Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 6779172" data-attributes="member: 12731">That's astonishing. To me, what makes a spell &quot;bad&quot; is when it comes with too high a cost. The concentration requirement is definitely such a cost, together with slot level and (theoretically) casting time and restrictions such as &quot;can save every round&quot; and a bunch of other things. I can definitely see how lifting the concentration requirement can salvage a spell*. That's kind of the fundamental assumption in this thread, and if you do not share it... well, then I understand if you have nothing to contribute.Regards,Zapp*) like I've explained previously, and now I'm not addressing anyone in particular; my aim is to introduce variety as in &quot;you can use best-in-class spell X, or... you can now use average spells Y+Z together!&quot;In contrast, taking away the concentration requirement altogether brings about two further changes that might be good, but might also be too good, which is why I'm not doing that: 1) instead of offering you a choice between best-in-class spell X and spells Y+Z, now you can cast Y or Z on top of X, which a) is a straight powerup and b) doesn't increase choice since you will still cast spell X. 2) the spell can no longer be removed by whacking you, which lessens the thematic choice the 5E designers made when they made your spells vulnerable to damage. Yes, our spell Y would become much more interesting for melee casters, but now I'm talking about concentration spells in general and not the select few where concentration might be an actual mistake.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 6779172, member: 12731"] That's astonishing. To me, what makes a spell "bad" is when it comes with too high a cost. The concentration requirement is definitely such a cost, together with slot level and (theoretically) casting time and restrictions such as "can save every round" and a bunch of other things. I can definitely see how lifting the concentration requirement can salvage a spell*. That's kind of the fundamental assumption in this thread, and if you do not share it... well, then I understand if you have nothing to contribute. Regards, Zapp *) like I've explained previously, and now I'm not addressing anyone in particular; my aim is to introduce variety as in "you can use best-in-class spell X, or... you can now use average spells Y+Z together!" In contrast, taking away the concentration requirement altogether brings about two further changes that might be good, but might also be too good, which is why I'm not doing that: 1) instead of offering you a choice between best-in-class spell X and spells Y+Z, now you can cast Y or Z on top of X, which a) is a straight powerup and b) doesn't increase choice since you will still cast spell X. 2) the spell can no longer be removed by whacking you, which lessens the thematic choice the 5E designers made when they made your spells vulnerable to damage. Yes, our spell Y would become much more interesting for melee casters, but now I'm talking about concentration spells in general and not the select few where concentration might be an actual mistake. [/QUOTE]

Verification