D&D 5E concentration in 5th edition, whats your fix?

[Slit518]

Caster classes used to be wildly powerful in previous editions of the game.

They would be able to have a plethora of spells cast on party members and themselves, as well as debuffing elements on enemies.

This helps balance them out a bit without overwhelming the game with their ongoing duration spells.

Though, this does not prevent multiple casters from using their concentration slot to beef up a character or the party.

 

[jgsugden]

I use it as is, but I have considered allowing spellcasters to concentrate on multiple lower level spells.

The rule would be that you would get a number of concentration points equal to half your spellcaster level rounded up, as determined by the multiclassing rules for spellcasters (spellcasting levels for wizards are 1/lvl, paladins 1/2 lvl, eldritch knight 1/3 lvl). To concentrate on a spell you need to use a number of your concentration points equal to the spell level of the spell plus 1/additional spell youre already concentrating upon. For example, a 17th lvl wizard would have 9 concentration points. He coud concentrate on one 9th level spell for 9 concentration points, or he could concentrate on two 4th level spells (the first one would cost 4 concentration, the second 4+1=5 concentration), or he could concentrate on a 4th lvl and two first level (with the 4th level costing 2, the first 1st level cost 1+1, and the second 1+2 for a total of 9 cooncentration.

A 5th level wizard could concetrate on two first level spells, an 11th level wizard three first level spells and a 19th level could concentrate on four first level spells.

I'm betting you'd mostly see the multiple concentration spells start to see use at 9th level when the could concetrate ona 3rd and 1st level spell....

 

[RangerWickett]

Interesting.

I like the concentration mechanic as-is, and most suggestions I've seen to get rid of it would overbalance the caster classes. This is the first house rule for allowing concentration on more than one spell that I might actually consider allowing in my games.

It was also proposed so that, say, a wizard could have up two effects to lock down two guys, but he's trading his turn to keep the second guy locked down.

We actually didn't go with the idea. The last 5e game I ran we capped at 9th level with a bard, a warlock, a paladin, a sorcerer, and a fighter who took a few levels of cleric. In the penultimate session they knew an army was marching on their town, because the wizard in charge of the army intended to perform a ritual there.

Full story, but not relevant to the main post
[sblock]A nation had its laws inscribed in a book artifact that prevented anyone outside the line of succession from ruling. I'd established Baphomet, as the demon lord of savagery, had the power that the presence of him or his unholy servants would cause text in nearby books to be unmade. In order to destroy the Book of Eight Lands and establish a magocracy, the wizard intended to summon Baphomet. The whole campaign had a 'book' theme, with demiplanes like out of Myst.[/sblock]

The PCs didn't need to defeat the army, just kill the wizard, without whom they couldn't do the ritual. So they devised Operation Bloodtalon. They scouted the location the army would march and found a steep hill they would need to pass, then hid just out of sight. When the stone golem elephant - atop which the lead wizard and his erinyes bodyguard rode - tromped past, the party struck.

The cleric cast enhance ability (Strength) on the bard.
The paladin cast bless on the bard.
The warlock cast fly on the bard.
The sorcerer cast haste on the bard.
The bard cast greater invisibility on herself. She was a grappler build.

Next round, everyone readies an action to attack, except the bard. She flies at incredible speed over the hill, invisible, and grapples the wizard, then dashes back over the hill. Everyone attacks the wizard. He dies.

The army freaks out and tries to crest the hill. The sorcerer and warlock each grab some people and dimension door away, out of sight. And that's why concentration is still perfectly fine as is.

 

[Ancalagon]

Given how grossly powerful main spell-casters could be in previous editions, I *love* the concentration mechanism.

Next round, everyone readies an action to attack, except the bard. She flies at incredible speed over the hill, invisible, and grapples the wizard, then dashes back over the hill. Everyone attacks the wizard. He dies.

The army freaks out and tries to crest the hill. The sorcerer and warlock each grab some people and dimension door away, out of sight. And that's why concentration is still perfectly fine as is.

Bravo!

 

[Cyber-Dave]

The "fix" for concentration is to use it as written. It is one of the best rules in 5e. It is one of the key mechanics that keeps the game simple, balanced, and fun. At least, that is my 2 cents.

 

[dwayne]

Also in the case, if concentration, where to break you, could only get 1d4 rounds of the spell to the max limit of the spell would normally last. Now if this may be too much for those who say wizards are powerful more than other classes well yes spells are a nasty attack. But casters are not strong in many ways and as to only casting each spell around and limited number to have any way should be a factor. if extra spells are a thing then one of my more exsperianced players who has played the system more suggested to do this " Perhaps something like you can concentrate on a second spell, but you have disadvantage on concentration saves, they become a minimum DC 15, and (in addition to taking damage) if you use your action or move on your turn, you have to make save." I think maybe this with a feat that could change the save to wisdom or super charge a spell each round that would run on its own for a limited duration of 1d8+2 rounds not sure just spit balling. As have not rteally looked at the feat stuff just yet.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I don't have a problem with Concentration, I do have a big problem with Damage saves to keep concentration spells going. I would eliminate the damage save which is easily forgotten even when trying to use it. It's just more rolling dice and I feel it should have been an optional rule to begin with.

 

[77IM]

I don't have a problem with Concentration, I do have a big problem with Damage saves to keep concentration spells going.

Yeah, everybody forgets about this at my table.

It's like an "anti-reaction" -- something you have to remember to do, but also it's a bad thing for you, so there's no real incentive to remember it.

 

[77IM]

I do think the designers of 5E went a little overboard applying the concentration mechanic. Some spells are pretty much never going to be taken because they use up your concentration slot. Other spells require you to get into melee, and that's rough because then you get hit and stop concentrating. Then there are completely awesome spells like spiritual weapon that for some bizarre reason don't require concentration. It totally doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[OpticalShadow]

I do think the designers of 5E went a little overboard applying the concentration mechanic. Some spells are pretty much never going to be taken because they use up your concentration slot. Other spells require you to get into melee, and that's rough because then you get hit and stop concentrating. Then there are completely awesome spells like spiritual weapon that for some bizarre reason don't require concentration. It totally doesn't make any sense to me.

i agree a more then a few spells just dont make sense with concentration, but i like the mechanic as it is.If nothing else it flat out prevents the tedious two page long sequence of things my wizard does at higher level ever moement of the day in just tax, because if you were at high level you spent the better part of your day making sure your team didnt lose the game of rocket tag that dnd had become.

now i wake up, cast mage armor, and im pretty ready for the day. adding concentration didnt just streamline things, it killed alot of tedious gameplay that was practically mandatory.