Concentration and AOO

[prodawg]

I took over a game as DM about a year ago. We started playing since the release of 3e. I took over when we reached level 10. Since then, my players have advanced to level 17. The DM before me had a rule that if you failed your concentration spell while casting defensively (15+ spell level), instead of losing the spell as described in the SRD, you suffer an attack of opportunity. If you get hit, you make another concentration check (10+ damage) to see if you lose the spell or not. I do not know why this rule was put in place. Perhaps misunderstading of the rules or perhaps rule 0. After taking over the game, I let the rules stay because I did not want to change the rules on my players so far into the game (they kept their old characters). And one of my players kept telling me that the magic is too powerful and casting defensively should be more difficult. So I kept the rule to make it more difficult for magic users. They are very clear about this rule.
However last game, one of the clerics failed his concentration check while casting next to a giant with a couple levels of monk. The giant hit him critically for about 60 points of damage. I asked him to make a fortitude save (DC 15) for massive damage. He failed critically. So he died.
A NPC offered the players a wish for before for completing a quest. This player (a cleric) wished for "if he drops below 0 hp of dies, his body is to be transported to his church, true resurrection be cast on him so he suffers no exp lose from death." This is clearly two wishes. Plus he cannot get a true resurrection (level 9 divine spell) from a wish. So I ruled that only the first part is fulfilled. He was not aware of this until he died.
The bottom line is that he died with a lose of level. Now my question is this, given the circumstances, did I make the right decision?
Any feedback is greatly appreciated. I thank you for taking time to read this post and respond. Thanks.

 

[Crothian]

Under those circumstances, it seems like you did. It is a tough break. Actually, allow ing the first part of the wish to work was really nice of you. I'd have just had the wish in general fail.

 

[prodawg]

I would really think that I made the right call. If this is just some random rule 0 that I made up, I would probably say in retrospect that I am incorrect. However, this rule has been in place since level 1 and we're at level 17 now (been playing close to 2 years now). This particular player actually have sat me down and talked to me about how powerful spell casters are with their one touch, make save or die spells (particularly harm, granted you don't die right then). To a certain degree I agree with him. This is part of the reason why this concentration rule stayed. It certainly does add a level of risk to casting spells while in melee.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Two parts to this:

I took over a game as DM about a year ago. We started playing since the release of 3e. I took over when we reached level 10. Since then, my players have advanced to level 17. The DM before me had a rule that if you failed your concentration spell while casting defensively (15+ spell level), instead of losing the spell as described in the SRD, you suffer an attack of opportunity. If you get hit, you make another concentration check (10+ damage) to see if you lose the spell or not. I do not know why this rule was put in place. Perhaps misunderstading of the rules or perhaps rule 0. After taking over the game, I let the rules stay because I did not want to change the rules on my players so far into the game (they kept their old characters). And one of my players kept telling me that the magic is too powerful and casting defensively should be more difficult. So I kept the rule to make it more difficult for magic users. They are very clear about this rule.

That is a common enough house rule - and if you like it, stick with it. You just saw why actually provoking the AoO (and thus getting hit) can be a greater consequence than just simply losing the spell. It adds a bit more risk to melee combat - and makes a certain amount of logical sense.

A NPC offered the players a wish for before for completing a quest. This player (a cleric) wished for "if he drops below 0 hp of dies, his body is to be transported to his church, true resurrection be cast on him so he suffers no exp lose from death." This is clearly two wishes. Plus he cannot get a true resurrection (level 9 divine spell) from a wish. So I ruled that only the first part is fulfilled. He was not aware of this until he died.
The bottom line is that he died with a lose of level. Now my question is this, given the circumstances, did I make the right decision?
Any feedback is greatly appreciated. I thank you for taking time to read this post and respond. Thanks.

Yes - you made the right decision. This is actually a bit beyond the scope of the wish for more than one reason.

1. You have a contingency/teleport type effect, which is in and of itself not possible with a wish - as the wish may only be allowed to replicate one spell... (if you wanted to be REALLY picky)

2. Wish clearly states that it can only bring you back by replicating a resurrection spell (not true ressurection). It COULD also replicate a raise dead effect - if it had to.

Now - IMC, what would have happened is that the wish would have followed a hypothetical setting rule called the "law of minimization".

The wish would - its power exceeded - attempted to fulfill the wish to the letter as best it could.

It would first use a contingency spell, followed by a teleport spell (NOT teleport without error...) - this would take effect.

now - the wish would then attempt to fulfill the second part of the request as well;

This is also possible - and the wish would then cast a "contingency raise dead" upon the character. It can't do a "contingency/resurrection" because of the level limit of the contingency spell.

This would then dispel the first contingency placed upon the character.

It would be mean and sinister - but the character would be in big trouble if he merely dropped to below 0 - say to a hit point total of -4.

His contingency would then trigger immediately - on the spot, as per raise dead, and he would still be alive! This means the spell fails... oh well - that is what you get for trying to abuse a wish spell. I would then remind the player that they should consider themselves lucky - as they weren't killed by a death effect that would have caused raise dead to fail.

However - in this case the character died because of death from massive damage, and the raise dead would work immediately. The character would lose the level on the spot.

He would have HP = level... ans still be in combat with the giant!
(even worse - yes? )

The "50% chance of losing any given prepared spell" from the raise dead would also be enforced - meaning that the character then has to roll percentile dice for each spell they have prepared - over 50% = lost spell; under 50% - they keep it.

Of course - this may not matter at all on the next round - as said giant may just whack the cleric again - and kill - with no contingency this time.

You were not only fair - you were overly generous. If your player keeps whining about it - show them this thread... and maybe they will count their lucky stars you weren't THIS mean about it.

 

[prodawg]

Wow, that is harsh. I'm glad I don't play in your game.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

When dealing with the wish spell - interpret the words of the player as if they were those of the character.

You try to do EXACTLY what the player asks for - nothing more or less.

This spell imparticular - is one you just HAVE to be a sticlker on. If you don't, certain types of players have a tendency to abuse it. At these levels, 5000 Xp can be gained after one to four adventures with the rest of the party (presuming 4 characters) depending on difficulties faced. This is - arguably; the most powerful spell in the game outright. Let this get out of hand - and it won't matter. The GM must draw the line on what magic can and can't do - and this is, if not the toughest spell in the game to adjucate, is at least in the top 5


Miracle as a spell is the only possible exception in terms of sheer power level, and this spell also depends on how you adjucate it. IMHO - Miracle is a tougher spell to adjucate, as the GM must determine what is a "powerful request" and what isn't; as in wether or not the character loses the XP.
My personal standard is that if the spell must replicate more than eight total levels of other spells - it constitutes a "powerful request" - and thus wether or not the cleric is charged the 5000 Xp. Deities of course - aren't as literal as the wish spell is, but they have their own ways of being fickle.

Limited wish is like wish and miracle - in that it requires extensive knowledge of the spells avialable. It also tends to get cast more often - as 300 Xp is nowhere NEAR as bad as 5000 Xp at the upper levels of the game.

My other 7 "pains in the butt" to aducate are the following;

Time Stop (and similar effects from the PsiHb) Due to the Quantum Mechanical theory involved

Geas and it's kin - due to the "discharge" conditions and the no save (which I changed to will negates IMC)... players tend to have a REAL tendency to abuse it.

Contingency - due to the possible trigger conditions involved

Polymorph and its kin - due to all the errata and the complications of the spell

Bestow Curse ans spells based off of it - due to the variety of things that players try to do with the spell. (Mark of Justice is like contingency and bestow curse in one...)

Illusions in general - with respect to what you can and can't do with them

Divinations in general - with respect to how much information they hand out


The more flexible the magic - the more abuse a player might try. You just have to be careful; and don't let things get out of hand.


The old saying goes...
Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

 

[hong]

This sounds like the session that Sodalis was talking about in the general forum.

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10745

FWIW, I think you made the right decision. The casting defensively thing is a house rule, but one that all the players were aware of beforehand. If they didn't like it, they had lots of opportunities to make their concerns known. It's a bit late to complain only after it turns around and bites you.

As for the wish, the player should have known that taking a wish for granted is bad for you. Perhaps you should have given him a chance to figure out that his wish wasn't going to work properly, or that there were no clerics around that could cast true res. However, it's all water under the bridge now.

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

As for the wish, the player should have known that taking a wish for granted is bad for you. Perhaps you should have given him a chance to figure out that his wish wasn't going to work properly, or that there were no clerics around that could cast true res. However, it's all water under the bridge now.

That's probably the crux of the issue. In our game, if such a wish wouldn't work, the DM probably would have told us at the time we made the wish. In character, the person/entity granting the wish would tell the character that such a request was beyond the scope of his/her/its powers.

 

[Pielorinho]

Prodawg, I takled about your killing a PC because of a rules-mistake on your part in Sodalis' thread. I apologize for that: Sodalis didn't mention that this was a well-established house rule.

As for the wish, I definitely believe that they shouldn't be interpreted by a lawyer: rather, I see it as the caster's ability to impose a change on reality by sheer force of will. It's a reasonable call that this wish is too powerful. But I do think it might've been a good idea to warn the player that the spell is too complicated to work; had youdone that, he may have made a different wish.

Even so, given that the concentration check was an established house rule, I think you handled things well, and his death makes sense within the game.

Daniel

 

[Holy Bovine]

As I posted in the other thread in General, I think the wish not working should have been known to the wizard casting it. If he is powerful enough to be flinging wishes around as rewards he should have some knowledge as to how they work (even giving him a Knowledge - Arcana or Spellcasting check would have been good).

As far as the AoO thing goes since it was a long established house rule your decision should stand.