Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Stalker0" data-source="post: 6385057" data-attributes="member: 5889">I was thinking along this line too.Effectively WOTC has attempted to solve 2 known issues with 1 mechanic:1) Too many buffs spells stacking on a character.2) Allowing for a &quot;disruption mechanic&quot; to negate particularly nasty spells (Dominate Person being one such candidate).What I wonder is if in trying to use a single simple mechanic to handle both...that they pushed too far. We now have buff spells that are hard to maintain under any kind of direct attack. We also have a lot more rolling in combat, as each hit drives another concentration roll.I wonder if this would have been a better option:1) Attunement: A character can not have more than 2 spells attuned to them at one time. This would be your buff spell stacking preventer, and would be applied to most of the buff spells.2) Concentration: Works as is. Works as your &quot;spell disruption&quot; mechanic, put on things like dominate person, etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Stalker0, post: 6385057, member: 5889"] I was thinking along this line too. Effectively WOTC has attempted to solve 2 known issues with 1 mechanic: 1) Too many buffs spells stacking on a character. 2) Allowing for a "disruption mechanic" to negate particularly nasty spells (Dominate Person being one such candidate). What I wonder is if in trying to use a single simple mechanic to handle both...that they pushed too far. We now have buff spells that are hard to maintain under any kind of direct attack. We also have a lot more rolling in combat, as each hit drives another concentration roll. I wonder if this would have been a better option: 1) Attunement: A character can not have more than 2 spells attuned to them at one time. This would be your buff spell stacking preventer, and would be applied to most of the buff spells. 2) Concentration: Works as is. Works as your "spell disruption" mechanic, put on things like dominate person, etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification