Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 wills2009 Sep 08, 2014 17:53:37	At first I didnt pay much attention to the new concentration mechanics, I was too busy reading spells and planning out casters. But now that I've been paying attention to it more, I cant tell you how many combinations of spells I've looked at that would work well together only to be stonewalled by the concentration mechanic nearly every time.    You can't build a general buffer/debuffer anymore who is able to do more than one thing at a time. What I find most aggrivating is how the decision on whether a spell has concentration or not doesnt even make sense in a lot of cases.   Traditionally powerful spells like haste that are well deserving of the limitation have it, as do a bunch of random spells of various power levels and situational uses. You can go ahead and haste your fighter but if you want to cast a simple protection spell on somebody else, nearly any sort of detection spell, or god forbid any type of CC or debuff spell on any enemy, you're out of luck.   Or even better. If I want to cast a cantrip like dancing lights, any concentration spell I have running is gone. Sorry haste, dominate, hold, or whatever else you cast the round before... That cantrip  is far too powerful to keep going at the same time...    I just checked and 153 spells out of 363 are concentration spells. That's 42% of the spells in the players handbook.     Does anybody else think this is completely out of control?   I like it as a way to prevent a hasted/stoneskin/polymorphed fighter from just steamrolling every fight, but why do so many marginally powerful and obscure spells have to share the same mechanic?
#2 Slyck314 Sep 08, 2014 18:00:50	Because wills2009 wrote:
#3 Zardnaar Sep 08, 2014 18:09:32	wills2009 wrote:
#4 wills2009 Sep 08, 2014 18:10:54	Slyck314 wrote:
#5 Brightmantle Sep 08, 2014 18:15:58	Slyck314 wrote:
#6 Zardnaar Sep 08, 2014 18:19:17	Brightmantle wrote:
#7 FallingIcicle Sep 08, 2014 18:27:00	Ridiculous. You really think you can hire spellcasters to just follow you around and sustain spells on you? Seriously? I don't know what kind of world or campaign you're in, but in most, 3rd+ level spellcasters aren't going to be willing to follow you around into extremely dangerous situations and be your buff bot. Even those that would aren't going to do it for cheap. And as for the really low lvel ones? They're easily wiped out with a single aoe spell from an enemy, ruining your not-so-clever scheme.   It accounts for party size just fine. Each party member gets to make a measured contribution, whether it's a fighter adding a set number of attacks or a spellcaster adding another concentration spell. It was the older editions that didn't account for party size, where each and every spellcaster added not just one but several additional buffs and debuffs to a fight, inflating the party's power exponetially with each additional caster.
#8 FallingIcicle Sep 08, 2014 18:33:45	wills2009 wrote:
#9 Zardnaar Sep 08, 2014 18:37:44	FallingIcicle wrote:
#10 wills2009 Sep 08, 2014 18:46:54	FallingIcicle wrote:
#11 FallingIcicle Sep 08, 2014 18:47:15	Zardnaar wrote:
#12 wills2009 Sep 08, 2014 19:02:48	FallingIcicle wrote:
#13 ORC_Cricket Sep 08, 2014 19:08:29	We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.   You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct   Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.   Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.     Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
(Reply to #6) Brightmantle	Zardnaar wrote:
#15 Zardnaar Sep 08, 2014 19:32:47	Brightmantle wrote:
#16 FFSAA Sep 08, 2014 19:54:20	FallingIcicle wrote:
#17 Rastapopoulos Sep 08, 2014 20:17:33	Zardnaar wrote:
#18 Furion_Thamior Sep 08, 2014 20:18:49	I see what you mean, but 5th edition really is a different beast. I encourage you to confirm your opinions with some actual play.   Combat in 5th edition is fast and furious. Even with some pre-buffing, combat has rarely lasted more than 3 turns for a medium/hard encounter, against my party of six 7th level PCs, which include a Paladin and an Evoker as the primary casters.    Single monster encounters get wrecked fast. Multiple creatures make blast spells such as fireball and cone of cold worth casting.   Furthermore, casters have much fewer spells per day compared to 3.X. This necessitates a careful rationing of spells that further discourages stacking battlefield control effects and buffs. 15 minute workdays aside, it means that the Evoker is usually best served dropping a nice battlefield control spell to divide the field (usually Wall of Fire or Evard's Black Tentacles) or casting Haste on the barbarian against a single foe, then following up with blast spells, counterspell, thunderwave, and grease to keep the rest of the battle under control.
#19 Zardnaar Sep 08, 2014 20:23:31	Rastapopoulos wrote:
#20 FallingIcicle Sep 09, 2014 4:33:00	FFSAA wrote:
#21 Zardnaar Sep 08, 2014 21:22:13	Do you need line of sight to concentrate? THe NPCs could wait amile or two outside the dungeon and conentrate from there.
(Reply to #8) Ashrym	FallingIcicle wrote:
(Reply to #4) Slyck314	wills2009 wrote:
#24 FallingIcicle Sep 08, 2014 21:44:24	Zardnaar wrote:
#25 Huntsman57 Sep 08, 2014 21:50:39	While buff stacking could be an issue of earlier editions, the concentration rule is pretty out of hand.    - once a single concentration spell is in effect the player is basically reduced to an invoker. The character's spell selection becomes extremely limited.   - multiclassing a caster with a frontline char like a fighter is just a bad idea because you basically want buff spells and since you get hit the most it will be very hard to maintain concentration. Shield and mirror image don't require concentration. Those are about the only worthwhile spells to combine with a fighter. Are they worth spending 3 of your fighter's char levels on the wizard or sorc class though...I don't think it is.   My suggested fix...allow no more than one concentration spell buff at once, but a total number of concentration spells could be allowed up to the casters ability modifier.   if concentration is broken it can be re-established with an additional check the following round.
#26 Tony_Vargas Sep 08, 2014 22:22:14	wills2009 wrote:
(Reply to #16) Slyck314	FFSAA wrote:
#28 Zardnaar Sep 08, 2014 22:27:50	Tony_Vargas wrote:
#29 TiaNadiezja Sep 08, 2014 22:33:27	Buffs need Concentration to avoid number bloat.   Removal spells without hit point gates need Concentration to avoid negating the HP system.   There may be a few spells that I'd pull the concentration reqirement off of, but not many.
(Reply to #26) Huntsman57	Tony_Vargas wrote:
#31 Regin_Vargtass Sep 08, 2014 23:24:52	I would point out that casting a concentration spell does not prevent you from casting another concentration spell, it just forces you to make a tactical meaningful choice of wether the new spell is more valuable than the first in the situation at hand. And I find that a good thing.   - Vargtass
#32 FFSAA Sep 08, 2014 23:47:51	Furion_Thamior wrote:
#33 danyc Sep 09, 2014 0:22:58	Concentration is by far one of the best additions to 5e.  It allows casters to do Awesome Stuff (tm) without doing ALL the awesome stuff all the time and totally eclipsing everyone. It removes the ridiculous Dispel Magic metagame of 3.5, not to mention arduous duration tracking.   I will agree that not all the spells that are Concentration need to be, but the game will always have good choices and bad.    I also expect to see class options, feats, or other rules expansions that will allow manipulation of the Concentration system eventually as power creep inevitably rolls in.
#34 arnwolf666 Sep 09, 2014 2:47:40	I do like concentration, just disagree with a few of the spells that need it and the consistency of certain spells.
(Reply to #19) Shiroiken	Zardnaar wrote:
#36 Zardnaar Sep 09, 2014 3:50:26	Shiroiken wrote:
#37 Irithil Sep 09, 2014 5:10:28	If you want to toy with another mechanic, just have an escalating concentration slot option.  Easy to add, and remove if it breaks something. Decision point comes with whether it should increase with multi-class levels (like total caster level 11 gets you two slots, versus 11 in one class).   I'd probably go with total.  As to what the break levels are, that's entirely up to what you want in your group.  I can definitely see an escalator for more than one spell having concentration, or being able to use a feat to choose a favored spell which no longer requires concentration (Innate Arcana: +1 to int, wis, or chr,  choose one spell which requires concentration - it no longer does.  etc).
#38 Timmee Sep 09, 2014 5:33:25	I personally, am grateful for the nerf to spell-stacking. However, I understand that others can miss that super buff experience and would offer that as a possible solution, one could have a number of concentration-required spells up equal to one's spell-casting ability modifier (or half, minimum two). Or three, as a general rule. You could impose a higher DC to maintain equal to "x" penalty  above the first, etc. If this makes sense.
#39 Cyber-Dave Sep 09, 2014 5:48:30	Concentration is one of my favorite mechanics of the game. It is definitely the primary reason I do not feel that spell-casters are overpowered compared to their martial cousins. I like the game as is. Overuse of (stacking) debuffs, (stacking) buffs, and the unexpected power gained from their combination, was one of the major issues of 2e and 3e (and it was a bigger problem in 3e). I didn't like the way 4e achieved balance. I find the way 5th has achieved balance is a GREAT change to this game.
#40 Otakkun Sep 09, 2014 5:51:49	wills2009 wrote:
#41 yakuba Sep 09, 2014 6:33:37	wills2009 wrote:
#42 CEBedford Sep 09, 2014 7:30:43	I like it. It bothered me at first but then I thought about:   1 - Potions! 2 - Multiple spellcasters coordinating their spell preparation. More teamwork, less one man army! That's a huge win IMO.   It will be fine, and promote the use of magic more evenly throughout encounters, rather than stockpiling buffs so that every epic set piece battle is undermined by an insane burst of power level, and an anticlimactic 2 round kill.
#43 VanRicter Sep 09, 2014 8:00:27	I have to completly disagree with the OP.  The concentration mechanics as well as advantage/disadvantage as opposed to the endless +1/+2 bonus stream are 2 of the best mechanics in 5th edition.
#44 autolycus Sep 09, 2014 8:02:35	The new mechanics mean that a caster must make meaningful decisions about what concentration spell to be using at any time.   This makes for a better game.
#45 wills2009 Sep 09, 2014 9:19:21	VanRicter wrote:
#46 Guest703856308 Sep 09, 2014 9:21:07	The lack of bookkeeping for running multiple buffs and durations is a big plus to concentration, it lets the game run a lot quicker.  One could reasonably debate whether certain spells should have the concentration aspect though.
(Reply to #45) 7he_professor	wills2009 wrote:
(Reply to #45) VanRicter	wills2009 wrote:
#49 wills2009 Sep 09, 2014 14:50:19	There are also plenty of spells that by all rights should be concentration but arent (based on logical projection from what other spells do require it)   Mirror image (casting 3 identical doubles of yourself that mimic your actions is apparently easier than bluring your form for 1 minute...) Armor of Agathys Blindness/deafness Blink Charm person False life Comprehend languages Spiritual weapon Tongues Fire shield Glibness Sanctuary See Invisibility True seeing Power word stun Foresight    All of these spells become substantially more desireable/powerful by nature of not being concentration based.    Concentration is a good idea to get casters under control, I was never arguing that. But if you start applying it to nearly every useful ongoing effect in the spellbook and limit it to 1, then inevitably people will only ever use the best of the best concentration spells, and not bother picking the rest. Likewise anything that isnt concentration and has any kind of ongoing effect becomes the go-to buff/debuff that people want to stack alongside their concentration spells.   Some of these spells may get changed (i.e nerfed) to have concentration.    I would have just rather seen the system deal with this in a more evenhanded way than just tagging a bunch of spells with a big C to limit them. Now every time a splatbook comes out people will jump all over anything that doesnt have concentration on it and the power will start creeping up again.   A simple limit of the # of beneficial effects that can be active on a PC, or a limit on how many active effects a caster can maintain in total (i.e more than one, probably less than 5) would have accomplished the same goals without needing to "mark" all the spells one way or the other.     One good balance I saw somebody suggest was allowing a caster to maintain a few effects but making it significantly harder to maintain concentration on them. Disadvantage on the save and failing means all your spells stop working would be pretty good incentive IMO
#50 Psikerlord Sep 09, 2014 15:05:31	I think concentration is bascially fine.... provided you pick up the warcaster feat. In one sense it makes the game more interesting because sometimes in the middle of combat hard choices will have to be made....
#51 Rastapopoulos Sep 09, 2014 15:17:10	Zardnaar wrote: