D&D 5E Homebrew: Removing Concentration From The Less Popular Spells

[Skrapers]

A very minor tweak that could make Concentration actually work is allow a caster to maintain a number of spells equal to their power stat. So a wizard with 18 int, would be able to maintain 4 concentration spells in tandem.

As an aside, I think concentration nearly as a whole should be removed from the game. The only reason players were buff stacking like they were back in 3/3.5 was the sheer number of spell slots they had available. Since the caster classes have been utterly neutered with what their max spell count can be, it simply became a non-issue then. Sure the wizard & cleric could stack 5 buffs on each party member. But all they'll be doing is lobbing cantrips the entire following fight. An exaguration to be sure, but spellslots are so small these days that it's utterly smothering to think about doing large scale battles, clearing dungeons, or making it from one town to the next without taking very arbitrarily forced rests.

I agree there's some spells that concentration should remain for. But the vast majority? Not really. I don't care if they feel op. Any spell is op in the right situation, in the right hands. It just depends on who's using them, and who's running the game.

Alternatively, since concentration is what it is, they could just give the caster classes back the lost spell slots. Then it wont feel so bad to drop one spell to use another, and then switch back to the previously employed spell as needed. I like playing the "Chess God" in games. A wizard, cleric, bard, etc that's purely devoted to changing the flow of combat through uses of buffs/debuffs. And honestly Wizards of the coast has kinda ruined that niche for me.

And new players into the game are so... Well let's be honest. Inexperienced and mud brained that they just parrot the NPC response, "That's OP" or "That's game breaking", etc. Without a single amount of thought being added. So they don't realize that while D&D is basically babies first RPG, it's also so constrictive they are completely unaware of the kind of freedoms they lack, and what kind of creativity they could apply in the older games.

Anyway, TLDR

My fixes are either you can maintain a number of concentration spells = to your power ability mod.
Or casters get a number of spells to each rank they can cast = to their ability mod so they can pop back and forth between spells they need to cast without feeling knee capped or getting sleepy and needing nappies.

 

[NotAYakk]

Except a level 20 wizard, even with 5e slot count and concentration , is still very strong compared to a level 20 fighter.

Concentration is an interesting mechanic and leads to interesting fiction. Noticing there are bad spells with it and responding with "remove concentration" seems like solving a water intrusion problem with dynamite.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Some solution.

1 remove completely concentration break on damage.

2 make two types of concentration, one as actual one for offensive and big spell, one as a light concentration ( for defensive and buff spell) that cannot be break by damage. Caster can have one standard and one light concentration spell at the same time.

I like bullet point 2.
Probably only self buff/defense spells should be in the light category. And not even all of them.

 

[jmartkdr2]

On Concentration checks;

It would be easy enough to distinguish concentration spells that have a target of self (or target yourself with a "one creature you touch/see within range" spell) from all other concentration spells. That distinction would make it easy to rule that casters don't have to risk losing concentration on spells affecting themselves (e.g. stoneskin, flame blade, aura of X, invisibility, etc.), but are still at risk with spells cast on anything else (e.g. stoneskin or invibility cast on someone else, conjure X, call lightning, various illusion spells etc.)

I'd have to see whether this is too crude, but it would solve the case of most "melee" wizard spells without dropping spell disruption completely.

"Self only" is a good limiter on a 'concentrate on two spells at once' feat. Although in practice I'd really want to gauge that case-by-case, rather than allow any two spells. Haste + anything is a problem, for example.

 

[jgsugden]

I tried out two houserules early in 5E before dropping them, but if you want a suggestion:

1.) You gain a number of concentration points equal to your spellcasting level divided by 2 (rounded up). Your first concentration spell uses up a number of concentration points equal to the spell slot/level used to cast the spell. An additional spell (for a total of 2) has the same cost +1. A third spell would be the same +2, and a furth the same +3. An 11th level wizard would have 6 concentration points to concentrate on a sixth level spell, a fith and a cantrip, a fourth and a first, a third and a second, three first, a seconf with a first and a cantrip, or a third and two cantrips.
Alternatively:

2.) When a PC gained 3rd level spells they gain the ability to concentrate on a second spell so long as one spell targetes only them. Then, when they gain 6th level spells, their second spell can target anyone. Finally, when they can cast 9th level spells they can concentrate on up to three spells so long as one targets only them.

 

[Stormonu]

I think several spells should have Concentration removed from them - if you cast it on yourself (Barkskin, Stoneskin, etc.). If you cast it on someone else, then I could see Concentration applying as a balancing factor.

Also, I've been contemplating the primary spellcasters (Wizard, Druid, Sorcerer, Cleric, maaaybe Warlock) being able to maintain two concentration spells at 11th level, or possibly via familiar (though the latter may make familiars too much of an autotake).

 

[Lyxen]

I think several spells should have Concentration removed from them - if you cast it on yourself (Barkskin, Stoneskin, etc.). If you cast it on someone else, then I could see Concentration applying as a balancing factor.

Honestly, casters are awesome enough as they are, and telling them that they'd better keep their spells to themselves rather than contributing to the party is certainly not the way to go for me. There is a "world logic" to what you are saying, but I really think it goes the wrong way in terms of game balance.

 

[niklinna]

I agree with the general opinion that concentration is a good idea that was implemented and applied very, very poorly. A few random ideas:

Buff spells could require concentration by the target, so that the wizard could buff multiple party members or buff + do some other concentration-spell, but each gets only one buff. The flip side is that now creatures can only have one buff spell on them! (Normally, multiple spellcasters could pile buffs on a single shared target, yeah?) This still sucks for certain defensive buffs that are supposed to prevent/reduce damage, of course.

Remove the concentration limit, but, if you are concentrating on a spell, then casting any spell requres a concentration check. On failure, some spells you are concentrating on or casting fizzle, or even backfire or cause a wild surge or something. Determining how many and which could be random, player's choice, or DM's choice, and a critical failure could be pretty spectacularly bad. If you are concentrating on multiple spells, the roll is at disadvantage, or the DC increases by some number per spell you're concentrating on. This adds a "push your luck" aspect to concentration.

I like the idea that defensive buffs have a light-mainenance mode distinct from concentration that doesn't require a check on taking damage, but removing concentration from them completely (as a category or on a case-by-case basis) is still worth considering.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

The 5.5e PHB team should take note, concentration while a great mechanic, it over used alot in spells that don't need it for balance.

 

[NotAYakk]

I mean, the list of concentration spells not worth the concentration isn't all that long. Like a dozen.

Barkskin: It acts like heavy armor and works with shields. Target can end it as a reaction to be immune to one non-fire source if damage.

Witch Bolt: As an action or when you cast this spell, make 1d12 damage attack. As an action, deal 1d12 damage to all creatures you have hit that are in range and not behind total cover. Spell ends if you do neither. Damage of both increases with higher level slots.

Etc.