Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7928638" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Sure, I won't argue the logic of a CON save, or using the spellcasting ability score as the save. If I joined a table I would be fine using whichever process they had in place with no complaints.It isn't about breaking the game as much as it becomes about making it a near-useless mechanic. Unless the wizard is hit on a critical hit, over 90% of the time (especially at tier 1 and tier 2) it is always a DC 10 check IME.Even at low levels, with a +2 for CON 14 (not unusual at all given the desire for HP), an 8 or higher succeeds, so failure is only about 1 in 3. Add War Caster, which is common as I expressed earlier, and it drops to only about 1 in 8 saves will fail. Add in save proficiency due to MC, Eldritch Knights, or Resilient to get, say a +5 bonus, and it drops all the way just 1 in 25!Now, basing it on a spellcasting check not only makes it a default +3 for most casters for ability, but also proficiency, and then you don't even need feats or anything else to make it a nearly pointless mechanic. Consider around level 5, using the ASI for the spellcasting ability (likely) and proficiency, the bonus is +7, meaning failure is only 10% of the time against a DC 10 (very likely at that level!). So, what is the point of even bothering to roll as it happens so rarely?Of course, you could argue &quot;Well, why bother with critical hits? They are usually only 5% by default.&quot; And to that I would response, &quot;Correct, but that mechanic is already tied into the attack roll, so it doesn't require any additional role to determine the outcome.&quot; In that light, I would more likely just rule it that if you have a concentration spell going and get hit by a critical hit, it is disrupted, otherwise you retain concentration.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 7928638, member: 6987520"] Sure, I won't argue the logic of a CON save, or using the spellcasting ability score as the save. If I joined a table I would be fine using whichever process they had in place with no complaints. It isn't about breaking the game as much as it becomes about making it a near-useless mechanic. Unless the wizard is hit on a critical hit, over 90% of the time (especially at tier 1 and tier 2) it is always a DC 10 check IME. Even at low levels, with a +2 for CON 14 (not unusual at all given the desire for HP), an 8 or higher succeeds, so failure is only about 1 in 3. Add War Caster, which is common as I expressed earlier, and it drops to only about 1 in 8 saves will fail. Add in save proficiency due to MC, Eldritch Knights, or Resilient to get, say a +5 bonus, and it drops all the way just 1 in 25! Now, basing it on a spellcasting check not only makes it a default +3 for most casters for ability, but also proficiency, and then you don't even need feats or anything else to make it a nearly pointless mechanic. Consider around level 5, using the ASI for the spellcasting ability (likely) and proficiency, the bonus is +7, meaning failure is only 10% of the time against a DC 10 (very likely at that level!). So, what is the point of even bothering to roll as it happens so rarely? Of course, you could argue "Well, why bother with critical hits? They are usually only 5% by default." And to that I would response, "Correct, but that mechanic is already tied into the attack roll, so it doesn't require any additional role to determine the outcome." In that light, I would more likely just rule it that if you have a concentration spell going and get hit by a critical hit, it is disrupted, otherwise you retain concentration." [/QUOTE]

Verification