Concentration Checks

[KnowTheToe]

During our Sunday game our DM and cleric got into a small tiff about concentration checks. The issue was is a magic user required to make a concentration check for every seperate attack he takes damage from or is it just one check per round will all of his distractions combined into one difficult role. We all pulled out our PHB, but no one could get a concrete answer.

We played by the GM's rule and moved on, but now I am curious...

 

[hong]

It's ambiguous, but I'd go with the interpretation of one Concentration check per attack. The attacks aren't occurring simultaneously, even if they all happen in one round.

 

[Crothian]

Only attacks that occur while he's casting the spell matter. So, unless he is taking a full round to cast or taking damage on the same intiative he is casting he will not need to make the check.

If one of the two excepts happened, he makes one concentration check for the total damage inflicted.

 

[IceBear]

As hong said. It is very ambiguous. I sent an email to the Sage about a week ago and still haven't gotten a reply back.

I play it that every attack that causes damage while you are casting the spell requires a seperate Concentration check. Artoomis, and others, are in favor of totaling all the damage that you took while casting the spell and make one check using that total. I prefer my method because you don't have to keep track of the damage total (which could be a long time before it's finally totaled in the cast of a 1 round (or longer spell). Actually, now that I'm thinking of it, I'm sure the one check per damaging blow is correct. If you were casting a spell with a casting time of 1 minute and you got hit at the beginning of the casting and then 59 seconds later, I'm sure you've shrugged off the first blow by then and I doubt it would impact the second enough to justify adding the two together. Also, if the first blow was powerful enough it could have disrupted the spell right then and there as opposed to waiting the other 59 seconds before you finally lose the spell due to the pain of the first blow I know that very few people would cast a spell with a casting time of 1 minute in combat, but I think by looking at how that would work you can see how it should work for one action and 1 round spells too.

One thing to keep in mind, spells like magic missles are considered one attack (as they all hit at the same time). So, you wouldn't make one Concentration check per missle, but for the entire volley.

IceBear

 

[skunian]

What they all said. I also agree with Icebear that you roll for each attack individually, it is also important to remember what Crothian said, you only have to make a concentration check on the initiative you are casting the spell. So an example would be: There are 3 combatants, Wizard, Orc 1 and Orc 2. Orc 1 gets a 15 for Init, wizard gets a 12 and orc 2 has a 9. Orc 1 goes and takes a swing at wizard hitting him for 3 points of damage, then wizard goes, (no need for a concentration check fromthe damege he took damage on 15 not 12), he can cast defenseivly to not provoke and AoO, and cast his sleep spell to make the orc go bye bye. If he does not cast on the defensive, Orc 1 gets an AoO hitting the wizard again for 3 damage and the wizard would need to make a concentration check to get the spell off (he was damaged on init 12). Spells with a longer casting time would cause you to make a concetration check each time you are hit until the spell is cast.

 

[Artoomis]

Here's how I would handle it:

Situation one: More than one person readies an action to disrupt a spell caster’s spell casting. Or one person gets multiple damage rolls somehow - like using shurikens or a the magic missile spell.

Situation two: More than one thing happens over time to possibly disrupt a spell with a casting time of longer than one action.

In situation one, I'd add all the damage together, as it happens all at the same time, despite the game mechanic that forces you to place them in some sort of order.

In situation two I would not add all the damage together - the damage is happening at different times (well, mostly - this is more a game mechanic issue than realism). I would, however, add all damage together that is round-to-round, like continuing acid or fire damage.


That seems to me to be most reasonable.

 

[EOL]

In my game I play it the same way Crothian does.

 

[IceBear]

Artoomis, these aren't really different situations. In your first situation they don't ALL occur at EXACTLY the same time as they are seperate attacks. Yes, they are timed to occur within split seconds of each other but they don't all hit at exactly the same time.

The rule on disrupting spells states that you make a concentration check when you take damage while casting a spell. It never describes two situations. You are making a house rule by seperating the two situations into two different resolutions (I'm not saying that it's a bad house rule, but I do believe that it is one).

As has been said, it's ambiguous and if you want to rule that way it's hard to disrupt it. I'll stick with my way.

IceBear

 

[KnowTheToe]

Thanks for all of the input. It reflects very closely the conversations we had around the table. The DM will be happy to hear this.

 

[Artoomis]

Well, I view several folks interrupting a spell caster as the equivalent of a "pig-pile" where a bunch of folks all jump on you at the same time.

The closest thing the D&D 3e game mechanic has to simultaneous attacks is if several folks ready an action to go off on the same trigger. In that circumstance I'd say all the actions happen together.

Of course, with a good Concentration skill and casting defensively, this all become moot anyway - at least at higher levels. And that's okay - it forces the combat spell caster to use up valuable skill points, a reasonable trade-off.

We disagree, which is okay. I'm mostly getting thoughts together to present both sides for my guide.