OK, this is a varied topic, but I thought I could start it off with this:
An "easy" (by mid levels) 15 DC to not provoke an AoO and suffer a much higher DC check?
Once 15 is near automatic to reach, there's no reason NOT to Cast Defensively, since besides avoiding getting hit/damaged, you have the same chance to roll a Natural 1 if you provoked an AoO and it hits.
Honestly, if this is the desired functionality,
we might as well just choose a level after which Casting doesn't provoke, and save some dice rolls.
I'd rather have more give/take, like how FIGHTING Defensively works.
For it's benefit:
Why doesn't Casting Defensively increase your AC like Fighting Defensively does?
And it could either give a bonus to Spellcraft Checks vs. Disruption, or weaken the effects of damage
(like how DoT damage is reduced by half for purposes of increasing Spellcraft DCs)
And in exchange:
Your Spell Save DCs are lowered,
or the Casting Time is increased one more Tier,
or even just delay your Initiative until just after the last person to act of this round.... ???
(just throwing these out there)
There's definitely a place for Feats to increase the viability of Casting Defensively,
but I think the "base system" needs to be updated itself...
Anyhow, any thoughts on how this aspect could be improved?
Casting Defensively in it's current form should go.
An "easy" (by mid levels) 15 DC to not provoke an AoO and suffer a much higher DC check?Once 15 is near automatic to reach, there's no reason NOT to Cast Defensively, since besides avoiding getting hit/damaged, you have the same chance to roll a Natural 1 if you provoked an AoO and it hits.
Honestly, if this is the desired functionality,
we might as well just choose a level after which Casting doesn't provoke, and save some dice rolls.
As I recall, the DC for casting Defesively is 15 + spell level (pg. 72 of the Pathfinder RPG Rulebook, pg. 73 in the PDF). Granted that this check is easily passable with full ranks in Spellcraft for casters with high Int, non-Int based casters will have a harder time of it if their Int is more average.
Just an observation...
~Doskious Steele
Good point.
I'd honestly wouldn't mind if Spellcraft was merged with Know(Arcana),
and Concentration was somehow linked to Caster Level, instead.
By my take on Class flavor, Clerics should resist Disruption BETTER than Mages.
(1 of the options, Cast Def. raising AC, is more viable for Clerics with already higher AC)
/shrug
Freesword,
I like your solution very much.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Quandry,
This is similar to an idea I've posted before, which I'll repeat again here:
What if we look at this in an entirely different way. Instead of casting defensively needing a roll, what if it automatically works, but has a cost?
Any combination of these could be costs:
1) Casting time increases to 1 full round action instead of a standard action
2) You cannot take a 5' step that round
3) Your caster level is reduced by 1 (since you're not concentrating on the spell as much - this would make the option unavailable as a 1st level caster)
I'm sure there's other options to consider for a cost of casting defensively, this is simply off the top of my head.
If a method like this were adopted, two things would happen. First, the debate on should concentration be a separate skill again, or checks for it be based on casting stat instead of intelligence would go away. Second, the combat casting feat could be meaningful (instead of inferior to skill focus), and simply let you ignore the costs of casting defensively.
There would still be a place for a check to cast a spell under duress, such as when you are hit with a readied action, take continual damage, are on horseback, on a storm tossed ship, etc. In these cases, I like Jason B's suggestion to use a Will save.
Re: the lowered Spell Save DC
I was seeing that as analagous to Fighting Defensively's Attack Penalty, although Spell Saves work differently, mainly in that the DEFENDER rolls not the "Attacker", and there aren't generally many Situational Modifiers (besides Spells)...
Re: Higher Level Spells
I probably didn't make it clear enough, but I was referencing a separate proposal (that Jason has indicated is an option) in which your "Top 2 Spell Levels" are cast one "Tier" slower than normal (Swift->Standard Action->Full Round Action->1 round+FR Action), so "stacking" with the Defensive Casting Action would mean it takes 2 rounds to Defensively Cast your Top 2 Spell Levels (effectively discouraging that).
And my original post was only dealing with DEFENSIVELY CASTING itself, not the "Concentration" Check, which would scale with Spell Level as currently.
Interesting ideas, everyone.
Like you say Joel, by removing the "Skill Check to bypass Skill Check" aspect of Casting Defensively, we can instead have "Casting Defensively Feats" that actually give a more "unique" benefit than just a Skill Check Bonus, which tends to quickly "max out" against the non-scaling 15 DC, which isn't so interesting or dynamic. I could actually see a first pre-requisite Feat that gave a bonus to Concentration Checks, and then another Feat that bypassed some of the Casting Defensively restrictions, let's say:
Skill Focus(Spellcraft/Concentraton)
->Improved Casting Defensively: +3? AC, reduce Spell Level by 1 for Casting Time purposes
->Greater Casting Defensively: +6? AC, reduce Spell Level by 2 for Casting Time purposes
and Casting Defensively itself halves the effectiveness of any damage towards increasing the Spellcraft DC.
if you also have Combat Expertise, that bonus also stacks with the AC bonus of Improved/Greater Casting Defensively.
I feel there's promise here.
Please read the first post.
In my original post, I wrote:
I don't care if you approach this with your own view that Casting should be easy in Melee Range. If you prefer a different relative difficulty, or cost/benefit ratio, fine - you could probably get on board with the "Casting doesn't provoke" option I WROTE.
This isn't fundamentally about that.
I just think setting a moderate DC (15) to avoid a potentially much higher DC is absurd.
Why isn't there "Tumbling Defensively" or "Stealthing Defensively" by this logic?
Or why couldn't melee combatants roll to hit a DC15 to ignore the actual AC of their opponent?
Why is the obvious melee parallel (Fighting Defensively) structured around a TRADE-OFF,
instead of, say, a DC 15 Acrobatics check with no negatives?
I actually thought my proposed change to Casting Defensively ADDED some robustness to Casters, since it offered an easy way to HALVE the effectiveness (Disruption-wise) of ALL damage (including "DoT" damage or Delayed Attacks), as well as giving them the AC benefits of "Fighting Defensively" which they currently rarely use, since it isn't compatable with their "core class ability", Spellcasting.
BTW, please read the blue section of the first post.
Peace, folks. I don't think the previous poster was making any indictments, merely asking a question, and as was said, they didn't understand your (Quandary) reasoning.
This is just a game, and these are simply fan-based ideas, after all...
What if we look at this in an *important* way and realize that wizard/sorc/druid/cleric dominate 3.5e because spellcasting can't be interrupted.
In 1e/2e/hackmaster, when they start casting the spell takes so long to cast and any damage makes them lose the spell.
Meele in 3e gets a *double* nerf. Most spells are 1 standard action, so fighters have to give up their turn to ready an action to attack casters if they want to interrupt, AND casters get a (fairly easy) DC check when they take damage.
This is the primary reason casters are so overbalanced compared to high level hackmas- I mean 1e/2e play.
Can this *pretty please* be addressed? People might have more success with higher level games if the casters weren't so dominating.
I started playing D&D in 2nd Edition times, and I never understood why casting in melee was boosted so far in 3.5E.
Would it really be so unbalancing to just say: casting provokes AoO no matter what you do, maybe you can cast defensively to get a better AC against the AoO (I like that idea), but anyway facing a decent fighter you will have to roll against the damage dealt by the AoO to not lose your spell?
I mean, a higher level caster has a lot of options to avoid the meelee guys most of the time, like fly, dimension door, mislead, etc.
Of course, there are casters that depend on casting in meelee, like a meelee sorcerer or paladins. Would they be nerfed too badly?
That sounds pretty reasonable, Kenobi, and gives more of a reason to Heighten Entangle. Then again, Tentacle Spells already have their own CMB. The Spell Level shouldn't add onto that. So I don't know how "re-usable" a rule like that would be. Increasing Entangle's DC by 1 doesn't seem like the strongest reason to introduce a new general rule, if it doesn't actually have a broad effect.
Anyhow, I also forgot that I've seen another idea mentioned re: Casting Defensively:
Making it a Spellcraft check vs. Opponent CMB (Maneuver AC?).
I just wanted to mention it here, since it's been brought up on the boards.
That said, I feel it isn't really the best solution, for one because it's still keeping the Skill Check to avoid a Skill Check (+damage) which I'd prefer to get rid of (even though this option would actually make it a harder check @ high levels).
SO, what I have left from my original post:
Those sound like they would streamline play, fit with other game sub-systems (Fighting Defensively, Casting Times), make Casting Defensively a useful option without being a trivial formality, and even extend benefits to Casters: AC increase until next turn, assisting Spellcraft vs. ALL Damage including Delayed "Interrupt" Attacks (quite signifigant!) and "DoT" damage.
I hope this is productive.
...wizard/sorc/druid/cleric dominate 3.5e because spellcasting can't be interrupted.
This is one of the key things I hope is addressed in the final rules.
In 1e/2e/hackmaster, when they start casting the spell takes so long to cast and any damage makes them lose the spell.
Yep.
Melee in 3e gets a *double* nerf. Most spells are 1 standard action, so fighters have to give up their turn to ready an action to attack casters if they want to interrupt, AND casters get a (fairly easy) DC check when they take damage.
I want to keep raising this point in hopes that spell casting times are, across the board, increased.
This is the primary reason casters are so overbalanced compared to high level hackmas- I mean 1e/2e play.
Yep.
Can this *pretty please* be addressed? People might have more success with higher level games if the casters weren't so dominating.
/me is jumping up and down waving hands hoping this gets hit with the tweak-bat.
/me is jumping up and down waving hands hoping this gets hit with the tweak-bat.
this point seems important enough to have its own thread. posting now.