Is the fact it's now INT-based your problem with it?
I could see Spellcraft & Know:Arcana being merged, personally.
Then Autohypnosis could be merged with Concentration (CON) as suggested.
Exactly what I've done. Spellcraft was merged with Knowledge (Religion) and Knowledge (Arcana), Autohypnosis was thrown in with Concentration, and Martial Lore was merged with Knowledge (History).
Concentration needs to stay a specific skill, in part because an INT based skill favors wizards over other casters, and because several other classes rely upon Concentration (psionic characters and martial adepts among them).
There was a lot of discussion on this during the Alpha, but since the Beta it's been mostly silent. Jason seems intent on Spellcraft for reasons I can't begin to fathom, though...
|
For me, it is two thinks I really dislike.
1.) is that Spellcraft has always been way to overused as a skill. It can already do a lot of things by itself, and really does not need anything else attached to it.
2.) is that it is both because it Int based and because it favores Wizards over every other Caster, when Wizards should in my opinion, be the ones with the worst chance of maintaining such power when push comes to shove (under the assumption that their craft is the most delicate and hazardous to handle).
I also agree that there needs to be Con based skills, and there are (where) plenty of uses for Concentration besides spell casting.
|
What manoeuvres need a Concentration check?I am running RotR and one player has a warblade, some of his maneuvers call fo a concentraion check, which in pathfinder is now subsumed into spellcraft, but this feels wrong for the class.
Any ideas?
Moment of perfection, mind over body, sapphire nightmare blade and others
|
|
Exactly what I've done. Spellcraft was merged with Knowledge (Religion) and Knowledge (Arcana), Autohypnosis was thrown in with Concentration, and Martial Lore was merged with Knowledge (History).
Concentration needs to stay a specific skill, in part because an INT based skill favors wizards over other casters, and because several other classes rely upon Concentration (psionic characters and martial adepts among them).
There was a lot of discussion on this during the Alpha, but since the Beta it's been mostly silent. Jason seems intent on Spellcraft for reasons I can't begin to fathom, though...
I agree and the Pathfinder rules are silent on drinking a potion in combat (in 3.5 it was DC 15 concentration check) it says it draws an AoO but mentions nothing of how to avoid it as it did in 3.5
|
I am running RotR and one player has a warblade, some of his maneuvers call fo a concentraion check, which in pathfinder is now subsumed into spellcraft, but this feels wrong for the class.
Any ideas?
What manoeuvres need a Concentration check?
Moment of perfection, mind over body, sapphire nightmare blade and others
Oh geez, my mind was vapour-locked or something. When I read "warblade" I was thinking it was some kind of weapon and the class escaped my consciousness. :)
To be entirely fair, though, ToB stuff barely worked with v3.5 D&D (it was a testbed for 4e concepts that were shoehorned into a 3.5 book). I have to say, Mind Over Body is a funny one... you use a Concentration check in place of a Fortitude save... but both are based off of Constitution. How is that using the mind over the body? Just a side note, I guess... :)
That said, though, since you asked for ideas....
Just keep the Concentration skill for the warblade (as Beckett said)
Or have a new "number" for the Warblade and call it whatever makes sense... Strength of Mind or something. Key it to the BAB (which is going to be like a maxed Concentration skill) and then apply the relevant stat for the save being replaced for those manoeuvres (Dex, Wis, Con) - or just always add Con (since that is what Concentration would have done). Doing this also works to get the Warblade one skill point per level that is freed up and not needed for Concentration.
I don't think that it's going to be possible to include a solution, in the core Pathfinder rules, that will suit all of the addon material that WotC produced for 3.5. Some of that material is going to have to change slightly to conform to the Pathfinder system instead of the other way around.
Oh geez, my mind was vapour-locked or something. When I read "warblade" I was thinking it was some kind of weapon and the class escaped my consciousness. :)
To be entirely fair, though, ToB stuff barely worked with v3.5 D&D (it was a testbed for 4e concepts that were shoehorned into a 3.5 book). I have to say, Mind Over Body is a funny one... you use a Concentration check in place of a Fortitude save... but both are based off of Constitution. How is that using the mind over the body? Just a side note, I guess... :)
That said, though, since you asked for ideas....
Just keep the Concentration skill for the warblade (as Beckett said)
Or have a new "number" for the Warblade and call it whatever makes sense... Strength of Mind or something. Key it to the BAB (which is going to be like a maxed Concentration skill) and then apply the relevant stat for the save being replaced for those manoeuvres (Dex, Wis, Con) - or just always add Con (since that is what Concentration would have done). Doing this also works to get the Warblade one skill point per level that is freed up and not needed for Concentration.
I don't think that it's going to be possible to include a solution, in the core Pathfinder rules, that will suit all of the addon material that WotC produced for 3.5. Some of that material is going to have to change slightly to conform to the Pathfinder system instead of the other way around.
It's certainly possible to include a solution. Dissolve Spellcraft, roll identification of spells and effects into the Knowledges, and reinstate Concentration, integrating Autohypnosis into it (likely ditching the memorizing aspect of that skill, because that should be part of the Knowledges, too). Removing Concentration and rolling it into Spellcraft is entirely unnecessary and not really justified, and keeping Concentration allows for the additional systems of D&D 3.5 to continue to function.
And the entire discipline of Diamond Mind is keyed off Concentration, not just one or two maneuvers. The vast majority use Concentration checks to accomplish their effects - it's not just one or two things, and it's not something that every Warblade makes extensive use out of, either. For that matter, I actually don't find ToB to be an awkward system in 3.5. It's not the same as everything in the PHB, but it doesn't interfere with the system, either. I think it was rather elegant. If 4.0 had resembled ToB more and a board game/MMORPG less, I might have actually bought into it, because ToB is one of my favorite 3.5 books.
|
|
And that's fine, of course. I didn't really like it, but it's just a matter of taste - it seems to be a "polarizing" book... either people really liked it or really didn't. :)
However, since, as you said, it's "not the same as everything in the PHB", I think it's dangerous to try to design something for Pathfinder that is in place only to support it.
That's not to say I don't see the point of keeping Concentration. I tend to support its removal, but I also see some things that are now in limbo because of it (the warblade abilities being among them). Many can be resolved by making them saving throws and other issues could be easily resolved by saying that the Spellcraft skill is keyed to whatever your primary casting stat is (rather than forcing it to Int).
And that's fine, of course. I didn't really like it, but it's just a matter of taste - it seems to be a "polarizing" book... either people really liked it or really didn't. :)
However, since, as you said, it's "not the same as everything in the PHB", I think it's dangerous to try to design something for Pathfinder that is in place only to support it.
That's not to say I don't see the point of keeping Concentration. I tend to support its removal, but I also see some things that are now in limbo because of it (the warblade abilities being among them). Many can be resolved by making them saving throws and other issues could be easily resolved by saying that the Spellcraft skill is keyed to whatever your primary casting stat is (rather than forcing it to Int).
Concentration as a skill is also a key component of 3.5 psionics, though I suppose that's also something of a polarizing book (though it is core and part of the SRD). Certainly, you could go around replacing all of Concentration's sundry uses with random other skills, but it seems unnecessary when Concentration did the job just fine and Spellcraft is a more or less redundant skill with the presence of Knowledge (Arcana) or Knowledge (Religion) anyway.
You have high ranks in Spellcraft, so you can identify a spell as it's being cast, even if you have no knowledge of arcane magic and couldn't identify an ongoing spell effect? You know lots and lots about arcane magic, spell effects, spell components, and even famous wizards, but darned if you can't identify a spell being cast right in front of you?
It just doesn't make sense to separate those uses, and rather than trying to give Spellcraft additional use (by rolling Concentration into it), it's much more elegant and reduces redundancy to remove Spellcraft and render it part of Knowledges. I did the same for Psicraft and Martial Lore, for what it's worth.
Agree with Becket, but Jason has said he is looking this over again, and everyone has a bad call every now and then. I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out of it.
I advise returning to Concentration (with a Con), throwing in Autohypnosis, (makes Monks a bit more mystical), and leaving Spellcraft for identifying spells. But that's just me.
again full agreement on my part... we'll see what comes out though.
Creative Director
|
I am running RotR and one player has a warblade, some of his maneuvers call fo a concentraion check, which in pathfinder is now subsumed into spellcraft, but this feels wrong for the class.
Any ideas?
This is an excellent example of the kind of trap hiding in non-core books when applied to the Pathfinder RPG. In the core rules, only spellcasters have a reason to ever make Concentration checks, and expanding that to non-spellcasters is, in a way, against the implied design theory of the core rules.
Personally, I think that rolling Concentration into Spellcraft was a sub-optimal solution for this very reason. It works fine in the core PF RPG rules, and going forward we can make it work by simply giving any class that requires Concentration checks Spellcraft as a class ability... but it strikes a blow at backwards compatibility in cases.
We ARE looking at solutions, though; not sure if Jason's talked about them on the boards. My current favorite is to make concentration checks simply a caster level check or a Will saving throw. In the case of the warblade, you can simply say that his "concentration" check is a d20 + his warblade level + an ability score of your choice. Or simply make it a Will or a Fort save, or give him Spellcraft as a class ability as long as the Beta's still in flux. Any one of those adjustments works fine and keeps things running without breaking game balance for the warblade during playtest.
|
|
In core 3.5, you rolled concentration for doing most anything that would provoke an AoO, if the character was under duress (ie, not just spell stuff),. so I didn't understand why it was rolled into spellcraft anyhow.
Making it a will save seems to penalise the players.
The important thing here is to allow spell disruption.
Part of the power level difference between 1/2e and 3e with spellcasters having so much power is the new initiative system, and the fact that melee characters have to *hold attacks* to disrupt spellcasting. In a segment based system, the wizards turn came up, and he started casting. If he took *any* damage in the segments that the spell went off, he got the spell disrupted.
Now, we have the skill check. The fighters are *already* nerfed in that they have to hold an action to disrupt the spellcaster, and double nerfed in that they don't automatically lose the spell, now they get a DC 10+damage+spell level whatever check to succeed.
Spellcraft can be given whatever stat modifier based on your spell type, it is spell craft after all.
In core 3.5, you rolled concentration for doing most anything that would provoke an AoO, if the character was under duress (ie, not just spell stuff),. so I didn't understand why it was rolled into spellcraft anyhow.
While there are other cases in which Concentration is used, in the core I have seen no at no point where a character had to concentrate to maintain a skill. In every case from there it was used by a spellcaster to maintain their spellcasting power. Although I have also seen psionic characters use it to maintain/regain their manifesting power. The only other case has been with the mentioned Tome of Battle manuevers.
To me the list of skills that Concentration to is short, and if I take away the things that you would not use next to an enemy then the list becomes much shorter.
The only non-spellcaster with the skills that would need concentration for these other cases would in fact be the rogue. Having disable device and such it would seem to be an important skill for a rogue to have. Except it is not a class skill for rogue. If it really were the case that characters other than spellcasters were expected to use concentration, then I would expect the rogue to be at the top of that list. However, it is not, so I'm not as confident that skill use is really something that concentration is expected to be used for.
Making it a will save seems to penalise the players.
How?
|
|
Because will saves aren't a result of player's character-development choice and unless you set DCs really low they're going to be harder. Furthermore, as in my games concentration checks do get made by non-casters, you're basically saying that meleers are going to fail because of their will saves sucking (unless they take feats and even then...). Of course, that's a reflection of the wider problem with the save progressions, particularly at higher levels where it's either auto-fail or auto-succeed (indeed, that's a summary of several problems in D&D 3.x at higher levels and I'm not sure how it would be solved; PFRPG doesn't seem set to solve it, anyhow).
I quite like concentration as something that can be learned but that isn't rolled in with spellcraft, as in 3.5. I don't mind the idea in principle that it would be related to innate mental toughness as per will save, but then the problem of the choice of classes that have feeble mental toughness re-arises. It might be one thing to have poor will saves reflecting the fact that fighters are more susceptible to magical mental dominance (although, as I say, it's one of the things that makes the game suck at higher levels, it does have a certain sense to it) but when it also means that fighters are basically feeble in their ability to concentrate in the face of pain, that Just Doesn't Fit (and we know that realistically, fighters that make significant investment in high will saves are going to be pretty feeble elsewhere as a result and that just doesn't make sense in terms of the flavour of the class, the fiction we base stuff on, etc; these are "I don't have time to bleed" guys, not "ohmygawd, I broke a nail, can you believe it?").
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
As resigned as I am to Concentration not being in Pathfinder, I do think the skill should exist. Make it con based, and roll autohypnosis into it.
While it would lead to wizards and clerics able to ignore poison, walk over caltrops etc, it would allow the monk to do all those 'monk things'.
I don't worry as much about the 'skill tax' (see favoured classes bonus) but if you're adamant that the half orc sorcerer with a 10 int shouldn't be penalized, take spellcraft and roll it into knowlege (arcana) and knowlege (religion) for arcane/divine effects respectively.
It's never made much sense to me that the cleric can readily recognize a crushing fist being cast, or that the wizard can recognize a 'Harm'
Note, Knowlege (arcana) is still going to grow more powerful with expansions. Knowlege (religion) and Knowlege (psionics) aren't going to touch on alternate arcana, such as shadowcasting true naming or pact magic (though SoPM and VoPM would seem to hint that Knowlege (religion) would tell a fair bit about pact magic, which I'm fine with)
|
|
I have seen Monks do it before. The Rogue, under no circumstances, should ever get Concentration as a Rogue Class skill.
I completely disagree. The most important skill for a skill monkey is being able to perform skills in face of distractions. Anyone that cares about skills should be able to develop concentration and so everyone should have it as a class skill (although nowadays, 'class skill' just means a +3 bonus so it's not like before when you were only getting 50% benefit from the points you spent).
|
|
Rogues are more about luck and chance, and being tricky. They are the class types that rather than having focus on overcomming a problem, would try to avoid it altogether. Concentration is their weak spot, not their strength.
Eh? That appears to be one very particular sort of rogue you have in mind. One that could be achieved easily enough by taking no ranks in concentration (although I am not sure how your guy, who so lacks focus, managed nevertheless to excel in so many different skills)...
Personally, I think that the steely-eyed rogue picking a lock while the icy water rises around the party is a pretty good model for a different kind of rogue. Indeed, concentration on a particular task is obviously behind stalking and hiding and, for that matter, learning so many damned skills in the first place.
The concentration skill is okay but, IMO, everything that it does could easily be governed by a Will save instead...
Spellcasters already have good Will saves,
They represent the ability to focus one's mind to overcome outside influences,
There is very little difference in a character's ability to make a saving throw at about the same level they could meet or beat a similar concentration check, and,
It removes the "skill tax" associated with spellcasting.
I could go on but this isn't a pesuasive post - it's just how I handle the "concentration vs. spellcraft" issue in my game. I hope it helps.
|
|
Not at all. That is the callsign of Rogue, "Better lucky than good". By Focus, I mean focus their mind, willpower, and inner strength, not mechanically focus in building up skill ranks.
Well, my rogues aren't going for 'better lucky than good', they're collecting ranks in skills so they're actually good. I am not sure why the rogues would get so many skill points instead of there being some special "know-nothing-but-lucky" mechanic in which they could star, otherwise, either.
As I say, though, I don't mind if the thing isn't in the skill, but I do want the player to be able to relatively easily build a character of any class that can resist distractions without running uphill in sand, which is what making it a will save would do. However it's done, it should scale nicely (so not an ability check) and be available to all characters.
|
|
You are confussing what I am saying with the spirit and letter of the law. Rogues do (and should) get many skills and skill points. In this sense, they mechanically focus. In the sense of being able to focus your mind, and do all of the things that fall under the perview of the Concentration skill, should be the complete opposite of the way the majority of Rogues view the world, trying to take the quickest, easiest route.
take spellcraft and roll it into knowlege (arcana) and knowlege (religion) for arcane/divine effects respectively.
It's never made much sense to me that the cleric can readily recognize a crushing fist being cast, or that the wizard can recognize a 'Harm'
I love this idea.
Would Know:Nature cover Druidic magic? Hmmm...I just don't get how Knowledge(Arcana) covers all magical knowledge EXCEPT actual Spells...!?!?
From all the discussion on this,
Spellcraft/Concentration really seems the most problematic Consolidation.
Because will saves aren't a result of player's character-development choice and unless you set DCs really low they're going to be harder. Furthermore, as in my games concentration checks do get made by non-casters, you're basically saying that meleers are going to fail because of their will saves sucking (unless they take feats and even then...). Of course, that's a reflection of the wider problem with the save progressions, particularly at higher levels where it's either auto-fail or auto-succeed (indeed, that's a summary of several problems in D&D 3.x at higher levels and I'm not sure how it would be solved; PFRPG doesn't seem set to solve it, anyhow).
I might suggest that having it as a will save would be, in many cases, better for the melee characters as classes like fighter because they don't generally have enough skill points to put into concentration and skills to use concentration with.
Even with the difference between an average fighter's constitution and wisdom, I would think for many of them the will save bonus would be better than their concentration skill bonus. I would think that this would be good for them if even if you forced them to reroll.
Which skills are the non-casters being forced to make concentration checks for? Most of the ones I see either don't apply (bluff), possibly could be rule to apply but I don't think apply (climb, balance), and a few that could occur but still aren't going to be a common occurance (disable device, diplomacy).
Personally, rather than have concentration as a skill, I would like to see that in situations where the character is under stress that they instead take a penalty to the skill check, the DC they have to meet is increased, or be forced to make the skill check again. Like trying to pick a lock during an earthquake might have a higher DC than trying to do it normally rather than forcing them to make concentration checks, will saves, or fortitude saves.
I quite like concentration as something that can be learned but that isn't rolled in with spellcraft, as in 3.5. I don't mind the idea in principle that it would be related to innate mental toughness as per will save, but then the problem of the choice of classes that have feeble mental toughness re-arises. It might be one thing to have poor will saves reflecting the fact that fighters are more susceptible to magical mental dominance (although, as I say, it's one of the things that makes the game suck at higher levels, it does have a certain sense to it) but when it also means that fighters are basically feeble in their ability to concentrate in the face of pain, that Just Doesn't Fit (and we know that realistically, fighters that make significant investment in high will saves are going to be pretty feeble elsewhere as a result and that just doesn't make sense in terms of the flavour of the class, the fiction we base stuff on, etc; these are "I don't have time to bleed" guys, not "ohmygawd, I broke a nail, can you believe it?").
I would agree with most of this, but that generally leaves me thinking that the concentration checks should be removed and moved into the skill you are trying to perform. Since I sort of see the "ohmygawd, I broke a nail, can you believe it?" when I imagine when a fighter or someone else who can't afford those concentration ranks starts failing check after check because he keeps being distracted. I don't like that if, in an earthquake, a high level rogue picking an incredibly easy lock is just as likely to pick it as a low level rogue if both didn't put ranks in concentration. At that point it no longer matters how good they are and the master becomes just as good as the novice.
Another idea might be making a fortitude save for strength-, dexterity-, and constitution-based (just in case there is some other book that makes one) skills while using will saves for wisdom-, intelligence-, charisma-based skills, and spellcasting. That would make it an act of endurance to continue performing physical skills and a mental focus to maintain spellcasting and mental skills.
|
|
I don't mind if it's a skill check, maybe with Con or Wisdom bonus acting as the stat bonus instead of the normal stat, or something like that.
The skills that meleers would have to use in face of distraction would most likely be bluff for feinting, I would say. Rogues could be using other skills, Open Lock, Disable Device, Subterfuge Skills (hiding whilst in area-effect hurt, say).
|
|
Also, concentration should be a class skill for all classes. It's mental focus, and everyone should be able to develop it.
Ah, but it's *not* mental focus. That would be a Wisdom-based skill. It's based on CON, which means that it is physical training to be able to shrug off physical distraction. Seems to me that it should be something fighters need to roll every time they get hit by an opponent... ;)
I'm in favor of concentration not being a skill but instead just being what you call it when you ask the spellcaster player to make an ability check to keep from losing his spell. The ability would depend on the caster, ie, int for arcane, wis for divine, etc and the DC of the check would = the damage taken if hit, or something simple like 5 or 10 for non-damaging situations. Simple, clean, and straightforward.
|
|
I don't mind if it's a skill check, maybe with Con or Wisdom bonus acting as the stat bonus instead of the normal stat, or something like that.
The skills that meleers would have to use in face of distraction would most likely be bluff for feinting, I would say. Rogues could be using other skills, Open Lock, Disable Device, Subterfuge Skills (hiding whilst in area-effect hurt, say).
I am slightly confused now... are we making up NEW uses for the Concentration skill that never existed before as a reason to keep it? :)
The skills that meleers would have to use in face of distraction would most likely be bluff for feinting, I would say. Rogues could be using other skills, Open Lock, Disable Device, Subterfuge Skills (hiding whilst in area-effect hurt, say).
I don't think feint is an action you use concentration with, with the rules as written; since feint doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity and concentration checks are required only for skills that provoke.
From Concentration skill: "...or using a skill that would provoke an attack of opportunity. In general, if an action wouldn’t normally provoke an attack of opportunity, you need not make a Concentration check to avoid being distracted."
I'm not sure about hiding either, as most cases don't even require an action so don't think that it would provoke an AoO or require a Concentration check.
|
|
I am slightly confused now... are we making up NEW uses for the Concentration skill that never existed before as a reason to keep it? :)
No, that was the 3.5 rule (although as Blazej points out, feint wouldn't be included as it doesn't provoke an AoO; however, how about healing someone in combat, say they need stabilising?). Subterfuge skills aren't listed as provoking AoOs, presumably for reasons of logic, but if you were in an area of hurt I'd require them (as I think they would provoke an AoO if you were stupid enough to try them next to an enemy and in any case they would seem to be a natural application of the old concentration skill; hiding involves stopping and standing completely still, after all).
|
|
Ah, but it's *not* mental focus. That would be a Wisdom-based skill. It's based on CON, which means that it is physical training to be able to shrug off physical distraction. Seems to me that it should be something fighters need to roll every time they get hit by an opponent... ;)
Other than the Con bonus, is there anything about the skill and it's use that doesn't make it look like a focus thing? In any case, Con has a constituent of pain resistance, which is itself a mental issue, so it's not like Con is just about physical training in practice. However, the question of D&D stat inadequacy isn't one we're going to solve, because that choice was made over 30 years ago.
Also, concentration should be a class skill for all classes. It's mental focus, and everyone should be able to develop it.Ah, but it's *not* mental focus. That would be a Wisdom-based skill. It's based on CON, which means that it is physical training to be able to shrug off physical distraction. Seems to me that it should be something fighters need to roll every time they get hit by an opponent... ;)
that doesnt make sense, what would happen if the fighter failed such a roll? If you make it a required check there has to be something the subject of the roll would be penalized for, if the roll was missed.
If a fighter with 40 hitpoints, took 5 damage, what do you think should happen to him if he missed his roll?
Bleed? Stumble? Loose an action? Then that would have to happen to every creature in the game that took damage, can you imagine how many rolls (and how slow it would make the game) if that were to happen?
If you were aiming a longbow at full range at a man sized or smaller target and took some damage, it would make sense that this would disrupt/distract your concentration and aim... but in regular melee? Not so much.
|
|
Finally, what about spell-like abilities? Should all of those come down to spellcraft? To pick the first monster I looked at with spell-like abilities, Barghests aren't spellcasters other than their spell-like abilities and didn't have spellcraft in 3.5 (but Greater Barghests did have concentration). Their ability to use those whilst being hit shouldn't also give the other abilities in spellcraft...
As for meleer checks on damage, it'd make more realistic sense but D&D determinedly doesn't work on a 'spiral of death' combat mechanic.
|
|
Id still say not a good idea with the "based on your caster type", because of multiclassing casters. If you where say, 1/2 Cleric and 1/2 Sorcerer, realisticly, shouldn't you be even better than a single class caster, (understanding more in depth multiple views and methods for the same goal), butmechanically you would probably be only as good as whatever you specific caster level where in each case, or inventing some complicated rules for this specifically.
|
|
Also, concentration should be a class skill for all classes. It's mental focus, and everyone should be able to develop it.
Ah, but it's *not* mental focus. That would be a Wisdom-based skill. It's based on CON, which means that it is physical training to be able to shrug off physical distraction. Seems to me that it should be something fighters need to roll every time they get hit by an opponent... ;)
that doesnt make sense, what would happen if the fighter failed such a roll? If you make it a required check there has to be something the subject of the roll would be penalized for, if the roll was missed.
If a fighter with 40 hitpoints, took 5 damage, what do you think should happen to him if he missed his roll?
Bleed? Stumble? Loose an action? Then that would have to happen to every creature in the game that took damage, can you imagine how many rolls (and how slow it would make the game) if that were to happen?
It makes perfect sense - arguing that there would be a lot of rolls isn't any kind of statement about the sense a proposal makes. It might make it impractical in the game, but it doesn't really speak to the validity of the idea. Why do we have to apply it to every creature in the game when it's applied to the fighter, but when it's applied to the wizard it should be even more deadly and not apply to any other class... OK, so you liked the old way wizards worked. I get it. They don't work that way anymore, and I, for one, don't want them to work that way again... that's why I play 3.5 (or Pathfinder, now) instead of 1e/2e.
If you were aiming a longbow at full range at a man sized or smaller target and took some damage, it would make sense that this would disrupt/distract your concentration and aim... but in regular melee? Not so much.
Please explain to me why you think it doesn't make sense.
If you were aiming a longbow at full range at a man sized or smaller target and took some damage, it would make sense that this would disrupt/distract your concentration and aim... but in regular melee? Not so much.Please explain to me why you think it doesn't make sense.
it doesn't make sense that if a melee fighter takes damage that his attacks are interupted, because it doesn't happen like that in real life and doesn't happen like that in any fantasy book or film.
Making it so it isnigh impossible for the 3e spellcaster to be interupted actually nerfs the fighter. But all the people who like things the way they are cry "nerf nerf" when someone else wants something done about the problem 3e created.
spellcasting takes longer than swinging a sword, but the potential reward is higher.
the sword does 1-8 plus some minor modifiers. and even a goblin can do it.
The spell is limited as per times per day, takes longer to get off (traditionally), and can be interupted : there is the "balance" between the different actions/modes of attack.
Take away one or more of those and the balance is lost.
The rules are broken in 3e, creating a universe where the spells that take up pages and pages in a spell book (taking immense time to read and/or SAY) can be shot off faster than a sword swing, doubling the unbalance.
Being able to do full moves and cast two spells causes major issues in the effectiveness of anything that doesnt cast spells.
This wold be the same as a pistol being able to do the damage of a tank round.
Why would we have a normal pistol anymore?
Answer is we wouldnt.
|
|
it doesn't make sense that if a melee fighter takes damage that his attacks are interupted, because it doesn't happen like that in real life and doesn't happen like that in any fantasy book or film.
So, in real life, if you're in the middle of a big swing and you take a nasty shot to the leg that doesn't affect your ability to complete the swing as effectively as if you hadn't been struck? I think your real life is different from my real life. And as far as fiction goes, that's how a "good fight scene" works itself out... the hero gets beaten up, beaten down, can't get his attacks to hit, but finally, in the end, pulls it out. Heck, just watching UFC should be enough to show you that when you take a blow to the head, or the leg, or the ribs, that has a serious impact (pun intended :) on your ability to complete your own strikes.
Making it so it isnigh impossible for the 3e spellcaster to be interupted actually nerfs the fighter. But all the people who like things the way they are cry "nerf nerf" when someone else wants something done about the problem 3e created.
We get it that you like how it worked in 2e. That's *not* how it works in 3e, and I honestly don't think it's broken. It's a paradigm shift, if you will. This is the new reality. Yes, there is an opportunity to tweak it, but why would we regress the game back 10 years to use rules that no longer fit with the way the game is intended to work?
spellcasting takes longer than swinging a sword, but the potential reward is higher.
the sword does 1-8 plus some minor modifiers. and even a goblin can do it.
I am not a min/maxer... but the amount of damage bonuses that can be piled onto any fighting class, even at low levels, quickly dwarfs the die roll. For you to dismiss this as "some minor modifiers" really doesn't do it justice.
The spell is limited as per times per day, takes longer to get off (traditionally), and can be interupted : there is the "balance" between the different actions/modes of attack.
Take away one or more of those and the balance is lost.
Nothing has been taken away - you can still interrupt spellcasting. It's called a Ready action. But that's apparently not a sure thing for the fighter, so you want something else that is a sure thing, while complaining about it being a "nearly" sure thing for the wizard to avoid an AoO. AoOs are cheap shots. You want your fighter to use some tactics, use the ready manoeuvre.
The rules are broken in 3e, creating a universe where the spells that take up pages and pages in a spell book (taking immense time to read and/or SAY) can be shot off faster than a sword swing, doubling the unbalance.
Not true. First I feel you are working from a flawed premise (that rules are broken in 3e). Second, why do you think the wizard spends time at the beginning of the day memorizing spells? He doesn't read 9 pages of a spell when he casts it... he's tucked most of it away into his mind, and needs only a couple of words and gestures, maybe some components to finish it off. And it isn't quicker than a sword swing. I can get any 1-action spell off while your fighter attacks as many as 6 or 7 times, plus special effects, plus special feat use. Heck, if I happen to want to summon a celestial badger, I can't do anything else for the whole round while your fighter is running a little ginsu demonstration on the battlefield. To say that 3e has made casting a spell faster than swinging a sword is flat out wrong.
Being able to do full moves and cast two spells causes major issues in the effectiveness of anything that doesnt cast spells.
And I assume that you're referring to the Quicken feat in this example? The feat that means you cast a single spell at +4 (or +5? brainfart on that one right now) level slot just for the privelege of getting off a second spell in the same round? How many times do you think a caster is going to do that per combat?
This wold be the same as a pistol being able to do the damage of a tank round.
Why would we have a normal pistol anymore?Answer is we wouldnt.
We would if we could have piles and piles of free normal pistols and ammunition for them (ie sword-swinging fighters), while we had a very limited number of tank rounds that we needed to keep in reserve for when they are needed most (high level spells). Oh, and you'd also want there to be a very high chance of firing a lot of DUD tank shells, apparently. You choose a good analogy, you just didn't flesh it out far enough to actually demonstrate the situation.