Interrupting a spell impossible w/Core rules?

[Ridley's Cohort]

The life expentancy of a Wizard stepping back 5' and casting is maybe 2 rounds against a competent grunt's full iterative attack. Making it mindlessly easy to stop spellcasting is a bad idea.

Your friend is stuck in a 2e mindset and obsessing over how he thinks his pet character should work. He should take a deep breathe, learn the tactics and get a feel for the 3e pace of combat.

I have not found that disrupting spells is actually that difficult. But we often do not bother to do so for tactical reasons. (If you very efficiently kill off their meatshields, the threat of getting suddenly swarmed by multiple PCs puts them on the defensive. KISS)

I am confident the designers and playtesters considered this issue and the game works adequately with the rules as is.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

Perhaps your friend is also still thinking that casting a spell takes alot of time, like it did under the old rules. Now it does not. The spell is practically cast in preparation. Now all the wizard must do is finish the final word or gesture with the appropriate component or focus, if necessary, and "bang!" I would not allow this to become more difficult or more like one round spells. Just my opinion.

 

[Macbrea]

Assuming that the Constitution is 3rd on a wizard/sorcerors list of important stats when he is making his character. This means it will average a 12. Why, because int/cha has to be very high, and Dex has to be very high to survive. There is no real gains of lossing 1 ac for +1 hp/level. The dex in the long run simply means too much.


Given that. A 10th level wizard should average 45 hps.

A 10th level warrior who decided that strength was the most important stat. Can simply pull out a Mighty Longcomposite bow and gun down a wizard in very few shot.

1d8+4 + (weapon spec) + any magic is an average of 8.5 damage per shot.

At 10th that fighter easily can get off 3 shots at round. Doing 25.5 damage for the round with a normal bow.

The wizard isn't on average going to do enough damage to kill the fighter before he dies.


Saying, that if a person moves the fighter may move freely with them is really saying, "I don't like how the system works so I am going to reduce the survivability of wizards to nothing." So, what if that wizard could lay down a hasted double lightning bolt for an average of 70 damage on the fighter. It isn't going to kill him before he takes the wizard out.

And if the wizard only takes a 5ft step, that fighter is going to just make his life much shorter with simple weapon swings. No, the rules work perfectly fine for game balance reasons as they are.

 

[DrSpunj]

Perhaps your friend is also still thinking that casting a spell takes alot of time, like it did under the old rules. Now it does not. The spell is practically cast in preparation. Now all the wizard must do is finish the final word or gesture with the appropriate component or focus, if necessary, and "bang!"

I think you've hit upon a very important point, and this is central to my disagreement with Jaych (the player/DM, just to keep anonymity going) and ouini on this topic. Couple this with madfox's observations on "walking tin cans" and you've argued my case for me. It seems very reasonable that while the fighter is trying to land a blow on the wizard, that same wizard can dodge left or juke right and gain enough time to raise his hand, point his index finger, stick his thumb up and yell "Bang!" which is the Verbal and Somatic components (in my head, silly me) of something like Magic Missile. In game terms I just described (again, in my head) the fighter swinging on their turn, the wizard taking a 5' step away and casting on theirs (without inducing an AoO).

So maddman75 (and others), I'm not caving on this point. Regardless. If Jaych doesn't like it he can play a different character or quit outright. What I *am* willing to bend on is the situation ouini describes above. I can very easily picture a wizard moving 30' back from the fighter while getting his hand into the mystical "gun-like" configuration for a Magic Missile spell at the fighter. What I can't picture is why this AoO (movement induced for moving more than 5' and taking any action other than movement) does not affect the wizard's spellcasting ability, but a readied ranged attack by the fighter would. It's for this reason I'm going to talk with Jaych about "all damage on the spellcaster's initiative count goes towards the Concentration check". ouini and I are curious to see how he'll respond to this, as well as all of our work (much of it from this thread, thanks again all) to outline how the rest of the system doesn't need changing and is balanced as is.

DrSpunj

PS: mikebr99 - Cordell clarified on Monte's board Burst does stack with Speed of Thought, which is enough for me to house rule it so. Jaych tried to use Hustle in our last game to bring him close to the goblin psion so he could interrupt his manifestations, but the confines of the dragon's mouth/throat thwarted him and he was pretty upset about it (OSM anyone?). This discussion stemmed from that and how even with his superspeed he couldn't stop the goblin psion. ouini and I have looked into the situation thoroughly now and are ready to straighten out a couple of his misconceptions about how 3E handles spell interruption. If people are interested I'll post again after our discussions with him.

 

[ouini]

mikebr99 wrote:

And this character hasn't solved this problem (as he sees it...) for him?

Well, no. Understand, our friend has correctly figured out that, depending on the speed of his attacker, a wizard has either a zero percent chance of being disrupted by a guy shoving an ax in his face trying to disrupt him, or a very nearly zero percent chance. Even an attacker with speed who gets ready to move with the wizard won't get an AoO off if the wizard Casts Defensively.

Ki Ryn wrote:

Sometimes people just fixate on some rule or other...

and Ridley's Cohort added:

Your friend is stuck in a 2e mindset and obsessing over how he thinks his pet character should work...the game works adequately with the rules as is.

He ran for a year to be sure it was a flaw before implementing a rule to fix it (the group agreed to leave the rules alone for a year before trying any house rules). He liked 3E rules in general, and he was quite over 2E before changing a thing about 3E.
I recognize that you probably mean well, but not having met the guy or read his story from his own fingers, show some kindness -- refrain from trying to psychoanalyze him.
That said, in fairness to his critics, I think that of all the 3E rules which sacrifice realism to promote fairness, this one drives his the buggiest.

Macbrea wrote:

Saying, that if a person moves the fighter may move freely with them is really saying, "I don't like how the system works so I am going to reduce the survivability of wizards to nothing."...the rules work perfectly fine for game balance reasons as they are.

The rules have holes all through them, but you're right in that they work adequately as is. That's not to say they can't be improved for individual troupes, though. Really, it's a rare gamer who doesn't implement at least a couple house rules.

This thread has kind of become an attack on the player instead of brainstorming the problem. I'm still curious to see if anyone has used or can think of other, maybe even better solutions to the problem (which also wouldn't unbalance the game in their eyes).

Anyone?

 

[mikebr99]

What I *am* willing to bend on is the situation ouini describes above. I can very easily picture a wizard moving 30' back from the fighter while getting his hand into the mystical "gun-like" configuration for a Magic Missile spell at the fighter. What I can't picture is why this AoO (movement induced for moving more than 5' and taking any action other than movement) does not affect the wizard's spellcasting ability, but a readied ranged attack by the fighter would.

DrSpunj

PS: mikebr99 - Cordell clarified on Monte's board Burst does stack with Speed of Thought

Thanks for the clarification on burst/speed of thought...

And on the other... I think you are opening a can of worms with respect to all your Wizard characters in the party. Just because he took damage 3 seconds ago... doesn't mean he is still feeling the effects as he digs out some bat guano and yells KA-BOOM!!!...

A d4 and no armour is limiting enough... don't make their job even harder.

If you let him nerf enemy Wizards... then he's also nerfed his own party's Wizard also.

 

[mikebr99]

Well, no. Understand, our friend has correctly figured out that, depending on the speed of his attacker, a wizard has either a zero percent chance of being disrupted by a guy shoving an ax in his face trying to disrupt him, or a very nearly zero percent chance. Even an attacker with speed who gets ready to move with the wizard won't get an AoO off if the wizard Casts Defensively.

But what you are describing is a Wizard using all (or most) of his class abilites (concentration/defensive casting). If a Wizard wants to be good at this, he needs skill points in concentration, and should buy the combat casting feat... but you are only using one of the fighters abilities (swing an axe).

In 3e, a fighter doesn't have to pick his weapon proficiencies (except exotic) ahead of time... he already knows how to use them all. That means thrown, melee, missile... as well as a variety of different maneuvers (trip, grapple, charge...)

The fighter needs to decide which is the best tool for this situation... and an axe in this case might not be it.

 

[DrSpunj]

Thanks for the clarification on burst/speed of thought...

And on the other... I think you are opening a can of worms with respect to all your Wizard characters in the party. Just because he took damage 3 seconds ago... doesn't mean he is still feeling the effects as he digs out some bat guano and yells KA-BOOM!!!...

A d4 and no armour is limiting enough... don't make their job even harder.

If you let him nerf enemy Wizards... then he's also nerfed his own party's Wizard also.

Just to clarify, damage 3 seconds ago wouldn't enter into our rules change, only damage on the spellcaster's initiative count is added to the roll. I know with 6 seconds a round it may *seem* like it was 3 seconds ago, but since everyone's turns are not happening serially, but in parallel, this really does seem to fit better (for us, anyway, YMMV).

When you think about what all could damage a spellcaster on their initiative, it's a pretty short list. You still get readied attack damage. You now include damage from movement induced AoOs as well (the goal of our change). Continuous damage would continue to use it's own roll/rule (if there were other damage to be added, it would be a single die roll with only 1/2 of continuous damage added to 100% of whatever damage needs to be accounted for). Anything else that could sneak into the spellcaster's initiative count that I've forgotten and/or seems very unbalanced?

While some/many may disagree with the need for the rule change, it's something that needs to be addressed in our group. Does anyone have anything to add that we may be overlooking with this change?

Thanks in advance.

DrSpunj

 

[mikebr99]

Just to clarify, damage 3 seconds ago wouldn't enter into our rules change, only damage on the spellcaster's initiative count is added to the roll. I know with 6 seconds a round it may *seem* like it was 3 seconds ago, but since everyone's turns are not happening serially, but in parallel, this really does seem to fit better (for us, anyway, YMMV).
DrSpunj

But it does...
Count 18: Wizard is infront of enemy fighter baddie, so he moves back 30ft. and then casts a spell.

The move equiv. action at the start of his 6 second round provoked an AoO. This could have happened about 3 seconds before he starts casting a spell. Under your house rule, any damage this AoO causes, may disrupt his spell later in the round, even if it is only half as effective.

This is a 2e-ism, one that the 3e designers wanted to get rid of to give spellcasters more freedom.

I don't want to tell you how to run your campaign, but I would not let this happen...


[edit] We probably aren't gong to change your minds on this issue, but I just want you to know that this was probably the most playtested part of 3e before it came out, because it is the most drastic change over 2e.

 

[DrSpunj]

But it does...
Count 18: Wizard is infront of enemy fighter baddie, so he moves back 30ft. and then casts a spell.

The move equiv. action at the start of his 6 second round provoked an AoO. This could have happened about 3 seconds before he starts casting a spell. Under your house rule, any damage this AoO causes, may disrupt his spell later in the round, even if it is only half as effective.

This is a 2e-ism, one that the 3e designers wanted to get rid of to give spellcasters more freedom.

I don't want to tell you how to run your campaign, but I would not let this happen...


[edit] We probably aren't going to change your minds on this issue, but I just want you to know that this was probably the most playtested part of 3e before it came out, because it is the most drastic change over 2e.

Ah, fair enough then. I have some 2E books but never really played it much (off the computer, that is: Pool of Radiance, anyone?). I though you believed we were going with Thanee's house rule of adding all damage since your last turn! That seems a bit much (but I'm glad it works for you, Thanee!) for us. As I've said, I don't really see a need for this rule change, and wouldn't have even noticed it if it wasn't "the beef" for Jaych's player. Hopefully this change doesn't affect core balance much and that we're ready to handle any repercussions. Regardless, thanks for your help mikebr99 and everyone else that's posted. (I really like this board!)

G'night.
DrSpunj