Concentration Spells w/ Saves

[discosoc]

A 7th level Wizard probably has a save DC of 15 or 16. Banishment specifically calls for a charisma save. There really aren't that many monsters that have any bonus for that, so random non-boss targets will generally only have a 25% chance (roughly) to resist that, which means either the target just got lucky (it happens), the GM fudged the roll because he didn't want a creature completely removed from the fight, or you chose a bad target (such as one that's resistant to magic or has an unusually high charisma mod or save).

As far as the first two scenarios are concerned, you can't really do anything about that. But the third is actually an important part of playing a caster, in that you really need to understand what kind of creature you're up against (without metagaming it). If it's resistant to magic, it makes the save at an advantage. If it's fairly charismatic, it's going to have some bonuses.

As a gm, I often let players roll to see if they have any particular knowledge of a creature at their request. It's basically 1 attempt per player, and only if I think the player could conceivably know anything based on class, background, and maybe race. Even then I might limit it to "mind flayers are known to be quite resistant to magical effects."

Point is, don't assume something is broken simply because it didn't work for you. Maybe you aren't using it properly, or maybe have just been unlucky. As a wizard, you have a spell selection with a wide range of effects for a reason. Part of the challenge is knowing what's worth memorizing for the day. Otherwise, why would you take any single-target spell if you could just count on banishment eliminating a target entirely?

 

[discosoc]

We have also found that spells that only target a single creature, only work after a failed save, and can be broken each round by making the save are generally not worth wasting your time with. If they also take your concentration, that's it: they're useless.

Spells that give multiple chances at saves usually do so at the end of the turn, so if you hit with one, you can count on the effect happening at least once. If you chose your target right, even that one round can make a huge difference in 5e, which how much faster combat goes. Seriously, fights are generally decided within 4 or 5 rounds, and with the way action economy works, dropping a single target out of combat (often means 2 or 3 less attacks) is often much better than doing 26 damage; every round after that is just mopping up.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I think what I'll do is create a party of 3 or 4 characters and include one controller type caster and one fire and lightning type caster and play them against a handful of encounters at various levels and see what happens.

Make sure to adjust tactics for the new ruleset. If spell slot cost is largely taken out of the equation, then you can e.g. Polymorph a dragon, then have your buddy grab you and Dimension Door you both out of there. Ninety seconds later, that dragon is now a worm (Legendary Actions are all expended) whom you can kill at your leisure.

Let's see the fire and lightning sorcerer do that with a single 4th level spell.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

As a gm, I often let players roll to see if they have any particular knowledge of a creature at their request. It's basically 1 attempt per player, and only if I think the player could conceivably know anything based on class, background, and maybe race. Even then I might limit it to "mind flayers are known to be quite resistant to magical effects."

Good point. As a DM, I tend to underestimate the difficulty of certain monsters because I know the monster stats and what would be effective against them, so I discount the uncertainty and fog of war which PCs have to deal with, since I "know" the optimal strategy.

However, that also means I am continually amazed at how infrequently my players stop to gather intelligence about a threat before engaging it. When I'm a player, I definitely have an interest in figuring out whether wraiths are immune to Hypnotic Pattern, for example, before venturing into a whole tomb full of wraiths. I may not be able to experiment on a dragon to figure out whether its Dex saves are better than its Int saves, but that kind of thing is exactly what Contact Other Plane (Legendary Dragonslayer) is for. Etc.

Knowledge is power.

 

[Uller]

Concentration and saves are fixing two separate problems. Concentration is to ensure that casters can't stack several effects. Saves are to give victims some sort of chance of not being screwed completely.

Have I said anything that would lead someone to think I don't understand this? If so, I apologize...I understand both concepts quite well.

Mechanically, you're essentially giving conditional disadvantage to some of the most powerful effects in the game. Not a good idea.

I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean I am giving conditional disadvantage to the targets of the most powerful effects in the game? No. I'm not. The target gets to save as normal. If it succeeds, it gets to act AND it knows it can prevent a second attempt by disrupting concentration. Can concentration be mitigated? Sure. That's called tactics and is what makes combat interesting. What is more interest? The party trying to help the wizard maintain concentration for a round while the Balor tries to break it or just saying "oh well...it saved...cast a new spell next time"?

If your wizard really hates missing, suggest Divination next time. Otherwise, it's part of the game.

Divination has what to do with this? Maybe I'm missing something regarding the Divination spell...Sorry be flippant here but really? Do you really think I don't know that missing a part of the game? Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't noticed.

The biggest cost of spells isn't action economy, but the spell slot. Concentration is also an issue that is largely mitigatable.

Is that always true? A wizard with 10 or 15 spell slots left in a very deadly encounter might think a bit differently.

I have two casters that have tried these spells, got bitten too many times by them doing _nothing_ and have chosen spells that are more of a sure thing. It's boring. If you have some suggestions of how I can make them a bit more useful I'd appreciate it. In the meantime, the only characters in my game that cast spells like slow or hypnotic patter are NPCs. My players prefer Fireball, Hunger of Hadar and the like. Which is fine. I just want to expand their options.

 

[Uller]

Spells that give multiple chances at saves usually do so at the end of the turn, so if you hit with one, you can count on the effect happening at least once.

This is true. I took a quick look at the spells in the basic rules today and only these ones are a save for no effect at all (and concentration in the duration):

Dominate Person
Dominate Monster
Hold Person
Suggestion (Not Mass Suggestion as it is not concentration).

Definitely at higher levels it starts to become save to break the spell on your turn (like Maze).

 

[Uller]

Make sure to adjust tactics for the new ruleset. If spell slot cost is largely taken out of the equation, then you can e.g. Polymorph a dragon, then have your buddy grab you and Dimension Door you both out of there. Ninety seconds later, that dragon is now a worm (Legendary Actions are all expended) whom you can kill at your leisure.

Let's see the fire and lightning sorcerer do that with a single 4th level spell.

You're forgetting the target must still be in range and meet line of sight and other requirements. But yeah...I'm sure tactics would change a bit. Probably I'll get my son to run the monsters and I'll run the PCs to experiment a bit. Unfortunately I won't get to do this until next week sometime.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean I am giving conditional disadvantage to the targets of the most powerful effects in the game? No. I'm not. The target gets to save as normal. If it succeeds, it gets to act AND it knows it can prevent a second attempt by disrupting concentration. Can concentration be mitigated? Sure. That's called tactics and is what makes combat interesting. What is more interest? The party trying to help the wizard maintain concentration for a round while the Balor tries to break it or just saying "oh well...it saved...cast a new spell next time"?

The latter is more interesting, because the former is trivially exploited.

Exponential drop-off in spell/etc. effectiveness via repeated saves as saving throw bonuses rise is an important part of 5E's saving throw system. It's why +4 and +0 are significantly different saving throw bonuses against a high-level spell (one of them shortens duration significantly, probably by 60% or more; whereas under the repeated-save rule, both bonuses are exactly the same 80% of the time). It is also how 5E balances out the continually-rising spell DCs of high-level spellcasters.

If you understand how radical this change is, and you're happy with the results of your test combats, then go ahead and use it. Maybe it will work just fine for your group. But it is fairly radical, and as a player I can think of many ways to exploit the rule.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

You're forgetting the target must still be in range and meet line of sight and other requirements. But yeah...I'm sure tactics would change a bit. Probably I'll get my son to run the monsters and I'll run the PCs to experiment a bit. Unfortunately I won't get to do this until next week sometime.

Ah, I overlooked that clause. It's not quite as trivially exploitable as I thought then. That is something at least.

Another exploit that comes to mind is for a Sorcerer to cast Hypnotic Pattern and hold it on the targets while he Quickens other spells like Chain Lightning on it. Other PCs ready actions to make sure that they attack after the monster's turn but before the sorcerer. Boom, target lose 50% of their actions every turn (more or less depending on DC vs. Wisdom save). You could do something like that even without this house rule, but it would cost you a 3rd level spell slot every round and you wouldn't get to cast Chain Lightning too.

 

[imabaer]

Have I said anything that would lead someone to think I don't understand this? If so, I apologize...I understand both concepts quite well.

You're suggesting things that indicate you don't understand balance, even if you get how they mechanically operate. You're trying to rewrite mechanics that are actually very healthy for game balance.

I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean I am giving conditional disadvantage to the targets of the most powerful effects in the game? No. I'm not. The target gets to save as normal. If it succeeds, it gets to act AND it knows it can prevent a second attempt by disrupting concentration. Can concentration be mitigated? Sure. That's called tactics and is what makes combat interesting. What is more interest? The party trying to help the wizard maintain concentration for a round while the Balor tries to break it or just saying "oh well...it saved...cast a new spell next time"?

Hence the word conditional. With one cast, you are making the creature roll to save twice from one spell cast. Frontliner with Sentinel, someone grappling, or even just tanking with concentration feats help make the second reroll way more likely. The last isn't ideal, but if the creature fails to disrupt, he loses.

Divination has what to do with this? Maybe I'm missing something regarding the Divination spell...Sorry be flippant here but really? Do you really think I don't know that missing a part of the game? Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't noticed.

Divination school, Portent feature. It's pretty amazing. No sarcasm needed.

Is that always true? A wizard with 10 or 15 spell slots left in a very deadly encounter might think a bit differently.

Not really. One of the effects of 5E spell progression is that you don't have nearly as many of the higher level spell slots as you used to. Once you whiff your level 4 spell at level 7, that's it. Flinging magic missiles in response isn't nearly as effective as simply being able to reroll polymorph, which completely takes the critter out of the fight.

I have two casters that have tried these spells, got bitten too many times by them doing _nothing_ and have chosen spells that are more of a sure thing. It's boring. If you have some suggestions of how I can make them a bit more useful I'd appreciate it. In the meantime, the only characters in my game that cast spells like slow or hypnotic patter are NPCs. My players prefer Fireball, Hunger of Hadar and the like. Which is fine. I just want to expand their options.

They have the options available; blasting is a legitimate preference. If they enjoy the spells they're using, why is it an issue that needs to be fixed?