Author Topic: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?  (Read 12224 times)

Offline Libertad

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3618
    • View Profile
    • My Fantasy and Gaming Blog
Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« on: December 06, 2011, 08:11:24 PM »
Some options are so vital to a character's effectiveness that it's almost a given that PCs would take them.  Should it even be optional?

Concentration for spellcasters is so necessary it may as well be a level check.  A spellcaster who doesn't take any ranks in it is screwed if she/he ever gets within melee range or under hostile conditions (rocking ship, storms, etc.).  A battle Cleric wading into melee may as well kiss his spell slots goodbye if he's untrained in the skill.

Should Concentration be turned into a level check, or some other option?  I'd like to hear your thoughts!

Offline SolEiji

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3045
  • I am 120% Eiji.
    • View Profile
    • D&D Wiki.org, not .com
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2011, 08:19:15 PM »
Pathfinder did that.  There are a few cases where I wouldn't have concentration as a spellcaster, but those cases are usually specific builds which never cast in combat situations, and are probably not full casters or gishes.
Mudada.

Offline Mooncrow

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 983
  • The man who will be Pirate King
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2011, 08:22:17 PM »
As a skill, it also adds a few more options for those interested in really boosting it up. 

Offline X-Codes

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2001
  • White, Fuzzy, Sniper Rifle.
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2011, 08:26:58 PM »
To answer the OP:
Wizards have no excuse not to, and Druids fight on a scale that probably makes it a meaningless skill, anyway, but should still take it.

Clerics and Sorcerers, however, count Int as a dump stat, and have only 2+int skill points per level.  As a result, they may need to ignore Concentration at first in favor of other skills to qualify for PrCs.

Offline Thurbane

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • **
  • Posts: 133
  • 3.5 fanboy
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2011, 08:28:51 PM »
Pathfinder did that.
I believe Trailblazer did, as well.

Offline InnaBinder

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Onna table
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2011, 09:55:21 PM »
Clerics and Sorcerers, however, count Int as a dump stat, and have only 2+int skill points per level.  As a result, they may need to ignore Concentration at first in favor of other skills to qualify for PrCs.
This.  I had a player trying to go Sorcerer into Chameleon; there just weren't enough skill points to go around for his concept.  Granted, he wasn't big on CharOp, but still.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics.  Even if you win, you're still retarded.

shugenja handbook; talk about it here

Offline Mixster

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2011, 05:17:42 AM »
If you are playing a cleric focused on DMM Persist, it's not certain you need to cast spells while in combat, since most of your superpowers are on all day long.

I suggest making it a BAB test. That way, you nerf casters.
This signature reserved for the first awesome quote!

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2011, 07:47:37 AM »
If you are playing a cleric focused on DMM Persist, it's not certain you need to cast spells while in combat, since most of your superpowers are on all day long.

I suggest making it a BAB test. That way, you buff casters, by making sure all of them go for the best caster build instead of meleeing, etc.

Fixed.

Offline StreamOfTheSky

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2011, 12:26:45 PM »
If almost all of your casting is out of combat buffs and in combat swift/immediate spells (which do not provoke), Concentration could presumably become a waste of skill points for a character.  Also...there's a feat bards can take to use Perform instead of concentration, so...that counts as an example.  :)

Offline Mixster

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2011, 01:34:07 PM »

I suggest making it a BAB test. That way, you buff casters, by making sure all of them go for the best caster build instead of meleeing, etc.

Fixed.
And thus we find that no proper caster ever needs to put ranks in concentration. Thank you BB.
This signature reserved for the first awesome quote!

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2011, 02:10:04 PM »
That wasn't the point I was making at all. The point I was making is that turning it into a you fail check just means everyone's going to gravitate towards something else, and that something is stronger anyways.

Offline X-Codes

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2001
  • White, Fuzzy, Sniper Rifle.
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2011, 02:23:03 PM »
That wasn't the point I was making at all. The point I was making is that turning it into a you fail check just means everyone's going to gravitate towards something else, and that something is stronger anyways.
Except Gishes have higher BAB, and also have Combat Casting thanks to Abjurant Champion.  Therefore, they can make the checks almost as easily as a Wizard that mindlessly puts ranks into Concentration.

Offline zugschef

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 699
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2011, 11:29:10 AM »
That wasn't the point I was making at all. The point I was making is that turning it into a you fail check just means everyone's going to gravitate towards something else, and that something is stronger anyways.
Except Gishes have higher BAB, and also have Combat Casting thanks to Abjurant Champion.  Therefore, they can make the checks almost as easily as a Wizard that mindlessly puts ranks into Concentration.
do you realize that you are totally missing BB's point?

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #13 on: December 08, 2011, 11:30:42 AM »
Indeed he is.

Offline weenog

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 379
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #14 on: December 08, 2011, 11:36:25 AM »
You want to give the guys who already have nearly everything free shit just because it's obvious a lot of them want that shit?  Stupid.  Let 'em keep their skill point tax or be more careful.
"Whoops, forgot to roll my fire and holy damage."
"I doubt she's going to make a DC 111 Fort save, anyway."

Offline darqueseid

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 593
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #15 on: December 08, 2011, 12:12:22 PM »
I agree with wee, (hehehe).  Wizards have so many skill points it doesn't matter, sorcerers shouldn't be casting from combat anyway (5 foot step out of reach, people), druids have a myriad of ways to not be threatened through shapeshifting, and clerics just have to bite the Bullet. 
Its one of the reasons human is a strong choice for any caster.  extra skills cover what you need.  a cleric only NEEDs 2 skills, spellcraft and concentration, an argument can be made for knowledge religion, but being human gives em enough.

Offline littha

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2952
  • +1 Holy Muffin
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #16 on: December 08, 2011, 01:16:10 PM »
and clerics just have to bite the Bullet.  take Shielded Casting if they want to cast in combat

Fixed  :D

You do have to sink 2 feats and 5 skill points into it but its a solid feat.

Offline X-Codes

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2001
  • White, Fuzzy, Sniper Rifle.
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #17 on: December 08, 2011, 01:38:53 PM »
do you realize that you are totally missing BB's point?
I'm not missing BB's point, I'm pointing out that it's completely wrong.

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #18 on: December 08, 2011, 03:04:51 PM »
and clerics just have to bite the Bullet.  take Shielded Casting if they want to cast in combat

Fixed  :D

You do have to sink 2 feats and 5 skill points into it but its a solid feat.

Something that is entirely inferior to just paying a skill point a level, as that doesn't delay Persist and such by six full levels. The only possible reason you'd even consider it is Mage Slayer, but if those guys bother you there are many ways of avoiding being in their range even taking into account the obvious reach weapon.

Offline Mixster

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
    • View Profile
Re: Why WOULDN'T a spellcaster take ranks in Concentration?
« Reply #19 on: December 08, 2011, 03:09:52 PM »
That wasn't the point I was making at all. The point I was making is that turning it into a you fail check just means everyone's going to gravitate towards something else, and that something is stronger anyways.

So if I want to spend my skill points on diplomacy and knowledge arcana, I should just stay away from close combat and I'll be fine without concentration?

Awesome.
This signature reserved for the first awesome quote!