Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Personal/Hosted Forums
The Society of 3.5 Revisionists
Concentration, Knowledge (arcana), and Spellcraft
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kerrick" data-source="post: 4551507" data-attributes="member: 4722"><p>Yeah, that's what I've been doing too - it usually applies to monsters more than PCs.</p><p></p><p></p><p><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, probably. I revised monks to be less mystical, though, so dropping Knowledge (arcana) would make sense.</p><p></p><p></p><p>That gave me a really interesting idea - combat focus. You can make a Concentration check as a move action to gain bonuses to a single attack (the DC determines the bonus). This would simulate the archer lining up the perfect shot, the assassin waiting for that exact moment to strike, or the fighter looking for the opening in his opponent's defense. </p><p></p><p>I see Sense Motive as kind of a social counter to social skills, that should require some kind of interaction, but Concentrate as a counter to mental trickery (feinting) or techniques (intimidating). Sense Motive seems to fit better when you can observe and interact, while Concentrate implies the ability to focus, be in the "now", and reacts with split-second timing which is required when someone is attempting to pick your pocket or mislead you in combat. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I think their thinking is that BAB = experience, and someone who's more experienced would be less likely to fall for a feint. As for level checks, it was a substitute for power - I guess they think that if you're more or less powerful than the other person (whether or not you know it), you're more or less susceptible to intimidation.</p><p></p><p>Hey, I never said it made <em>sense</em>... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></p><p></p><p>I used to play in a Neverwinter Nights persistent world (an MMO, basically); NWN doesn't have Sense Motive, so we usually used Will saves vs. Intimidation. Obviously, the Intimidate check far exceeds the Will save, but I think this better simulates what happens, since Will saves cover fear-based effects (which is what intimidation is). Once again, Rule of 3 to the rescue! If we divide the Intimidate check by 3, it brings it well down into the range of a Will save (even your PC scoring 40+).</p><p></p><p>For Bluff... I dunno. You could extend combat focus over multiple rounds, representing the fighter in intense combat with his opponent (but he would be more susceptible to flanking attacks); he would then be watching his opponent more closely and get a bonus to avoid being fooled by a feint.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's kind of an even split between who gets Concentration and who gets Spot; I don't think anyone gets them both, and many classes get neither.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kerrick, post: 4551507, member: 4722"] Yeah, that's what I've been doing too - it usually applies to monsters more than PCs. :D Yeah, probably. I revised monks to be less mystical, though, so dropping Knowledge (arcana) would make sense. That gave me a really interesting idea - combat focus. You can make a Concentration check as a move action to gain bonuses to a single attack (the DC determines the bonus). This would simulate the archer lining up the perfect shot, the assassin waiting for that exact moment to strike, or the fighter looking for the opening in his opponent's defense. I see Sense Motive as kind of a social counter to social skills, that should require some kind of interaction, but Concentrate as a counter to mental trickery (feinting) or techniques (intimidating). Sense Motive seems to fit better when you can observe and interact, while Concentrate implies the ability to focus, be in the "now", and reacts with split-second timing which is required when someone is attempting to pick your pocket or mislead you in combat. I think their thinking is that BAB = experience, and someone who's more experienced would be less likely to fall for a feint. As for level checks, it was a substitute for power - I guess they think that if you're more or less powerful than the other person (whether or not you know it), you're more or less susceptible to intimidation. Hey, I never said it made [i]sense[/i]... :D I used to play in a Neverwinter Nights persistent world (an MMO, basically); NWN doesn't have Sense Motive, so we usually used Will saves vs. Intimidation. Obviously, the Intimidate check far exceeds the Will save, but I think this better simulates what happens, since Will saves cover fear-based effects (which is what intimidation is). Once again, Rule of 3 to the rescue! If we divide the Intimidate check by 3, it brings it well down into the range of a Will save (even your PC scoring 40+). For Bluff... I dunno. You could extend combat focus over multiple rounds, representing the fighter in intense combat with his opponent (but he would be more susceptible to flanking attacks); he would then be watching his opponent more closely and get a bonus to avoid being fooled by a feint. It's kind of an even split between who gets Concentration and who gets Spot; I don't think anyone gets them both, and many classes get neither. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Personal/Hosted Forums
The Society of 3.5 Revisionists
Concentration, Knowledge (arcana), and Spellcraft
Top