Game design: Spell Concentration and inconsistances - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Jared711 Apr 28, 2015 16:24:02	I have been playing Role Playing games for 25 years and I love game design. I have played DnD next in Beta and I am finally throwing my ideas around. For spells, I hope some things can be adjusted in a FAQ or a later version such as a DMG2 to provide optional rules. For spells concentration requirement is hit and miss. Because of earlier versions of DnD, concentration is a great mechanic for limiting how many spells are active at one time. There are simply some mistakes in the PH such as suggestion requires concentration and mass suggestion doesn’t. The buff spells such as blur requires concentration. Blink doesn’t not require concentration. Both spells should require concentration as they are both one minute buff spells. Mirror image don’t require concentration but probably should (1 minute buff). All short term buff/utility spells of likely 10 minute duration or less should likely require concentration. For hour duration spells, it is hard to say if they should require concentration or not? Long term buff spells like Aid or Foresight that last for 8 hours it makes sense they don’t require concentration. Given what is said above, concentration would be applied to more spells but a player should be able to concentration on two spells. Ideally, a caster should get a concentration slot for an offensive spell like grease, cloudkill, etc. They should also get a concentration slot for a buff/utility spell. A different and simpler way of doing concentration is you can have one minute duration buff running. You can also have a 10+ minute buff running. This means you can concentration on two different spells. This allows a wizard to have fly running and then cast a cloudkill. Suggestion for breaking concentration: DC 10 (less than 21 damage) up to a max of DC 20 (40+ damage taken). The Max DC 20 being the new part. I am not sure of the benefit of breaking concentration adds to the game. I see it as being most fun as applying to offensive based spells. Hit the wizard to break his wall of fire or phantasmal killer. My suggestion is that buffs or utility based spells can’t have concentration broken, only offensive spells. For spell durations: I like the concept of [encounter] [short rest] or [long rest]. The whole 1 minute, 10 minute, 1 hour, 8 hours, seems a bit more complex than it needs to be. [encounter] duration spells being a few minutes enough time to handle one fight and perhaps a fight that goes immediately into another fight. [short rest] duration spells end after an hour or a short rest is taken. [long rest] duration spells end after a long rest has been taken. These spells likely actually last longer than 8 hours. Instead of concentration you could simply have one spell of each type active at any one time. UPDATED: suggestion for concentration: 1. Keep concentration for offensive spells with a continuous effect. This allows villains or heroes to break out of a nasty on-going effect by targeting the caster. 2. All other spells with a duration should not require concentration but there should be a total limit as to how many can be active based on level. This may not apply to cantrips and doesn't apply to a duration of 1 round. At lower levels: Only one of each spell duration active at once. Example: 1. Encounter duration spell: Bless or hold person. 2. Short duration spell: Protection from energy (1 hour) 3. Long duration spell: Aid (8 hours) At medium levels: Here you might add multiple long duration spells. 1. Encounter duration spells: Mirror image or wall of fire. 2. Medium duration : Stone skin or polymorph. 3. Long duration spells: Mage armor plus animate dead. At higher levels: More multiple long duration spells. Probably keep shorter duration spells limited to one. Wizards might get a bonus on long duration spells as it's part of their main feature. 1. Encounter duration spells: Mirror image or wall of fire 2. Medium duration : Stone skin or polymorph. 3. Long duration spells: Mage armor, animate dead, simulacrum, contingency.
#2 Xeviat-DM Apr 28, 2015 20:07:36	Or maybe concentration DCs could get harder the more spells you're concentrating on?
(Reply to #2) CCS	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#4 mellored Apr 29, 2015 6:08:22	Suggestion and mass suggestion different levels. Having a higer level spell not take concentration is fine. Same with blink and blurr. Mirror image is a weaker buff, it can only block a few attacks. I prefer the variety. It allows you to choose a more powerful concentration defense spell, and a less powerful offensive spell. Or vice versa.
#5 sandvirm Apr 29, 2015 7:17:45	CCS wrote:
#6 Horwath Apr 29, 2015 9:14:30	CCS wrote:
(Reply to #6) Jenks	Horwath wrote:
#8 ModusPonens Apr 29, 2015 11:25:39	Jared711 wrote:
#9 LordTwig Apr 29, 2015 11:59:24	Jared711 wrote:
(Reply to #9) AaronOfBarbaria	LordTwig wrote:
#11 Jared711 Apr 29, 2015 12:14:44	ModusPonens wrote:
#12 ModusPonens Apr 29, 2015 12:25:20	Jared711 wrote:
(Reply to #5) CCS	sandvirm wrote:
#14 Dwarfslayer Apr 29, 2015 14:08:38	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#15 Jared711 Apr 30, 2015 14:07:54	To sum up my points: I like the concentration mechanic but only for offensive spells. (Hold person, banishment, etc). I don’t like the concentration mechanic for any other duration based spells. That said, there should be a mechanic in place to limit how many spells are active, I didn’t like the math and balance issues in 3.X version keeping track of 20-30 spells active. In DnD 5th, there currently is not a limit in place for non-concentration based spells and GM’s have to limit players. Imagine having 100 simulacrum clones active, animate dead, etc. Suggestion: Come up with a number of how many spells can be active at once and that is the upper limit, perhaps it would increase based on the level of the caster. And on the other end, turning spells that last multiple hours, but not actually all day, into spells that last until a long rest is a huge benefit for things like mage armor that would normally need 2 castings to cover the whole time betwen one long rest and the next.
#16 arnwolf666 Apr 30, 2015 17:09:22	I really don't think concentration is even neccessary in this game. Let the spellcaster go nova for an encounter and get slaughtered in the next. Although I would still tweak a couple spells.
(Reply to #16) AaronOfBarbaria	arnwolf666 wrote:
(Reply to #17) arnwolf666	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#19 mellored May 01, 2015 6:41:11	Don't forget the other 1/2 of concentraion feature. Mainly, you can break an ally out of a hold person/hypnotic pattern/ect.. by hitting the wizard.
#20 joeburgos May 01, 2015 7:03:32	I like the way 5e handles spell concentration, I feel no compulsion to break that. I am, however, considering allowing a simple system for Archmages (beyond level 20) to be able to do so as one of the Epic Boons.
#21 FFSAA May 01, 2015 8:20:05	arnwolf666 wrote:
(Reply to #21) AaronOfBarbaria	arnwolf666 wrote:
#23 SlippyNapkins May 01, 2015 15:41:46	While I think that the concentration mechanic is necessary in some form, I do think that it is overly broad and internally inconsistent. It also has the negative effect of limiting spell options when a player is "required" to consistently use their concentration slot for a given spell because it is much more mechanically advantageous than some other option. I think the designers went a little overboard with which spells require concentration to the detriment of differennt character archetypes. An small army of undead is possible for a necromancer but a summoner really only has one brute out a time. There isn't anything consistent with Blur requiring it but Mirror Image gets a pass other than the effect of one is stronger than the other. Similarly, I have trouble distinguishing the difference between Stinking Cloud vs. Fireball or Suggestion vs. Sleep. I would hope that individuals that approve of the status quo at least admit that the system is completely arbitrary.
(Reply to #23) randl	SlippyNapkins wrote:
#25 arnwolf666 May 02, 2015 14:50:40	You already get a save every round against effects like hold and paralysis. I would work more on writing spells then using the concentraiton mechanic.
#26 RCanine May 02, 2015 20:57:44	I'm sad I missed this thread because there's some nice analysis going on here. Well done, OP. When I think about the design of concentration spells, I think of it like I do a card in Hearthstone or Magic: the Gathering. Essentially, a concentration spell's value is conditional upon how long it lasts, so when evaluting it against other spells, you need to ask yourself whether you get value from it, even if it is immediately interrupted. So if I were designing spells for D&D, I would try to ensure that concentration spells either: Provided some immediate value, with greater value the longer they last, or Create effects that are stronger than similar, immediate options, such that the reward is worth the risk I see chain lightning as a good example of the former, and haste as a good example of the latter. Unfortunately, I see a lot of spells that would be good concentration spells that don't meet either bar, and spells that don't require concentration that do. Spiritual Weapon is a great example of something that should be a concentration spell, whereas beacon of hope, beast sense feel underpowered in that sense. It would be neat if casters had some means of "tying off a weave" (if you've read Wheel of Time) that made spells easier to overcome but don't require concentration.
#27 Totoro1968 May 02, 2015 23:49:31	I think some spells work great with Concentration. Bless and Blinding Smite are good examples of spells that give a benefit that it is best to consume ASAP. You don't hold onto Blinding Smite for just the right moment; rather, Concentration ensures you don't waste the spell by missing with your attack. Bless is similar in that you want the targets of the bless to use up the power so you can get on with some other spell. Other spells, like Blur, don't work as well for me. Compared to Mage Armor, Blur pretty much sucks. I realize you can use Blur to buff a person in armor and Mage Armor only works with an unarmored person, but it is still pretty lame in the sense Blink (one level higher) completely blows Blur out of the water and Mage Armor is better than Blur under certain circumstances. Heck, Shield is better than Blur in many circumstances. It isn't just that Blur sucks, though. It is also that Blur is no fun. Barkskin is similar (it can be used to buff lightly armored individuals better than Blur, but Blur is still better for the heavily armored). I think Barkskin is a better spell than Blur in many instances, but it is also not fun. I think a better approach for boring spells is to weaken them and remove the concentration requirement or increase the spell level required to cast them and remove the concentration requirement. Alter Self and Animal Shapes are not in the least bit over powered, but they are more fun to concentrate on because you are generally trying to get something done other than prevent the next attack from hitting you. Ongoing damage spells, like Call Lightning and Witchbold, also work nicely with the concentration mechanic, as do the save-or-suck spells (e.g., Confusion, Hold Person). One thing that seems relatively clear to me in all of these cases, though, is that spells would not seem to be horribly over-powered if they could be put in hiatus. The most powerful spells that require concentration only last a minute or so (or are consistent low damage options) and the utility spells sometimes last much longer, but don't help much in combat. So you could allow a caster to put a spell on the back burner while concentrating on a different spell, then pick up the spell that was on the back burner afterward (as long as it has not exceeded its maximum possible duration).
#28 Jared711 May 18, 2015 11:06:59	RCanine wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Jared711

Apr 28, 2015 16:24:02

I have been playing Role Playing games for 25 years and I love game design. I have played DnD next in Beta and I am finally throwing my ideas around.

For spells, I hope some things can be adjusted in a FAQ or a later version such as a DMG2 to provide optional rules.

For spells concentration requirement is hit and miss. Because of earlier versions of DnD, concentration is a great mechanic for limiting how many spells are active at one time.

There are simply some mistakes in the PH such as suggestion requires concentration and mass suggestion doesn’t.

The buff spells such as blur requires concentration. Blink doesn’t not require concentration. Both spells should require concentration as they are both one minute buff spells. Mirror image don’t require concentration but probably should (1 minute buff).

All short term buff/utility spells of likely 10 minute duration or less should likely require concentration.

For hour duration spells, it is hard to say if they should require concentration or not?

Long term buff spells like Aid or Foresight that last for 8 hours it makes sense they don’t require concentration.

Given what is said above, concentration would be applied to more spells but a player should be able to concentration on two spells.

Ideally, a caster should get a concentration slot for an offensive spell like grease, cloudkill, etc. They should also get a concentration slot for a buff/utility spell.

A different and simpler way of doing concentration is you can have one minute duration buff running. You can also have a 10+ minute buff running. This means you can concentration on two different spells. This allows a wizard to have fly running and then cast a cloudkill.

Suggestion for breaking concentration:

DC 10 (less than 21 damage) up to a max of DC 20 (40+ damage taken). The Max DC 20 being the new part.

I am not sure of the benefit of breaking concentration adds to the game. I see it as being most fun as applying to offensive based spells. Hit the wizard to break his wall of fire or phantasmal killer. My suggestion is that buffs or utility based spells can’t have concentration broken, only offensive spells.

For spell durations: I like the concept of [encounter] [short rest] or [long rest]. The whole 1 minute, 10 minute, 1 hour, 8 hours, seems a bit more complex than it needs to be.

[encounter] duration spells being a few minutes enough time to handle one fight and perhaps a fight that goes immediately into another fight.
[short rest] duration spells end after an hour or a short rest is taken.
[long rest] duration spells end after a long rest has been taken. These spells likely actually last longer than 8 hours.

Instead of concentration you could simply have one spell of each type active at any one time.

UPDATED: suggestion for concentration:

1. Keep concentration for offensive spells with a continuous effect. This allows villains or heroes to break out of a nasty on-going effect by targeting the caster.

2. All other spells with a duration should not require concentration but there should be a total limit as to how many can be active based on level. This may not apply to cantrips and doesn't apply to a duration of 1 round.

At lower levels: Only one of each spell duration active at once. Example:

1. Encounter duration spell: Bless or hold person.

2. Short duration spell: Protection from energy (1 hour)

3. Long duration spell: Aid (8 hours)

At medium levels: Here you might add multiple long duration spells.

1. Encounter duration spells: Mirror image or wall of fire.

2. Medium duration : Stone skin or polymorph.

3. Long duration spells: Mage armor plus animate dead.

At higher levels: More multiple long duration spells. Probably keep shorter duration spells limited to one. Wizards might get a bonus on long duration spells as it's part of their main feature.

1. Encounter duration spells: Mirror image or wall of fire

2. Medium duration : Stone skin or polymorph.

3. Long duration spells: Mage armor, animate dead, simulacrum, contingency.

Xeviat-DM

Apr 28, 2015 20:07:36

Or maybe concentration DCs could get harder the more spells you're concentrating on?

(Reply to #2)

CCS

Xeviat-DM wrote:

mellored

Apr 29, 2015 6:08:22

Suggestion and mass suggestion different levels. Having a higer level spell not take concentration is fine.

Same with blink and blurr.

Mirror image is a weaker buff, it can only block a few attacks.

I prefer the variety. It allows you to choose a more powerful concentration defense spell, and a less powerful offensive spell. Or vice versa.

sandvirm

Apr 29, 2015 7:17:45

CCS wrote:

Horwath

Apr 29, 2015 9:14:30

CCS wrote:

(Reply to #6)

Jenks

Horwath wrote:

ModusPonens

Apr 29, 2015 11:25:39

Jared711 wrote:

LordTwig

Apr 29, 2015 11:59:24

Jared711 wrote:

(Reply to #9)

AaronOfBarbaria

LordTwig wrote:

#11

Jared711

Apr 29, 2015 12:14:44

ModusPonens wrote:

#12

ModusPonens

Apr 29, 2015 12:25:20

Jared711 wrote:

(Reply to #5)

CCS

sandvirm wrote:

#14

Dwarfslayer

Apr 29, 2015 14:08:38

Xeviat-DM wrote:

#15

Jared711

Apr 30, 2015 14:07:54

To sum up my points:

I like the concentration mechanic but only for offensive spells. (Hold person, banishment, etc).

I don’t like the concentration mechanic for any other duration based spells. That said, there should be a mechanic in place to limit how many spells are active, I didn’t like the math and balance issues in 3.X version keeping track of 20-30 spells active.

In DnD 5th, there currently is not a limit in place for non-concentration based spells and GM’s have to limit players. Imagine having 100 simulacrum clones active, animate dead, etc. Suggestion: Come up with a number of how many spells can be active at once and that is the upper limit, perhaps it would increase based on the level of the caster.

And on the other end, turning spells that last multiple hours, but not actually all day, into spells that last until a long rest is a huge benefit for things like mage armor that would normally need 2 castings to cover the whole time betwen one long rest and the next.

#16

arnwolf666

Apr 30, 2015 17:09:22

I really don't think concentration is even neccessary in this game. Let the spellcaster go nova for an encounter and get slaughtered in the next. Although I would still tweak a couple spells.

(Reply to #16)

AaronOfBarbaria

arnwolf666 wrote:

(Reply to #17)

arnwolf666

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#19

mellored

May 01, 2015 6:41:11

Don't forget the other 1/2 of concentraion feature.

Mainly, you can break an ally out of a hold person/hypnotic pattern/ect.. by hitting the wizard.

#20

joeburgos

May 01, 2015 7:03:32

I like the way 5e handles spell concentration, I feel no compulsion to break that. I am, however, considering allowing a simple system for Archmages (beyond level 20) to be able to do so as one of the Epic Boons.

#21

FFSAA

May 01, 2015 8:20:05

arnwolf666 wrote:

(Reply to #21)

AaronOfBarbaria

arnwolf666 wrote:

#23

SlippyNapkins

May 01, 2015 15:41:46

While I think that the concentration mechanic is necessary in some form, I do think that it is overly broad and internally inconsistent.

It also has the negative effect of limiting spell options when a player is "required" to consistently use their concentration slot for a given spell because it is much more mechanically advantageous than some other option.

I think the designers went a little overboard with which spells require concentration to the detriment of differennt character archetypes. An small army of undead is possible for a necromancer but a summoner really only has one brute out a time.

There isn't anything consistent with Blur requiring it but Mirror Image gets a pass other than the effect of one is stronger than the other. Similarly, I have trouble distinguishing the difference between Stinking Cloud vs. Fireball or Suggestion vs. Sleep.

I would hope that individuals that approve of the status quo at least admit that the system is completely arbitrary.

(Reply to #23)

randl

SlippyNapkins wrote:

#25

arnwolf666

May 02, 2015 14:50:40

You already get a save every round against effects like hold and paralysis. I would work more on writing spells then using the concentraiton mechanic.

#26

RCanine

May 02, 2015 20:57:44

I'm sad I missed this thread because there's some nice analysis going on here. Well done, OP.

When I think about the design of concentration spells, I think of it like I do a card in Hearthstone or Magic: the Gathering.

Essentially, a concentration spell's value is conditional upon how long it lasts, so when evaluting it against other spells, you need to ask yourself whether you get value from it, even if it is immediately interrupted.

So if *I* were designing spells for D&D, I would try to ensure that concentration spells either:

Provided some immediate value, with greater value the longer they last, or
Create effects that are stronger than similar, immediate options, such that the reward is worth the risk

I see chain lightning as a good example of the former, and haste as a good example of the latter.

Unfortunately, I see a lot of spells that would be good concentration spells that don't meet either bar, and spells that don't require concentration that do. Spiritual Weapon is a great example of something that should be a concentration spell, whereas beacon of hope, beast sense feel underpowered in that sense.

It would be neat if casters had some means of "tying off a weave" (if you've read Wheel of Time) that made spells easier to overcome but don't require concentration.

#27

Totoro1968

May 02, 2015 23:49:31

I think some spells work great with Concentration. Bless and Blinding Smite are good examples of spells that give a benefit that it is best to consume ASAP. You don't hold onto Blinding Smite for just the right moment; rather, Concentration ensures you don't waste the spell by missing with your attack. Bless is similar in that you want the targets of the bless to use up the power so you can get on with some other spell.

Other spells, like Blur, don't work as well for me. Compared to Mage Armor, Blur pretty much sucks. I realize you can use Blur to buff a person in armor and Mage Armor only works with an unarmored person, but it is still pretty lame in the sense Blink (one level higher) completely blows Blur out of the water and Mage Armor is better than Blur under certain circumstances. Heck, Shield is better than Blur in many circumstances. It isn't just that Blur sucks, though. It is also that Blur is no fun. Barkskin is similar (it can be used to buff lightly armored individuals better than Blur, but Blur is still better for the heavily armored). I think Barkskin is a better spell than Blur in many instances, but it is also not fun. I think a better approach for boring spells is to weaken them and remove the concentration requirement or increase the spell level required to cast them and remove the concentration requirement.

Alter Self and Animal Shapes are not in the least bit over powered, but they are more fun to concentrate on because you are generally trying to get something done other than prevent the next attack from hitting you.

Ongoing damage spells, like Call Lightning and Witchbold, also work nicely with the concentration mechanic, as do the save-or-suck spells (e.g., Confusion, Hold Person).

One thing that seems relatively clear to me in all of these cases, though, is that spells would not seem to be horribly over-powered if they could be put in hiatus. The most powerful spells that require concentration only last a minute or so (or are consistent low damage options) and the utility spells sometimes last much longer, but don't help much in combat. So you could allow a caster to put a spell on the back burner while concentrating on a different spell, then pick up the spell that was on the back burner afterward (as long as it has not exceeded its maximum possible duration).

#28

Jared711

May 18, 2015 11:06:59

RCanine wrote: