for people to counter a caster. not both at once. Seems a bit heavy handedWhy not run it as is?
I very likely will be (putting it back the way it was). but i find it interesting that my houserule document in pathfinder is getting longer than my houserule document in 3.5
You could in the past buff your DC roll so high it was likely in all situations it costs you half your base skill points plus two of your feats, but it was possible. Now you can only spend one feat on it, and there are two feats(or more) enemys can spend to make it harder.
Being able to buff your concentration to the point where these checks were automatic was a serious balance problem in the past. The need for staying out of melee, and the threat of losing a spell were intended checks on Wizard/Sorc power. Just because 3.5 did it one way, did not make it better (and in most cases, meant it was worse, otherwise what's the point of updating everything).
As it stands in Pathfinder, at most levels casters can still get their chance of being disrupted down to an acceptable level. The DC scales at exactly the same rate as caster level and the casters casting stat continually increases as they level, making the check easier and easier. Throw in Combat Casting and a mid level caster can easily get their chance of failure down to 15-20 percent. Disruptive just gives fighters a way to offset the effects of Combat casting, and bring everything back to even.
(Still, I can understand the urge to roll things back, I'm not fond of the new Grappling rules for instance. And if you think this is a nerf to casters, you should check the section of the Combat chapter where it talks about ranged touch attacks and Attacks of Opportunity. Hint: Even casting defensively, casters still take an AOO for using a ranged touch attack like a Ray.)
You could in the past buff your DC roll so high it was likely in all situations it costs you half your base skill points plus two of your feats, but it was possible. Now you can only spend one feat on it, and there are two feats(or more) enemys can spend to make it harder.Being able to buff your concentration to the point where these checks were automatic was a serious balance problem in the past. The need for staying out of melee, and the threat of losing a spell were intended checks on Wizard/Sorc power. Just because 3.5 did it one way, did not make it better (and in most cases, meant it was worse, otherwise what's the point of updating everything).
As it stands in Pathfinder, at most levels casters can still get their chance of being disrupted down to an acceptable level. The DC scales at exactly the same rate as caster level and the casters casting stat continually increases as they level, making the check easier and easier. Throw in Combat Casting and a mid level caster can easily get their chance of failure down to 15-20 percent. Disruptive just gives fighters a way to offset the effects of Combat casting, and bring everything back to even.
(Still, I can understand the urge to roll things back, I'm not fond of the new Grappling rules for instance. And if you think this is a nerf to casters, you should check the section of the Combat chapter where it talks about ranged touch attacks and Attacks of Opportunity. Hint: Even casting defensively, casters still take an AOO for using a ranged touch attack like a Ray.)
They also can't rely on taking a 5 foot step out of melee because they could end up followed and still in melee in pathfinder. A 20% chase to fail to cast is bad, a 20% chase to fail to cast no way to back out of melee range even in an open field with only one guy in your face and if you fail giving out a free attack on you seems all a bit much to me.
Having seen it in action. I added a second feat called improved combat casting, lets you reroll a failed attempt.
|
I very likely will be (putting it back the way it was). but i find it interesting that my houserule document in pathfinder is getting longer than my houserule document in 3.5then i may be houseruling it back in as a skill and just increasing casters skill points to 3 instead of 2. Should either increase the DC a bit, OR put in ways for people to counter a caster. not both at once. Seems a bit heavy handedWhy not run it as is?
No i mean why not give it a try as is, you seem to need it to be a skill, I'm asking what's wrong with the current version that you feel it needs to be houseruled back as a skill.
No i mean why not give it a try as is, you seem to need it to be a skill, I'm asking what's wrong with the current version that you feel it needs to be houseruled back as a skill.I very likely will be (putting it back the way it was). but i find it interesting that my houserule document in pathfinder is getting longer than my houserule document in 3.5then i may be houseruling it back in as a skill and just increasing casters skill points to 3 instead of 2. Should either increase the DC a bit, OR put in ways for people to counter a caster. not both at once. Seems a bit heavy handedWhy not run it as is?
He said why in an earlier post:
Should either increase the DC a bit, OR put in ways for people to counter a caster. not both at once. Seems a bit heavy handed.
I tried it RAW, the casters in the party got frustrated. Added a feat that let them reroll a failed attempt. Neither caster was thrilled but are willing to give it another try. I was tempted to remove the x2 to spell level, but figured the added feat still keeps it difficult but allows a determined caster to learn to do it more safely just never completely safely. I might add in a feat to counter the one that allows melee to follow the caster during his free 5 foot step, a bit of an arms race I know, but I want them to be able to do something if they are willing to devote themselves to it. Think of all the meta magic feats they are passing up to do this, I think it's somewhat balanced.
|
|
He said why in an earlier post:
Should either increase the DC a bit, OR put in ways for people to counter a caster. not both at once. Seems a bit heavy handed.
Thanks, I misunderstood it earlier, I was misreading it and thinking he meant that he was going to do both of those once he re-instituted it as a skill check, thanks for clearing it up.
And I actually agree that a feat to allow you to re-roll a failed concentration check for casting defensively is a great idea, much better than going back to skill points, and I agree the meta-magic or item creation or even combat feats being passed up makes it balanced.
He said why in an earlier post:
Should either increase the DC a bit, OR put in ways for people to counter a caster. not both at once. Seems a bit heavy handed.
Thanks, I misunderstood it earlier, I was misreading it and thinking he meant that he was going to do both of those once he re-instituted it as a skill check, thanks for clearing it up.
And I actually agree that a feat to allow you to re-roll a failed concentration check for casting defensively is a great idea, much better than going back to skill points, and I agree the meta-magic or item creation or even combat feats being passed up makes it balanced.
Thanks. At first I was dead set against the change, figured I've give it a whirl when Jason and Lisa posted we should all try it. So I did, and well the results weren't what I wanted. Still I saw the value, it made the casters nervous about it. Adding my improved combat casting kept the fear but gave them a chance to make their odds better. I don't want the players to feel they have no chance, even when the mage is being punched to death by the evil troll monk, I want him to feel he has a chance maybe a desprate near hopeless chance to roll the dice and maybe beat the odds one more time.
My best recalled memory of any game was when I pulled a 20 out of the air in a fight nothing else would have mattered and won. That battle the players and the villians still are as fresh in my mind as they were almost 20 years ago. If the DM had rules I had no chance, well what fun would that have been?
Heck I still remember the aftermath treasure divide.
Andy (Male Dwarf Fighter): She threw boulders at us clearly it is a belt of giant strength and I want it.
(Me) 1/2 Orc Cleric: But ... something strikes me as wrong about that whole situation.
Khirish (human male druid): I say we roll. Top roll gets it.
Tim (human male mage): Thurgon's right something about that fight doesn't add up. I don't want it, pass on my roll I want the wand.
Melody (human female fighter/thief/bard): Let's just roll top roll picks first Tim if win take the wand with your first pick.
Charles (human male assassin): I'm rolling.
The dwarf won the roll off, picked the girdle and put it right on...becoming a female dwarf.
That's when I recalled we were sent after a male cleric gone bad, not a female one.....
I also think that this change makes combat casting almost a required feat. NO feat should be required in order to do your job. A feat should be useful, a feat should be good. any feat that is REQUIRED or a must take should be part of the class to begin with. No caster in my game has taken combat casting in the past, now they have to do that just to have a chance to cast a spell and still have a 2 in 10 (or more) chance to fail. and risking two attacks of oppertunity per casting is a bit much. More I look at PFRPG, the less of the magic system I'll be using
Really the only thing missing with it not being a skill is you can't get skill focus for it.
As it is now you get your caster level which the same a the maxed out skill. You can still take combat casting for +4. The class skill bonus is about equal to the attribute bonus because you now use the attribute that is or should be your primary stat and that should equal about +3 bonus over time. It might not be +3 at the start but as you stat up it would be. I don't know too many caster that boosted there constitution over the their casting stat so it 3.5 it wasn't likely you got boost due increasing Constitution. As you level up and get magic items further boosting the casting stat even that +3 skill focus bonus is compensated for. You can still buff you stat too with spells to improve your chances as well.
I do like the idea of the feat "Improved Combat Casting" where it allows you to re-roll a failed roll for concentration.
I'm not sure aid another would help but I'd allow it my game. If a fighter decided to aid you they could roll an attack roll to defend and give a +2 to the concentration check.
Yeah I think it's kind of ridiculous too frankly. It feels like it should scale linearly so you always have that same 20-ish chance to fail. That seems fair. I've yet to actually encounter a situation where I was casting while threatened though, and I'm playing very much the "stay back and buff/blast" type so I'll likely not encounter it often enough to even bother with the combat casting feat. There does seem to be a lot of mage hate though these days.
I tried it RAW, the casters in the party got frustrated.
They got frustrated with the actual use, or just the numbers part of it? I just so rarely see casters in a situation where they actually have to use concentration and can't 5' step back safely to cast.
About the roughest thing I've seen (and nothing to do with the change from a skill) is for casting while grappled: DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level. That's *hard*
The problem with the new Concentration is that it has the opposite effect as intended: low-level casters have a hard time succeeding, but defensive casting is even more of an auto-success at higher levels, because both caster level and casting stat are level-dependent. So instead of the static DC 15 + (2 x spell level), we're using
DC = 10 + (1/2 threatener's BAB) + (2 x spell level).
That way, the difficulty scales meaningfully even at higher levels.
I think the new way is awesome. Casters, specially Arcane, where nigh unstopable, expecially at high levels, why shouldn't the warriors have a chance?
true, it is about the same as if you took the skill focus, but when it was a SKILL the feat was unnecessary. just an option. Now its a neccesary feat just to make your spell potentially useful. and you STILL face two attacks of oppertunity. I like most of what PFRPG did and I appreciate what Jason and company did for us, but I won't be using much if any of the magic chapter of the new book. Back to a skill for me and my players.
And on the off chance I do ever get to play at a con.... I just won't be playing a wizard or sorcerer. I do find myself liking the new cleric though.
*edit
last wasn't meant to reopen the wound, just trying to point out that I don't think ALL the changes are bad :)
I think the new way is awesome. Casters, specially Arcane, where nigh unstopable, expecially at high levels, why shouldn't the warriors have a chance?
As I just pointed out, the Pathfinder rules still pretty much support auto-success for casting defensively at high levels. A 20th level caster can easily have a +10 stat modifier (starting 20, +5 for levels, and a +6 headband), so for a 9th level spell (DC 33), he succeeds on a 3 or better, on a 1 or better for 8th level spells, and he cannot possibly fail for 0 - 7th level spells. The static DC disproportionately affects low-level casters.
The problem with the new Concentration is that it has the opposite effect as intended: low-level casters have a hard time succeeding, but defensive casting is even more of an auto-success at higher levels, because both caster level and casting stat are level-dependent. So instead of the static DC 15 + (2 x spell level), we're using
DC = 10 + (1/2 threatener's BAB) + (2 x spell level).
That way, the difficulty scales meaningfully even at higher levels.
Thats basically what I was trying to say...but you said it a lot better. Thats going to be a bit harder to work on the fly....but I'm going to give that a try at our next game and see how it works.
Thats basically what I was trying to say...but you said it a lot better. Thats going to be a bit harder to work on the fly....but I'm going to give that a try at our next game and see how it works.
If you force your players to calculate their concentration bonuses in advance, and also mark them down for NPCs, it gets somewhat easier -- then you just need to do 10 + 1/2 BAB, which is pretty easy.
I also allow additional threatening creatures to Aid Another, adding +2 each to the DC.
I think the new way is awesome. Casters, specially Arcane, where nigh unstopable, expecially at high levels, why shouldn't the warriors have a chance?
This is the textbook mage nerfing excuse but I have to ask-did you ever actually play in a high level campaign? I've played in two that reached epic levels and honestly wizards were sub-par in combat. Where they've always shined is utility, the stuff that other classes can't or won't do. Sure I can scrye on an opponent, buff myself based on his percieved offensive capability, teleport to his location, timestop to set up the perfect situation, and obliterate him. But the new combat casting rules hasn't changed that, only when I'm unprepared and feebly trying to fireball a red dragon can I be swatted into a red smear or lose my spell.
IMO the new rules accomplish virtually nothing.
I tried it RAW, the casters in the party got frustrated.They got frustrated with the actual use, or just the numbers part of it? I just so rarely see casters in a situation where they actually have to use concentration and can't 5' step back safely to cast.
About the roughest thing I've seen (and nothing to do with the change from a skill) is for casting while grappled: DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level. That's *hard*
It was against giants in the 4th book of the RotRL series. They are loving it, but in a three man group there is not good way to keep two giants off the wizard and cleric.
This is the textbook mage nerfing excuse but I have to ask - did you ever actually play in a high level campaign? I've played in two that reached epic levels and honestly wizards were sub-par in combat.
We played both Age of Worms (to 20th level) and Savage Tide (to 18th), and in both cases the non-casters were more like henchmen after 12th level or so. Between the wizard casting save-or-die/save-or-suck spells and the druid casting spells and wild shaping into a bear to out-fight the fighters, and both of them summoning monsters that could out-fight the fighters... well, the poor barbarian in Savage Tide was a bit out of place. At least the bard could still use Diplomacy!
IMO the new rules accomplish virtually nothing.
At high levels, I agree, because casting defensively is still an auto-success. Unless you meant the "new rules" I had proposed?
I think the new way is awesome. Casters, specially Arcane, where nigh unstopable, expecially at high levels, why shouldn't the warriors have a chance?This is the textbook mage nerfing excuse but I have to ask-did you ever actually play in a high level campaign? I've played in two that reached epic levels and honestly wizards were sub-par in combat. Where they've always shined is utility, the stuff that other classes can't or won't do. Sure I can scrye on an opponent, buff myself based on his percieved offensive capability, teleport to his location, timestop to set up the perfect situation, and obliterate him. But the new combat casting rules hasn't changed that, only when I'm unprepared and feebly trying to fireball a red dragon can I be swatted into a red smear or lose my spell.
IMO the new rules accomplish virtually nothing.
I really thought the same. And I am one of the most obstinate people I know still I tried it from level 4 to level 10 with the group and saw it's effect. It put the fear of failure in the cleric's eyes, and that is good, but he felt unable to overcome that fear even with combat casting. So I came up with the improved combat casting. It's not perfect but now he tries to avoid situations he can and will try DC when he must. It has forced him to be more reactive to the battle field flow, that to me is a possitive.
I think the new way is awesome. Casters, specially Arcane, where nigh unstopable, expecially at high levels, why shouldn't the warriors have a chance?This is the textbook mage nerfing excuse but I have to ask-did you ever actually play in a high level campaign? I've played in two that reached epic levels and honestly wizards were sub-par in combat.
If the casters you saw were subpar, it was entirely the result of their player's choices. I've not only played, I've DMed almost every single week since third edition was released (Actually most weekends going back to the mid 80's, but we're just talking about d20 based stuff here). (And yeah, I'm a huge geek, yes, I am aware of this. Not that worried about it.)
Wizards and Sorcerers were unbelievably good if you switched from trying to deal damage to using control effects. Damage was somewhat balanced and ranged from slightly better to slightly worse than melee characters could deal, depending on what sourcebooks were available, but spells like Slow and Glitterdust were insanely good. Add in the wide variety of disabling spells, and it means a prepared wizard/sorc is almost always going to be casting against his target's bad saves, drastically increasing the odds the effect would bring the whole combat to a sudden end, as the previously threatening opponents became near invalid targets just waiting to be cleaned up by the caster's henchmen.. I mean underlings.. I mean "fellow adventurers"
Hooray for anecdotal evidence! It solves nothing but sure makes us feel good, don't it? :)
Heh, which side were arguing for/against here? So far, both are providing lots of anecdotes.
Since we're all sharing our favourite anecdotes:
Out of all the spellcasters I've played in 3.5/Pathfinder (a dozen or more), I've had to make a Concentration check maybe three or four times (not counting psionic characters). Therefore I never found that Concentration was a "skill tax" and indeed I often skimped on it.
Aren't anecdotes fun? :-)
All of them. ;)
Heh, good answer.
Hooray for anecdotal evidence! It solves nothing but sure makes us feel good, don't it? :)
Well, they answer the question, "have any of you actually played in a high-level campaign?" My anecdotes answered that in the affirmative.
|
Back in 1e, a 20d6 spell was a lot of damage...only that oldest dragons had more than that.
in 2e, dragons got buffed, spells got a minor slap (magic missile reduced to max 5 missiles, things like that.)
in 3x Everything got way more HP...Dragons ran in the hundreds, a CR9 giant can't be 1-shoted with a fireball now...
in PFRPG, spells got no love, melee got better and casters still got no love...
I have to agree, for utility casters are king, with holds, charms, debuffs etc...but lots of people want to blow things up...Add a line of feats that boost and remove restrictions to damaging spells for casters...
I want to do a 30d6 fireball, maximized to 180 dmg (save for half). I want to let 10 magic missiles fly again, I want to be able to kill a normal giant in 1 shot...
There are already breaks in the system for damage, at upper levels there are saves for none or half, and there is spell resistance. (remove the 25 cap for SR also....too easy to break 25 with a level 20 GSP caster..AKA auto)
And I am one of the most obstinate people I know still I tried it from level 4 to level 10 with the group and saw it's effect.
Yeah, you quit just before defensive casting returned to the auto-success it always used to be. Like I said (three times now?), the final PF rule penalizes low-level casters disproportionately.
And I am one of the most obstinate people I know still I tried it from level 4 to level 10 with the group and saw it's effect.Yeah, you quit just before defensive casting returned to the auto-success it always used to be. Like I said (three times now?), the final PF rule penalizes low-level casters disproportionately.
Which is why I'm going to try your solution, and if that doesn't work go back to being a skill. Most of the games I play and DM in go from 1-15 or 1-17 at most. I see no reason to make a player struggle to play the character s/he wants to play just to suddenly succeed all the time towards the end. Maybe I'm being alarmist to a point, I can only base this on my initial assessment and the test encounter I ran at 7th level. I'll try a few more test encounters later, and use next gaming session this sunday as a test bed for a few techniques, but as of now I'm not too optimistic.
My wizard in second darkness might just end up being swapped out for a cleric :)