Dealing with spellcasters as a martial

[Krachek]

Both from a DM's and a player's perspective, dealing with spellcasters is difficult. This difficulty don't reside on raw power, but instead on their flexibility. One never can be too prepared to them: Have you achieved somehow Fire resistance? The wizard hits you with a ligthing bolt. High Dex saves? Hold Person. Etc.

Nevertheless, spellcasters in 5e are limited in three main ways: Spell slots, Concentration and action economy. The last two of them are intrinsecally linked: if you have concentration, you can't prepare a lot and break Action Economy with pre-battle buffs. At best, as a wizard you can have two pre-battle buffs (mage armor, and any Conc. buff), and you need to expend the slots. Furthermore, many concentration buffs have very short durations, so you need to cast them as close to combat as you can. A 1 minute spell, like Haste, will pass shortly after being cast.

As a player, I 've being dealing with casters since level 1. Priests, mages and hobgoblin Devastators are enemies with I've being dealing with. I have a big advantage: I'm a Strength fighter, human, with the Shieldmaster feat. This allowed me to improve my action economy. Furthermore, any effect that allows me to pass a Dex saving throw to halve my damage, I receive no damage instead as a reaction (and if said effect is directed against me only, it allows me to add the Shield bonus to my DST). But the main factor is the action economy: knocking prone spellcasters as a bonus action is incredibly useful. I use the following tactic: knock, grapple, choke. Choke isn't an action described on any manual, but it could be considered both as an attack and as a grapple. Succesfuly choking someone should silence and suffocate it, doing minimal (disarmed) damage. My DM usually considers it as a grapple at disadvantage (as it is more specific).

Other ways of disabling casters may be:

1) Heavy smoke: heavily obscures an area, so impedes casters to make targets or choose the point in which cast their targets. Also, it can provoke suffocation, thus "silence" creatures inside the area.
2) Sand in the eyes: Blinded condition doesn't allow to see, so any spell that requires to see the target can't.
3) Disarm: Any spell that requires material components and any caster with a Spellcasting focus such as a staff could be disarmed. That renders many powerful spells useless.
4) Kill them with lots of damage before they cast. Obviously.

Thougts? Ideas?

Have you consider your DM using your tactics against a Pc wizards?

 

[5ekyu]

That is true. With that in mind it might be better to require succeeding on the grapple check by 5+. That's my go-to rule when a player wants to add an effect to a normal attack, such as sweeping someone prone with a kick.

I dont have a go-to rule for "shut down what a character does with improv"... I have to handle those case by case.

 

[MechaPilot]

I dont have a go-to rule for "shut down what a character does with improv"...

Neither do I.

 

[neogod22]

The reason there are no rules like this, is because casters are already limited in their spell casting because of the concentration rule. They can't stack protections on top of each other and make the room a magical mind field anymore.

 

[Erechel]

Straw man...

Nothing more...

I did not say a fighter could not choke a mage... I said (as a broad statement) about imptlrov action) the general principle of working how that is resolved into the rules and within the context of the rules - not as a way to bypass rules.

The key difference is... Does a gm allow choking to be resolved as inflicting a much more severe penalty that gets around or shuts down a frigging ton other existing rules?

It is there any rule that says that spellcasting can't be prevented in any way? I've bypassed some rule that I'm not aware of? It isn't exactly playing by the rules that when a spell calls for a verbal component, if you can't bring it you can't cast it? It isn't how spells like Silence works, only that magically and in an area?

Does he say choking prevents spell casting?

If you read my post, I've said that verbal components would be compromised. Not every type of spellcasting. I've also said something about disarming to prevent material components.

Does he say choking creates a massive damage type situation due to change of crushing windpipe?

Unarmed damage will suffice, but why not (maybe with a Con save). There are also rules for drowning (that you could use if someone is choking).

Does he rule that a kick in the groin can render a full hp foghter in plate incapacitated for 5 rds?

I would say no. Full armor is still protecting the groin. But maybe a light armored one could be incapacitated by one round. If you really want to, you could still give the fighter a chance to survive (by, for example, giving disadvantage to the attack and a saving throw, exactly how I claimed to resolve chokes). Maybe a plate armor gives advantage to the save.

The oft thrown straw man pretext of the bypass rules with improvs is always along the lines of "you're saying it cannot be done" when in reality what is being said is "it can be done but not with the consequences you hoped for (in my game or within the context of the rules and mechanics we use.)

I'm not trying to bypass the rules. Casting is not granted if you can't bring all the components. Verbal components exist. Furthermore, more often than not the players ignore the components rules for casting spells. I'm not. I'm playing within the framework and core assumptions on 5e. Of course, you can rule it otherwise, ignore verbal, somatic and material components and take them for granted. Or assign other consequences to choke someone (like only making unarmed damage+grapple). I, as a DM, will rule it the way I've said. You have your own judgement. Grabbing the mouth will be unambiguous in your table? I would rule it the same way: two grapples, the second one at disadvantage.

You want you grab for the throat to be resolved stop the mage from casting... Well my bet is the barbarian with the axe wants his axe shot to hit the throat too and for that to stop casting too...

You already have a rule for that. It is called Attack Action. The barbarian will certaintly shut down casting by killing the wizard. I've also said that in the OP.

 

[Erechel]

Here's the point I'm making, on the player side you're trying to argue "sure this is a great idea, I can choke wizards and not allow them to cast spells. Nice way to exploit the rules." As a DM, I say, this a 2 way street. I will choke every single one of your casters in every combat and you'll never get a heal or support. Your casters will missed and probably threaten to never play again. All thanks to the fighter who wants to exploit the rules.

And I'm aware of that. don't give ideas to the GM. I'm not a player only, you know. I've DMed several years. I'm mostly a DM. I've tried this on my players, and they also expect to the fights being brutal, and don't take anything from granted. And if some monster wants to grab my caster friend throat, I will kick it in the mouth first. Or not, if an enemy spellcaster is there. And, if I play a spellcaster, I will make sure to always be at a safe distance from big brutes with hands like coconuts. Or invest in Acrobatics.

 

[5ekyu]

"It is there any rule that says that spellcasting can't be prevented in any way?"

Nope there is not. Matter of fact there are plenty of rules about how they can.

There also are not rules saying you cannot do any of the following:
Shoot a pea with a straw down the throat of the fight causing him to choke out.
Protect onself from sneak attack damage using trolls blood poltices.
Cause a fight to have to win a charisma vs wisdom face off as an action in combat or be convinced to drop all his weapons and take off armor.

No rules forbidding any of those things.

All the attempted serious "counterpoints" like stab with dagger or rely on non-verbal spells just point to the agenda...

If you feel this will work for your games and make them more fun... Great... You dont need us internet yahoos to agree or sanction you.

But in my small amount of experience, a rule like this seems counter to the general rule structure of 5e and not needed and even harmful to set as a precedent in many games i have seen or experienced.

 

[5ekyu]

"You already have a rule for that. It is called Attack Action. The barbarian will certaintly shut down casting by killing the wizard. I've also said that in the OP"

Nope... Attack action is for hitting the guy for damage, i am improving a shot yo the throat specificalky whichvis improv so i get to define nee results. I dont want to go thru hp, anymore than i want to go by the other limiting rules.

 

[neogod22]

And I'm aware of that. don't give ideas to the GM. I'm not a player only, you know. I've DMed several years. I'm mostly a DM. I've tried this on my players, and they also expect to the fights being brutal, and don't take anything from granted. And if some monster wants to grab my caster friend throat, I will kick it in the mouth first. Or not, if an enemy spellcaster is there. And, if I play a spellcaster, I will make sure to always be at a safe distance from big brutes with hands like coconuts. Or invest in Acrobatics.

Actually I don't know, because I don't know you. You sound like a player trying to exploit the game. If you are a DM, and this is how you want to DM your game, more power to you, but like I said, I wouldn't allow it. I don't see how this is a fair rule.

 

[5ekyu]

"And if some monster wants to grab my caster friend throat, I will kick it in the mouth first."

Sorry, was there an OA provoked by this choke?

Otherwise, you are waiting your turn **or** otherwise ready action but that goes **after trigger** not before, right?