easy question, concentration checks

[Ridley's Cohort]

I thought you said this would be an easy question?

The RAW are not unambiguous. IMHO, it should be a separate Conc check for each damaging event. Technically the two AoOs are no more simultaneous than any other two actions, i.e. not at all.

 

[Tatsukun]

I'm often surprised how hard some things are in D20. This seems like it should have been in the book, but it's not.

Two demerits for D20 !

-T

 

[dvvega]

Actually from my reading of the Concentration Skill it's obvious that it requires 2 checks.

Each attack will cause your concentration to be broken, therefore you must make a Concentration check against each.

 

[Scharlata]

Hi!

Make two separate checks because even if you cause two AoO from the same action that doen't mean that the two opponents making the AoOs do them at the very same instant.

I want to propose an example:

Imagine the scenario as above (in the beginning of the thread from Tatsukun):

If the first bad guy happens to kill the mage outright in the first place, I've never ever heard of an instance that the second bad guy (especially if he were a PC) was forced or inclined to make his AoO.

The solution will be to make the AoOs (if appropriate) in the order of the higher initiative factor and therefore to make 2 separate Concentration checks.

Kind regards

 

[rushlight]

Injury: If while trying to cast a spell you take damage, you must make a Concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the level of the spell you’re casting). If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect. The interrupting event strikes during spellcasting if it comes between when you start and when you complete a spell (for a spell with a casting time of 1 full round or more) or if it comes in response to your casting the spell (such as an attack of opportunity provoked by the spell or a contingent attack, such as a readied action).

That can be read two ways, seemingly.

1) Attempt to cast spell. Draw AoOs. Take damage (from all sources) and then make con check.

Reason: The rule just says "If while trying to cast a spell you take damage" not "per attack" or anything that would denote mulitiple checks for multiple damage sources. Add up the damage from both AoOs, and say you're also on fire and have acid on you (man, that's one unlucky mage!) That's one check, not four (because fire and acid are doing continuing damage to you).

2) Attempt to cast spell. Draw first AoO. Take damage, then make check. If you pass (which means you are still casting your spell) then you draw the next AoO, and repeat.

Reason: If you take both AoOs at once, then make seperate checks, you could fail the first check. If that check fails, then you are no longer casting a spell - and since AoOs technically take place before the provoking action, you never would draw the second AoO. But then you get into who should make the first AoO, and where in the line of damage sources you'd fit the fire and the acid, and do you do those seperatly...

I would go with number 1. It's simple, and it gets the job done according to the rules - without inventing a new AoO/concentration initatitive phase.

 

[Bloodstone Press]

I believe the wizard should make 2 checks.

 

[Nightchill]

Yep, I'd go with 2 checks.

 

[dvvega]

Rushlight,

although I can understand your point of view on point (2), it doesn't necessarily happen that way.

AOO are drawn the instant the Wizard begins casting, NOT if he keeps casting.

So Wizard begins to cast, enemies (2 in example) swing their weapons.

Enemy 1 connects and hits, Wizard fails check, spell fizzles, Enemy 2 still completes swing.

If it was important to know who hit first then Initiative gives the answer without much debate.

 

[rushlight]

Rushlight,

although I can understand your point of view on point (2), it doesn't necessarily happen that way.

AOO are drawn the instant the Wizard begins casting, NOT if he keeps casting.

So Wizard begins to cast, enemies (2 in example) swing their weapons.

Enemy 1 connects and hits, Wizard fails check, spell fizzles, Enemy 2 still completes swing.

If it was important to know who hit first then Initiative gives the answer without much debate.

Which is exactly why I concluded the rules say you only make one check.

Read the SRD:

Injury: If while trying to cast a spell you take damage, you must make a Concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the level of the spell you’re casting). If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect.

It only refers to "if you take damage" you make a check, not "for each occurance of damage make another check". There is no provision in the rules for multiple sources of damage - only "if damage occurs" and "how much". If you were meant to make multiple checks, it would have said as much.

There can only be a single point at which the check is made - all the damage taken at the point of the spellcasting is added up, and a single check is made.

You can see this is true if you add additional sources of damage. If your mage takes two AoOs, while on fire and suffering from acid, it would be absurd to make 4 checks - the rules only say "If you take damage". Well, you took damage (from 4 sources). You make a check vs DC 10 + damage taken + spell level. There's no rule (unless you'd like to houserule it) that says you break up the damage by type, or by source. DC = 10 + damage + level. It's there in the rules.

There is no rule stating you make 2 checks (or 4 checks!) The rule is clear. If you prefer it that way, that's fine - but it's a houserule, not the RAW.

If you were to change the rules in favor of the multiple check system, you'd need to address the incongruity of the placement of AoOs in relation to the actions they prevent. If the first AoO is successful, it stops the action before it began, thus preventing any further AoOs from a secondary source. The second AoO would not - by the rules - be allowed to continue. After all, the triggering event will not now occur. So you'd need more rules to sort this all out.

Or, you could just total the damage, make one check, and move on with the game. I can see why the rules are written the way they are...

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

If you were to change the rules in favor of the multiple check system, you'd need to address the incongruity of the placement of AoOs in relation to the actions they prevent. If the first AoO is successful, it stops the action before it began, thus preventing any further AoOs from a secondary source. The second AoO would not - by the rules - be allowed to continue. After all, the triggering event will not now occur. So you'd need more rules to sort this all out.

Or, you could just total the damage, make one check, and move on with the game. I can see why the rules are written the way they are...

You already have to sort this kind of thing out by 'DM common sense' if one the characters with the AoO has Trip, Improved Grab, Cleave, etc. Choosing to up the damage does not absolve the DM of the logical necessity of treating the AoOs as separate events.

I understand where you are coming from. The RAW are not unambiguous. And the method you suggest would work.

IMHO the most self-consistent interpretation of the rules is too disallow simultaneous actions -- even though our RL common sense allows for the possibility. The RAW do not allow two quickdrawing crossbowslingers facing off at high noon to simultaneously kill each other, even if they roll the same initiative. I prefer to not make a special case for AoOs.