|
Actually, golems are rather weak in general, and weaker after the crippling, so not really. Meanwhile spells like Glitterdust end fights, even though the fight does not technically end after it is cast, the rest is just making it official. Other enemies with SR can do more when crippled. It's still not going to take much resources.
Golems aren't the strongest monsters, to be sure, but your summoned monsters are pretty crappy against CR appropriate monsters anyway. The DR that just about every golem packs makes it a definite pain for your summons to bypass, and they have to take the golem's attacks while they're whittling away at its hp. Glitterdust helps your monster not get torn to shreds in one round, but it doesn't end the fight. You make the enemy a lot less effective, but you don't win with it. You have to seal the deal with damage from some source, and summoned monsters aren't exactly the best at damage. But these abstractions aren't going to get us anywhere.
Suppose you're a 7th level Wizard who doesn't necessarily know he's going to be running into golems today, but he encounters a Flesh Golem. How do you handle it?
(I live in Westchester, NY)I went to intermediate school there -- I wonder if we know any of the same people?
Where did you go? I live in Croton-on-Hudson, kind of in the middle of Westchester. When I was young, there was a gaming store in Yonkers, called The Dragons Den, but they moved to the next county North of here.
If I get PbP going, you are of course welcome.
As for SR.
check here:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/spells-db
select SR: No, and see what comes up. Some good stuff (Wall of thorns!) but most of it isn't really "taking something out".
Where did you go? I live in Croton-on-Hudson, kind of in the middle of Westchester.
OT:
A few people I knew went to the Harvey School in Katonah.
I guess I didn't know many gamers (outside of my group of classmates) back then. I graduated HS in 1994.
Small world!
...snip...
well, i consider high ranks in the heal skill to equate to a more detailed knowledge of anatomy, like a doctor might have. i know a couple of orthopedic surgeons and i'm pretty sure they would be quite good at targeting critical areas were they trained swordsmen as well.
and the ride check is overpowered compared to what? the OP did ask for ways to help out the lower tier classes. besides, i limited it to targeted spells only. it could always have some limits placed on it too, like you can use just your ranks in ride in place of a save.
as for dazzling display, why is there that feat anyways? a high enough intimidate score should be able to do that. many feats fall into this trap actually. if i have a high enough skill check, why do i need to waste a feat to do something the skill should do by itself. i mean, what if i want to intimidate a bar full of yokels without drawing a weapon?
i admit, some of my ideas are definitely noticeably better than the way the RAW currently works, but that's really the whole point of this thread. IF you perceive an imbalance with different classes the only way to remedy it is to take something away...
Most people just intuitively know most of the key weak points. A slash at the neck has a reasonable chance of being lethal, you don't have to know that what you're aiming for is the jugular. A blow to groin, while nonlethal, will certainly incapacitate most. Piercing the left side of the chest is almost certainly lethal. This knowledge isn't the result of having an MD, it's the result of common knowledge. Granted people might not know about the last one during the dark ages, but they certainly understood the first two.
The ride check doesn't really help the martial cause anyways because arcane casters can just cast a first level spell and have all the same benefits. Also it just doesn't make sense.
"Hold Person"
"I hide behind my horse"
Maybe reflex saves are understandable because you can get your horse out quickly.
I have to sympathize on the intimidate point, but doing so leaves you with a bit of an issue of any feats in line behind dazzling display. Are they all cheaper now, or is it truly just a feat tax?
I think that remedies need to be made, but they have to meet three important conditions. First, they have to make sense. Second it mustn't step on the toes of already existing mechanics. Third, it mustn't swing the pendulum into the other direction.
But none of those spells actually win the encounter. You have to spend them and then a pretty hefty number of Summon spells, because even a de-buffed golem is still probably better than anything you can summon.
If the golem is about APL then the casters have access to a fun little thing in summon monster 5. It's the Ankylosaurus, DC 23 fort or stun every hit (only +14 to hit though). Against Clay Golem CR 10 AC 24 fort +4. That's essentially 50% chance for the golem to be stunned each round. Granted you could just do a dazing acid arrow and get better results with the same slot, but that won't soak hits and takes a feat (that you're probably going take anyways).
|
|
Golems also have low HP, so it still works fine.That particular golem has 79 HP, no save over +3 (at a level at which you have a spell DC of 17-20, without trying depending on spell level), is mindless, and can't see very well.
So let's see...
Silent Image, walk around.
Fog spell, walk around.
Grease, walk around.
Glitterdust, walk around.If for some reason you want to actually fight the thing, even though there's no point in doing so cast summons. Or better yet, let the Druid's pet solo it. After all I never assumed the Wizard was alone, just that there were ways around SR. I'm not quite sure where the no martials thing came from, but Druid pets aren't martial classes in any case.
I still don't see how Silent Image beats golems. It can still hear you in fog. It can still move at half speed while prone from slipping in Grease, and it can get up once it's out of the spell's radius. It can still hear you with Glitterdust.
If you want to fight it with summons, your piddly little creatures are still going to have a hard time breaking through its DR. Assuming you use Summon Monster IV, your best damage dealers are Hound Archons, Lions, and Grizzly Bears. But they still have trouble getting through DR. Let's assume you got the golem with Grease and Glitterdust, which gives it an effective AC of 14. I'm going to run the DPR on a Grizzly Bear factoring in the golem's DR, but I won't bother with the Hound Archon or Lion. If you're that curious about how it would look, you can run it on your own. I'm sure they won't be much better than the bear.
Grizzly Bear: .65(3.5)+.05*.65(3.5)=2.38875. Grizzly has 3 attacks just like that, so that's a total of 7.16625 DPR. Over the 7 round duration of the spell, that's a grand total of around 50.13675 damage. Not enough to kill the golem. If you were a Conjurer with Augment Summoning, your bear would probably manage to kill it, but if not, you're still spending two of your highest level spells killing this thing, which is a pretty significant expenditure of resources.
As for your Druid argument: If you have the rest of your party and you're fighting a monster of CR=APL, the fight will be easy. You're just stating the obvious here.
* spoiler omitted *
|
|
If the golem is about APL then the casters have access to a fun little thing in summon monster 5. It's the Ankylosaurus, DC 23 fort or stun every hit (only +14 to hit though). Against Clay Golem CR 10 AC 24 fort +4. That's essentially 50% chance for the golem to be stunned each round. Granted you could just do a dazing acid arrow and get better results with the same slot, but that won't soak hits and takes a feat (that you're probably going take anyways).
Constructs are immune to being stunned. A Dazing Acid Arrow still doesn't do nearly enough damage to kill the golem.
|
|
Victory condition: Defeat the encounter. Since it's a mindless creature, who is typically a sentry getting around qualifies. And since it has +0 Perception, there is also Invis and walk around.Also, you don't move at half speed when prone. That is only when not prone.
And you can assume a higher level golem if you'd like. Mindless creatures are free XP, so the party won't mind.
Not even touching on such things as the problem with the Berserk ability here. That makes things a lot worse, mostly because it means there is no golem.
Who uses a creature with +0 Perception as a sentry?
You move at half speed while prone. That's the rule. Grease can stop you from moving at all while walking, but it doesn't restrict prone movement.
You're missing the point about the whole party thing. I was saying that there's no way a Wizard can beat a level-appropriate golem alone without a pretty severe expenditure of resources.
Berserk is only for a few golems. I picked a Flesh Golem for my example because I wanted to pick a golem at a reasonable level.
Constructs are immune to being stunned. A Dazing Acid Arrow still doesn't do nearly enough damage to kill the golem.
If the golem is about APL then the casters have access to a fun little thing in summon monster 5. It's the Ankylosaurus, DC 23 fort or stun every hit (only +14 to hit though). Against Clay Golem CR 10 AC 24 fort +4. That's essentially 50% chance for the golem to be stunned each round. Granted you could just do a dazing acid arrow and get better results with the same slot, but that won't soak hits and takes a feat (that you're probably going take anyways).
Ah, forgot that part of constructs. Also the Acid Arrow isn't meant to kill it outright. It's there to incapacitate them while A) you get around / away or B) Let someone else chop it to bits.
You move at half speed while prone. That's the rule.
I think the closest rule to moving while prone is crawling:
"Crawling: You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl. A crawling character is considered prone and must take a move action to stand up, provoking an attack of opportunity.
|
Except you can't lose intelligence or charisma while lockpicking, and lock picking is a skill check, and you don't have to spend your standard action concentrating on casting a spell while your mind is on another plane...
But if you would like to argue those factors are neither distracting nor dangerous, or that picking a lock out of combat is distracting or dangerous, please continue.
The lock contains a trap, which you think is relevant that does Int and/or Cha damage. Ability checks are the same as skill checks except the latter add ranks. You are concentrating on... sending your mind to another plane, so no you are not distracted from that other plane. The very same thing you are focusing on.
Meanwhile by your logic even if the lock is not trapped you are so distracted by picking the lock that you cannot focus properly on the lock, therefore you cannot take 10 on anything, ever.
Now Abundant Step away.
Wow, you are really going to try to keep arguing this. Ok.
If the lock contains a trap, you can't take 20 at that is the one where risk of failure means you can't do.
You can still take 10 if it has a trap, as long as you are out of combat and not threatened or distracted at the time you are picking the lock. If in the process of picking the lock you trigger the trap, that was due to you not successfully spotting the trap during the search check, since both disarming traps and picking locks are disable device checks.
Contact other planes is a 10 minute spell that requires you to concentrate on casting the spell as a standard action in order to ask a question. Allow me to cite from the spell
1) "You send your mind to another plane of existence (an Elemental Plane or some plane farther removed) in order to receive advice and information from powers there" which seems distracting
2) "See the accompanying table for possible consequences and results of the attempt" which seems threatening
3) "You must concentrate on maintaining the spell (a standard action) in order to ask questions at the rate of one per round." which seems distracting
4) "Contact with minds far removed from your home plane increases the probability that you will incur a decrease in Intelligence and Charisma due to your brain being overwhelmed" seems both distracting and threatening.
5) "You must succeed on an Intelligence check against this DC to avoid a decrease in Intelligence and Charisma. If the check fails, your Intelligence and Charisma scores each fall to 8 for the stated duration, and you become unable to cast arcane spells." seems threatening and also isn't a skill check, which is what take 10 applies to. You know, skills like Disable Device.
If you like, I can also explain how Raise Dead works in pathfinder, since earlier you seemed to think it was still following the 3.5 rules? I would think it would come up a lot in your Pathfinder games, since you describe them as such meat grinders, I was surprised you didn't know the rule...odd that.
|
|
back to the original post.
i don't think you need to alter the mechanics of the "lesser" classes to make them more useful. As the DM you have the ability to change the world as you see fit.
Personally in the games i run if a player decides to go a physically less powerful but useful class such as a rogue, bard or what have you. i just create different challenges that play to those classes and add them in to the campaign. For example a wizard being an idiot and blowing his spell slots on what the rogue is trying to do? An anti-magic room with several locked doors, chests and many many traps is part of the dungeon.
Although this won't solve the problem entirely it will let the other members of the group see that the rogue is capable and useful with the mage simply trying to steal the spotlight.
Adding items other than the standard +1 ring of protection or whatever is always a good idea to. Adding a pair of gloves that give bonuses to some skills such as disable device also gives the party the hint that the rogue can do these things not to mention probably make the rogue better at the job than the mage.
All that being said i don't think its a good idea to force players into a certain role. If no rogue is playing i would happily welcome a wizard who focuses in those rogue like spells as a form of roleplay and a different character. Not all mages have to be battlefield control or blasters.
Also its always a good idea to note that i do sometimes favor the "lesser" classes with items and such that are slightly better than what the other characters have i make them specific so they don't intrude/hurt the other players roles that they have chosen and simple help to bring the lesser character in line with the party (not making them a powerhouse but letting them do there job)
IMO distracted equals not being able to keep focusing on the job, or focusing on something else when forced to make a reactive check (Perception check while you are busy showing the tavern wench your secret magic rod f.ex).
Threatened is easy. Threatened is a condition; inside someone's melee reach.
In the context of the discussion, then, how is it possible that you can be distracted by the exact same thing on which you are concentrating?IMO distracted equals not being able to keep focusing on the job, or focusing on something else when forced to make a reactive check (Perception check while you are busy showing the tavern wench your secret magic rod f.ex).
Threatened is easy. Threatened is a condition; inside someone's melee reach.
It isn't. Thus, you can take 10. And frankly, who cares? Taking 10 means average. Taking 20 is a hassle, and I think it should be.
In my view there are two things going on while you cast the spell. The first is that you are casting a spell, and you need to concentrate on keeping the magic flowing in order to ask questions at the rate of one per round. This is like detecting magic, making pretty colors with a Rainbow Pattern spell, or any of the other concentration spells. The worst thing that could happen to you from those spells is that you detect an "overwhelming" reading, and are stunned for 1 round, and the spell ends.
Unlike those other spells, which just require concentration, the ability check you need to make for CoP has SERIOUS consequences! You have your mind (a fairly important thing for most casters) on another plane, and for all you know, Demogorgon, Nic Logue, Asmodeus, David Lynch, or many other sick bastards are just threatening to crush your fragile eggshell of a mind. But they can't do it automatically... You get to make a check... you have the chance to save yourself from being a magic-less moron for the next month. If, if you can just make that check...
And you think there is no threat? That you should be able to take 10, cuz really, what is the worst thing that could like happen?
No way.
PS - With a casting time of 10 minutes, you are obviously not going to be in combat.
|
|
In my view there are two things going on while you cast the spell. The first is that you are casting a spell, and you need to concentrate on keeping the magic flowing in order to ask questions at the rate of one per round. This is like detecting magic, making pretty colors with a Rainbow Pattern spell, or any of the other concentration spells. The worst thing that could happen to you from those spells is that you detect an "overwhelming" reading, and are stunned for 1 round, and the spell ends.
Unlike those other spells, which just require concentration, the ability check you need to make for CoP has SERIOUS consequences! You have your mind (a fairly important thing for most casters) on another plane, and for all you know, Demogorgon, Nic Logue, Asmodeus, David Lynch, or many other sick bastards are just threatening to crush your fragile eggshell of a mind. But they can't do it automatically... You get to make a check... you have the chance to save yourself from being a magic-less moron for the next month. If, if you can just make that check...
And you think there is no threat? That you should be able to take 10, cuz really, what is the worst thing that could like happen?
No way.
PS - With a casting time of 10 minutes, you are obviously not going to be in combat.
Exactly. In addition.
"Take 10
When a character or creature is not in immediate danger or distracted, it may choose to take 10 on some rolls (specifically, skill checks). Instead of rolling 1d20 for the check, calculate the result as if the die had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible to take 10 . In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure—you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn't help."
It isn't JUST combat, it is distractions or threats, exe Combat, having your mind overwhelmed by an extra planar being, being on fire, etc...
Take 10 is specifically for out of combat not distracted checks. Take 20 is specifically for out of combat no risk, no distraction checks.
You aren't using a skill, you are functionally making a save as part of the spell against having your brain overwhelmed. Would you also allow people to take 10 on saving throws?
|
|
IMO distracted equals not being able to keep focusing on the job, or focusing on something else when forced to make a reactive check (Perception check while you are busy showing the tavern wench your secret magic rod f.ex).
Threatened is easy. Threatened is a condition; inside someone's melee reach.
So having to concentrate for the standard action portion of your turn to maintain a spell while your mind is on another plane is less distracting than a bar maid?
Keep in mind, the save isn't what you are doing, it is a risk occurring because of what you are doing. You aren't taking 10 to execute the spell, as you would take 10 to pick a lock. You are taking 10 to not have your brain turned to mush BECAUSE you are casting the spell.
You can take 10 on the lock pick, but if there was a trap in the lock you didn't disarm first (and you can take a 10 on that too), you can't take a 10 on the reflex save.
Take 10 means I am using one of the skills I have learned in a setting without distraction, so I can expect at least an average performance of that skill.
Interpretations like this that explain a lot of why people think casters are overpowered and skill checks are useless.
I understand your point, and you very well may be right.
However, the use of "threatened" in this case is clearly more broad then "in a threatened square". That is why they use, "(such as combat)" as an example in the take 10 rules. There are many ways to be in combat without being in a threatened square.
Pathfinder uses "threatened" in other ways: "Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor, help those in need, and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."
Obviously, the above quote isn't about an innocent being within melee reach of the paladin.
Honestly, it is magic and open to all kinds of interpretation. I consider the possibility of losing all of my casting ability and being rendered mentally deficient by some resentful extra-planar demigod a threat and an immediate danger. I think concentrating on a spell while fighting for my mind on a different plane of existence would be distracting. If you disagree, by all means, rule differently.
I don't think anything would cause either of us to change our minds, so I suggest starting a new thread asking for clarification on Taking 10, and specifically Contact other plane, and I will be the first to hit the FAQ button with you.
Concentrating on a spell is actually hard to do, seeing as you need to make checks in many situations to maintain that concentration, I'd not allow a player to take 10 on a disarm trap check while concentrating on a spell at the same time for example.
I do not think the spell in itself qualifies as a distraction for the intelligence check rather than a part of the spell's casting, that said since this is not a rule forum, I will say I'd not allow players to take 10 on this check treating it more like a saving throw.
I do not really like the take 10 mechanic either way, especially since you have to choose to use the take 10 option and if it falls short you have no chance of succeeding, I rather use something like getting a +2 bonus or have a result of at least 5 when you are not in immediate danger or distracted.
Ross has kindly asked on several occasions that we not worry about who is behind the posting name.
Welcome to the boards Liquid150.
I suggest we move this to a Rules discussion, and just hit the FAQ button, as we are arguing about "how magic works", and since none of us have any real life insight into magic, lets just let the developers tell us what they intended for the Take 10 rules.
PS
liquid150 - "A wizard may not ban Divination."
Ummm, you seem to be stuck in 3.5. The rules have changed.
Also, arguing that your point is "common sense" is very poor form.
I think there are problems with both sides of this argument.
The biggest problem with the pro-taking-10 position is that by RAW, taking 10 is applied to skill checks. The check to avoid being overwhelmed when casting Contact Other Plane is not a skill check; it's an Intelligence check. A lot of people (including me) probably do allow taking 10 or 20 on ability checks, but if you're going to get all het up about RAW vs. house rules, then there it is.
However, on the general subject of taking 10 on skill checks, I don't think the potential risks inherent in the task you are attempting should be considered a distraction that prevents you from taking 10 at that task. The wording of the rule seems to suggest that the danger and/or distraction must come from an external source. In particular, the phrase "immediate danger" suggests that the danger must be present right now, at the moment of the skill check, not at a potential future moment if you should fail.
Liquid150 makes a good point here. Otherwise, taking 10 would be disallowed on any number of routine checks where the rules clearly allow it: climbing (you might fall); bluff (you might get found out); heal (you might screw up and injure the patient); disable device (the trap might go off in your face).
You are explicitly allowed to take 10 without necessarily knowing the task's DC ahead of time. Thus you must be allowed to take 10 when the possibility exists that you will fail. Even if the consequences of failure are dire, I would not consider mere knowledge of the consequences to be a distraction. Indeed, you could argue that knowledge of the consequences can serve as a great aid to concentration.
I removed some posts. Play nice.
In response to Michael (nice name, it's mine too, sorry I was writing while you posted), it is specifically stated in the rules that you may take 10 on an ability check. Taking 10 applies to ability checks in the same way it applies to skill checks.
Whoops, you are totally correct. How'd I miss that?
well, yes, but intuitive knowledge isn't as good as actual training and study of the body, not to mention heal works on anything that is capable of being healed as far as i can tell. if you can heal it, you prolly know some good ways to quickly kill it too. and giving a slightly better chance of a crit with a heal check really wouldn't seem to be beyond the pale to me.
Knowing where to go for doesn't help you actually hit it. I know how to work through the Lagrangian in classical mechanics, but that doesn't help me solve the equations of motions. Knowing to do something is very different from knowing how. Slashing someone in the jugular and healing someone who has been hit in the jugular are two completely different skill sets.
well, either it's overpowered, or it's useless, is what you're saying? i don't see how it could be both. besides, i picture it more as the rider draws extra mental strength through the close bond with his mount, and vice versa. the whole is greater than the sum of the parts type thing.
Yeah, completely overpowered. It's fine for attacks because attacks grow much much faster than DC's. Breif semi-optimization at level 10:
Ride: 10 ranks + 4 animal affinity + 6 skill focus + 2 military saddle + 3 class skill = +25 + statDC: 10 + 5 spell level + 2 spell focus + 2 elemental focus = 19 + stat. You effectively autopass every save. If it were 3.5 I could get to around 22 + stat depending on the school within minimal effort. Even at level 1 it is still autopass (assuming human for the extra feat)
Ride: 1 rank + 2 animal affinity + 3 skill focus + 2 military saddle + 3 class skill = 11+stat
DC: 10 + 1 spell level + 2 spell focus = 13+stat
Overpowered in every respect from right from the get go at level 1.
In the context of the discussion, then, how is it possible that you can be distracted by the exact same thing on which you are concentrating?IMO distracted equals not being able to keep focusing on the job, or focusing on something else when forced to make a reactive check (Perception check while you are busy showing the tavern wench your secret magic rod f.ex).
Threatened is easy. Threatened is a condition; inside someone's melee reach.
I'd limit myself to rules as intended here. If it was intended that you could take 10 on the ability check to prevent Int/Charisma damage, why would the easiest DC be DC7? If you took 10, and had the minimum stat to cast the spell (15), your unmodified check would be 12. I really don't think that makes sense... you'd have to have a -6 situational modifier to your roll to have a chance to fail.
So, while it's not RAW, I'd certainly say that if taking 10 was an accepted response to the mental attack inherent in sending your mind out, they would have made the DC more variable... it makes no sense for a risky spell to be designed to have no inherent risk prior to casting. If you know the attack against you is going to fail up front, it's not much of an attack.
Also, you are concentrating on maintaining the spell and asking questions. Failure to concentrate causes the loss of the spell. As a GM I'd rule that that is separate from fending off the mental assault that can obliterate your mind, so you are being distracted by holding the channel to the planes open when the overwhelming planar force hits you. You can't concentrate on resisting the force, your concentration is already being used to open the channel.
|
|
In the context of the discussion, then, how is it possible that you can be distracted by the exact same thing on which you are concentrating?IMO distracted equals not being able to keep focusing on the job, or focusing on something else when forced to make a reactive check (Perception check while you are busy showing the tavern wench your secret magic rod f.ex).
Threatened is easy. Threatened is a condition; inside someone's melee reach.
Since the other post was deleted...
The wording isn't "threatened". The wording is "When a character or creature is not in immediate danger or distracted..." followed by "Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible to take 10."
The idea being you should be able to expect to make an average attempt under ideal circumstances.
You can take 10 to disarm a trap if you are trained to disarm traps, no one is saying you can't take 10. You can't take 20, but you can choose to take 10 rather than roll just like you could with picking a lock or making a climb check.
Now if you are trying to be quiet while picking the lock because you hiding from a nearby enemy, or you have to do it quickly before the bad guys come around the corner, or you are in a burning building, or extraplanar beings are trying to overwhelm your brain...those are distraction and/or threats that make you unable to take 10, because you are operating in a distracting environment, or one with immediate danger.
In the case of this spell, the ability check isn't the spell, it is a "save" as part of the spell. For the spell you have to use the standard action part of your turn to maintain the spell AND you have to concentrate on the spell in order to accomplish the goal of the spell, specifically speak with someone on another plane.
The check is a save against making you go insane while you do this.
The equivalent would be trying to take 10 on a lockpick while also casting a spell in the same round. Or taking 10 on the reflex save on a failed disable devices.
As someone else pointed out, considering the low DC save for the spell is 7, it's pretty obvious the intent was not for people to be able to take 10, and therefore be able to bypass the risk from the spell if they have an INT score of more than 6.
Which is another example of why I don't think you have to do much to adjust for "tiers" if you follow the restrictions and limitations built into the rules.
i'm not sure autopassing a targeted save while mounted is really that overpowered. having a mount is in general pretty limiting. i would like it to be based more on just the ranks though. maybe you can substitute your ranks in ride for your base save, but use the same modifiers as the base save, and if you fail, it affects your mount as well as you.
Having a mount is not limiting, it is an option.. it might be a limited option, but noway in itself limiting. You will get casters that refuse to cast spells on people riding horses for some 'obscure' reason, a slight bonus on reflex saves in specific cases with a good riding check I can imagine.. especially if the saves of your mount are better than yourself, or a feat that allows you to use your mounts evasion while mounted.
This entire post is wrong, and I have already explained to you why.
You are not distracted. You are not threatened. Your logic results in character being unable to take 10 on climbing when 300 feet up. This is wrong. It also results in a rogue not being able to take 10 to disarm a trap, ever. Simply saying "a rogue is trained in disarming" is completely irrelevant to the topic. A wizard is equally trained in his craft.For the last time, it is not a save no matter how many times you say it. It never was a save, and never will be a save. It is an ability check and you may take 10.
Ok. Can you take 10 on an ability check while maintaining concentration on a spell? That's my first question.
Because when casting Contact Other Plane, you are maintaining concentration to simply open the channel to the other plane and ask questions. Failing to concentrate on the spell causes the spell to fail.
Resisting being blasted by the overwhelming awesomeness of the power you are asking is NOT what you are concentrating on. If it was, then maybe you could take 10.
I would not let a wizard maintaining a spell take 10 on a Dex check to avoid falling off a moving platform, or take 10 to use a skill, or any other usage of take 10... because if concentrating on a spell isn't distracting, then what is?
And again: the concentration on Contact Other Plane is solely to open/hold the channel. If you stop concentrating on that to concentrate on resisting the mental onslaught, the spell fails.
Without taking sides in the CoP spat, I'm going to state the obvious: Spells like this are subject to a lot of GM discretion - so noone is ever going to win this argument.
As others have suggested, FAQ it and move on if it bothers you that much and you really want to know the design team's intent.
If you insist on continuing to try and "win" it, you've probably failed the Int check. :) Your Charisma is definitely dropping, in any event.