Casting on the Defensive alternate?

[grantham]

My players have decided that casting on the defensive is too easy. That's kind of funny, since making it harder will only hurt them.

Guess it shows that I'm not playing with a bunch of munchkins.

Has anybody else come to the same conclusion, and can you offer a house rule that's worked for you?

To quote/paraphrase one of my players:
I was going to suggest a rules modification.
Some of the rules almost seem like last minute additions that were not play tested well and do not work well or seem at all logical for game play. I hate the way Casting on the Defensive is done. A little too simplistic. At the level my PC currently
is, she will almost never fail an attempt to Cast on the Defensive and I am not sure if this is realistic. Here is my suggestion for a modification:
the third addition contains many circumstances where an opposed role is made for an action or the DC for a skill or feat is changed based on how hard of a creature you are fighting. I think CotD should be treated like this.
Currently, the Concentration DC is 15 + level of spell. I think it should be influenced based on the creature causing the spell caster to cast on the defensive. It is ridiculous that my PC would have the same DC when CotD against a kobold or a dragon. I think the DC should be 15 + spell level + (Monster Level - Character Level.) So, my 6th level PC CotD with a fireball next to a Kobold would be 15 + 3 + (1-6) = 13 and against the dragon (and I am completely guessing on the dragon equivalent level...) 15 + 3 + (9-6) = 21.
As another modification to this rule, I think the Monster Level should be Total Monster Levels within striking distance of the caster. I know that the rules are made to make combat run faster and easier. I think this is a pretty easy adaptation that would not slow the game down in any significant way. If there is a problem with the DM not wanting us to know monster's equivalent level, I can roll and he can secretly know what the DC
is and let me know if I make it.

[I think by Monster Level, he means either HD or CR, but perhaps attack bonus or BAB would work better.]

Comments?

 

[Crothian]

You could have the DC be 15 + spell level + threateners BAB

It makes it harder for everyone, but still within reach. I think your way actually makes it to easy for the caster as you are more likely to run into things weaker then you then tougher.

 

[hong]

You could use Monte's variant rule, which basically makes it an opposed roll between the spellcaster's Concentration check and the enemy's attack roll + spell level.

http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly5.html

 

[twjensen]

Like that one!

You could use Monte's variant rule, which basically makes it an opposed roll between the spellcaster's Concentration check and the enemy's attack roll + spell level.

http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly5.html

Sounds like the way to go. Similar to the reflex-save opposed tumble checks that we're already using to deal with a similar problem of tumbling being way too easy at high levels and not taking into consideration the capability of the opponent.