So I like to visit the WotC boards periodically, because it's great for kicks. Today I found a whopper; someone posted a thread asking what a good 1st level feat would be for a sorcerer. Running down the list of a dozen or so posts, people suggested all kinds of things: metamagic, sudden metamagic, draconic heritage, regional...hmm something's not right...something's missing...Combat Casting! Amidst all of the suggestions, not one so much as mentioned this most basic feat in passing. So of course I posted the suggestion myself along with some not-so-subtle chides.
Anywho, I'm guessing that Combat Casting is so unpopular because of it's habit of becoming obsolete by high levels. So I'm wondering what y'all think about this issue and others like it. (I've heard mention of similar feats and options that become less useful with levels) My own policy is that of the epic Improved Combat Casting. (diametrically opposed to Spellcasting Harrier and Improved Spellcasting Harrier; my own versions to account for a balanced bonus/penalty grade) If a player isn't interested in that, he/she is free to spend a marginal amount of XP to 'trade in' Combat Casting for a more desireable one.
I'm afraid I agree with the majority ... Combat Casting is a waste of space at high level.
Yes, it may be very useful at low-levels, but I have a rather narrow view of how a character should operate ... you're either a front-line character or you're not.
If you're front-line and casting spells while in combat I'll be giving you a reality check afterwards; if you're not front-line, casting a spell and using Combat Casting then someone isn't doing their job keeping off the bad guys from the second-line.
In any case a 5' step is always a good option (assuming the opponent doesn't have reach).
I'm with Rowe and the others on this one. The casters in my groups never take this feat, myself included. A lot of times casters, especially clerics and sorcerers with 2+ skill points, don't put ranks into Concentration. As Rowe said the casters tend to stay out of melee, and if things hit the fan, either do the 5' step or if need be provoke with movement then cast the spell. Of course creatures with Combat Reflexes always surprise them, like I saw the other day while fighting harpoon spiders. Oh man, that gnome took a whallop!
By the way, Player's Handbook 2 is going to have rules for changing previously chosen feats, skills, and levels.
I'm afraid I agree with the majority ... Combat Casting is a waste of space at high level.
Yes, it may be very useful at low-levels, but I have a rather narrow view of how a character should operate ... you're either a front-line character or you're not.
If you're front-line and casting spells while in combat I'll be giving you a reality check afterwards; if you're not front-line, casting a spell and using Combat Casting then someone isn't doing their job keeping off the bad guys from the second-line.
In any case a 5' step is always a good option (assuming the opponent doesn't have reach).
My experience has been that a mage can never depend on others to keep him/her out of danger. Even if you're just fighting a few goblins there is a reasonable chance that one or two will go after the mage, and the fighter may not be able to cut down all of them in time. Maybe I've just had hard-knock DMs, but 5 ft steps and opening yourself to AoO are not options when you have a monk mage-killer NPC in your face. Nevermind that tarrasque droping on your head... Well anyway my personal motto is 'the fighter's job is to keep the baddies off my back, but hey s&+* happens'.
Any smart monsters will make a point to target casters first. Combat casting is an absolute must for all of my casters. With Skill focus and Combat casting and a 16 con you can start out with a +13 concentration check at level 1.
|
Any smart monsters will make a point to target casters first. Combat casting is an absolute must for all of my casters. With Skill focus and Combat casting and a 16 con you can start out with a +13 concentration check at level 1.
I agree - a DM who lets the spellcasters just stand at the back and cast spells with impunity isn't doing his job. Any intelligent monster will know the real damage comes from the mage with fireball, and will act accordingly.
Skill Focus (Concentration) is actually a better choice than Combat Casting. Yes, Skill Focus only grants a +3 vs CC's +4. However, Skill Focus always applies. Combat Casting only applies when you're casting defensively or in a grapple.
That said, I think both are generally poor choices mechanically.
Skill Focus (Concentration) is actually a better choice than Combat Casting. Yes, Skill Focus only grants a +3 vs CC's +4. However, Skill Focus always applies. Combat Casting only applies when you're casting defensively or in a grapple.
That said, I think both are generally poor choices mechanically.
Agreed.
And yes, it's likely that eventually, at some point, your spellcaster is going to be caught in a situation where he absolutely has to cast defensively. Nevertheless, you will get much more mileage out of some other feat (if you're playing wisely). So when that day finally comes, you just suck it up and make your roll (or figure out some other way of drawing the AoO out of your opponent before casting your spell).
I think a lot depends on your character's build and your style of play. If you're a wizard who takes care to stay out of harm's way, maybe you don't need the feat often enough to justify it. If you are a sorcerer who casts lots of touch spells, spectral hand is the way to go.
If the party depends on you for healing, the story is different, since you can't always move to a safe spot when you're trying to get the fighter back on his feet. Clerics can cast sanctuary, but it takes a spell slot that might be better used for something else, and you probably need to prepare at least 2-3 per day for a combat-heavy adventure. And if you're a bard, paladin, ranger, or druid, you don't have sanctuary. (In my parties with secondary healers, I find they end up buying wands of CLW and using their ability rather frequently).
If it's a medium-sized opponent without combat reflexes, sure, you can suck up a hit or two, but if you're dealing with something big and nasty, especially if it has improved grapple and a large maw, that might be a disastrous choice.
Also, you aren't always in a situation tactically where you can avoid melee--especially if you're outdoors. When the dragon flies over the party tank to get at you, or the burly hill giant overruns him and moves up so you can't get out of his threatened space with a five foot step, you want that feat, because his attack of opportunity may drop you before you can cast, and he's going to hurt you bad enough to require a high roll on your concentration check if you try to beat him to the punch.
|
|
Skill Focus (Concentration) is actually a better choice than Combat Casting. Yes, Skill Focus only grants a +3 vs CC's +4. However, Skill Focus always applies. Combat Casting only applies when you're casting defensively or in a grapple.
That said, I think both are generally poor choices mechanically.
I agree with the first comment, but rather disagree with the second. But I think it is a question of perspectives.
A wizard or mage would get more mileage out of the feat - casting spells is what they do (and pretty much all they do), whereas a cleric or bard does at least mix it reasonaby in toe-to-toe combat. Especially at lower level, having a spell slot fizzle is a big drag for a wizard, and a low level wizard doesn't have that many. So you can argue that it might be a worthwhile choice for a low level wizard or sorcerer, maybe a bit less so for a cleric or bard.
Yes, it gets pretty pointless as a feat at higher levels. But, if you have your spells fizzle at an inopportune moment, you actually might not make it to higher levels. That, arguably, is the point of Combat Casting. If a player (or character) is happy with the risk, take another feat. But since combat is a constant in this game, there are certainly worse choices than Combat Casting while you build up your Concentration skills.
As a side comment, most of my spellcaster NPCs take Combat Casting - they normally only get one or two shots off before being taken down, and it would be soooo boring if all they do is have their spells fizzle before they get axed.
As a second side comment, as mentioned above, a sensible, intelligent foe will clobber the spellcasters in the party first if they can. While you don't want to victimise a player for choosing a spellcaster (and possibly not taking Combat Casting) I think it is a bit dull to let the wizard just stand at the back all the time (even if that is where they thought they were standing). They should have to make those Concentration checks once in a while.......
As a side comment, most of my spellcaster NPCs take Combat Casting - they normally only get one or two shots off before being taken down, and it would be soooo boring if all they do is have their spells fizzle before they get axed.
Many of mine do, too - but it sounds like for a different reason. I don't seem to have any problems keeping NPC casters alive for 4 or 5 rounds - sometimes even longer. I give them Combat Casting, instead, because I like feats that assign a "flat" bonus to NPCs, because it makes them easier to run. Feats like Combat Casting, Improved Initiative, Weapon Focus, Spell Focus, and so on are easier to use during combat than feats like Combat Expertise, Power Attack, Improved Trip, and so on. There's nothing to remember - it's built into the stat block.
As a second side comment, as mentioned above, a sensible, intelligent foe will clobber the spellcasters in the party first if they can. While you don't want to victimise a player for choosing a spellcaster (and possibly not taking Combat Casting) I think it is a bit dull to let the wizard just stand at the back all the time (even if that is where they thought they were standing). They should have to make those Concentration checks once in a while.......
A 5' step is often times enough to get a caster out of trouble. Get towards middle and higher levels, and it's even harder to pin down a caster -- the ability to fly, greater invisibility, mirror images, blinking, cloaks of displacement, etc all provide protections to a PC wll beyond AC.
I have to agree that combat casting is, in large part, a waste of a feat except when it's being used as a gateway feat toward some prestige class or another, more useful feat. My personal favorite is the Shielded Casting feat from Races of Stone (and shielded Manifesting). If you wield a shield, you don't provoke AoO for spellcasting.
While reading this thread, however, a thought came to me to make the Combat Casting feat a more useful choice:
Variant Combat Casting [General]You remain calm and collected when casting spells in difficult situations.
Benefit: You may always Take 10 on Concentration checks when casting spells or using spell-like abilities.
Normal: You cannot Take 10 on Concentration checks when casting spells or using spell-like abilities in stressful situations such as casting defensively or casting a spell while grappled.
Good solution? Too powerful?
Variant Combat Casting [General]Benefit: You may always Take 10 on Concentration checks when casting spells or using spell-like abilities.
This might attract some players to Combat Casting, but it still doesn't address the fact that the feat becomes useless with a high Concentration bonus. Further, it makes certain other options obsolete: the Bladesingers (CW) gets this same ability as a class ability.
Here's my incentive to players to use Combat Casting:
Spellcasting Harrier [General]
Benefit: When you threaten a creature, that creature takes a penalty on Concentration checks to cast defensively equal to 1/2 your character level.
Special: A fighter may select Spellcasting Harrier as one of his bonus feats.
Another option would be to change the defensive casting DC to 15 + (2 x Spell Level).
Heh. Actually, I just found a published version of my 'variant' in Races of Stone: "Steady Concentration". It allows you to always take 10 on concentration checks.
In any case, taking 10 on Concentration checks is never really made obsolete by a high concentration score because it also applies when taking damage (like when someone readies an action to disrupt the spell). The higher your score, the more damage you can take and automatically succeed (and 9 more than if you assumed a roll of 1).
|
|
As a side comment, most of my spellcaster NPCs take Combat Casting - they normally only get one or two shots off before being taken down, and it would be soooo boring if all they do is have their spells fizzle before they get axed.Many of mine do, too - but it sounds like for a different reason. I don't seem to have any problems keeping NPC casters alive for 4 or 5 rounds - sometimes even longer. I give them Combat Casting, instead, because I like feats that assign a "flat" bonus to NPCs, because it makes them easier to run. Feats like Combat Casting, Improved Initiative, Weapon Focus, Spell Focus, and so on are easier to use during combat than feats like Combat Expertise, Power Attack, Improved Trip, and so on. There's nothing to remember - it's built into the stat block.
As a second side comment, as mentioned above, a sensible, intelligent foe will clobber the spellcasters in the party first if they can. While you don't want to victimise a player for choosing a spellcaster (and possibly not taking Combat Casting) I think it is a bit dull to let the wizard just stand at the back all the time (even if that is where they thought they were standing). They should have to make those Concentration checks once in a while.......A 5' step is often times enough to get a caster out of trouble. Get towards middle and higher levels, and it's even harder to pin down a caster -- the ability to fly, greater invisibility, mirror images, blinking, cloaks of displacement, etc all provide protections to a PC wll beyond AC.
All good points. I think we are agreed that Combat Casting is much less useful at higher levels. The point boils down to whether you want to take a feat at lower levels which is potentially very helpful then, but becomes much less so later. That is decision which probably hinges on style of play, both for the player and the DM, and (horrible phrase) attitude to risk.
Combat Casting is a fantastic feat at level 1 that gets weaker and weaker as you level up, to the point where it eventually becomes useless. The two best ways to counter that are:
Let the player swap it out somehow for another feat
Make it a prerequisite for another, more powerful feat.
Amen, brother!
By the way, Player's Handbook 2 is going to have rules for changing previously chosen feats, skills, and levels.
Hmmm.....I wasn't going to buy PH2 until I read this....curses, foiled again ;)
Hmmm.....I wasn't going to buy PH2 until I read this....curses, foiled again ;)
By the way, Player's Handbook 2 is going to have rules for changing previously chosen feats, skills, and levels.
I flipped through it at B&N and the "re-do" of the character section is very interesting. Will have to get it next paycheck (14 hours of overtime! woo-hoo!)
Speaking from a players perspective and how we attack spellcasters. There are many ways in which combat casting will help alot. Fighters usually charge spellcasters with large melee weapons and use power attack. Another way is for a bow specialist to use manyshot on the spellcaster. These attacks are made with a readied action to force concentration attacks. Giants can make great use of the first attack. Rangers and thieves have high enough spot and listen skills to identify the square if not pinpoint an invisible mage, an invisible mage is not silent.
Invokers often target other mages with their damaging spells. Try making a concentration check with the DC modified by the damage of a fireball.
The 20% (+4)does not offer a huge change unless the DC is very high. A 70% moved to a 90% chance of success is not major but a 20% to 40% chance is tremendous. Ask a mage if he would take a feat to give him twice the chance of his spell not fizzling.
Speaking from a players perspective and how we attack spellcasters. There are many ways in which combat casting will help alot. Fighters usually charge spellcasters with large melee weapons and use power attack. Another way is for a bow specialist to use manyshot on the spellcaster. These attacks are made with a readied action to force concentration attacks. Giants can make great use of the first attack. Rangers and thieves have high enough spot and listen skills to identify the square if not pinpoint an invisible mage, an invisible mage is not silent.
Invokers often target other mages with their damaging spells. Try making a concentration check with the DC modified by the damage of a fireball.The 20% (+4)does not offer a huge change unless the DC is very high. A 70% moved to a 90% chance of success is not major but a 20% to 40% chance is tremendous. Ask a mage if he would take a feat to give him twice the chance of his spell not fizzling.
Combat Casting only gives a +4 to cast defensively. In your examples the feat wouldn't apply.
Combat Casting only gives a +4 to cast defensively. In your examples the feat wouldn't apply.
Whoops, my examples were to show ways to stop a mage's casting. The first example would be how a fighter could close then threaten. I would prefer the skill focus concentration as well but that only became a +3 in 3.5, instead of +2 in 3.0, while combat casting remained the same. 3.5 made skill focus the superior choice. That is just the way it goes sometimes.
It still is great against grapples or (the best way to stop a mage). Still not as good as skill focus.
|
I like feats that assign a "flat" bonus to NPCs, because it makes them easier to run. Feats like Combat Casting, Improved Initiative, Weapon Focus, Spell Focus, and so on are easier to use during combat than feats like Combat Expertise, Power Attack, Improved Trip, and so on. There's nothing to remember - it's built into the stat block.
As an aside, does anyone else hate it when a stat-block has been jiggered about with, on the assumption the creature will ALWAYS use full Power Attack, Expertise, etc.
First time I saw it it totally threw me; I couldn't work out why the creature's attack bonus was so pathetic vs the party tank.I'LL decide if they use a tactic; if you must mess with the stat-block, at least make it clear.
As a second side comment, as mentioned above, a sensible, intelligent foe will clobber the spellcasters in the party first if they can. While you don't want to victimise a player for choosing a spellcaster..., ...I think it is a bit dull to let the wizard just stand at the back all the time. They should have to make those Concentration checks once in a while...
A good DM never victimises the PCs.
Not when he has NPCs who will gladly do it for him ;PA 5' step is often times enough to get a caster out of trouble.
Whilst this is the official line, I hate the way simultaneous movement in 3E has been ignored. The "5' step backwards" is a classic example of this.
If the opponent has used up EVERY bit of movement to JUST reach you, then fair enough. But if your new position would still have been within move/charge range, he'd just plough on through and still threaten you, surely?At least, that's the line I'm trying to push back home.
I know several DMs who allow players to hold a 5' step to counter exactly this sort of cheese.
Get towards middle and higher levels, and it's even harder to pin down a caster -- the ability to fly, greater invisibility, mirror images, blinking, cloaks of displacement, etc all provide protections to a PC wll beyond AC.
Exactly. You're a wizard; start thinking like one.
You don't need high-level abilities either; you can start by not looking like a damn wizard. I despair of figure manufacturers who parade an endless line of Gandalfs in their wizard ranges, or (God help us) the 'leather joy-boy Gay Pride march' outfit, as worn by Hennet (PHB, p51). What on earth is he thinking? There's a time and place for flamboyant fashion statements, but down the dungeon sure aint it. Doesn't he get cold?What are those buckles for? Don't they get caught on door-handles? Where does he put his component pouch (On second thoughts, don't tell me...). The whole ensemble is an accident waiting to happen.I see my wizards (just like my rogues) in practical, everyday clothing, such as that worn by everyday folk in dirty jobs. Tough boots, with thick soles, not curly slippers. Long, waterproof trousers, not a damn skirt. Oiled leather coat, with toughened elbow patches, not a silk kimono. Hair tied back or hacked off, not flapping around begging to be grabbed. When the party blunder into the villains, they shouldn't be able to say "Kill that wizard", at least not until I've let rip. Looking like the torchbearer/muledriver/ratcatcher doesn't half extend your lifespan.
For even more options, disguise self lets you look like anyone. They'll soon wake up when they get fireballed by their own 'henchman'.
Snorter, I was mentioning something along these lines just the other day. A glamored robe or belt to make the mage look armored.
|
|
Snorter, I was mentioning something along these lines just the other day. A glamored robe or belt to make the mage look armored.
How's this?
Belt of glamoured armour
Wearer appears to be wearing a suit of armour.
Limitations; appearance set at time of creation.
Any touch interaction reveals the deception.
Prerequisites; Craft Wondrous Item, disguise Self
Spell level 1
Caster level 1
Continuous 2000gp
Orignal spell duration 1.5
(10 min/level)
TOTAL 3000gp
(Possibly even slightly over-priced, considering the wearer's own appearance is not affected. If you want to include this effect, feel free.
If you want the wearer to have complete control over appearance of armour and facial features, it's possibly best treated as a charged or x/day item, to prevent them chopping and changing it every round. Whatever you pick, you're stuck with for 10 minutes).