Interrupting a spell impossible w/Core rules?

[Oracular Vision]

i think one possible idea is to consider that your two handed sword is not the best weapon for mage busting. try a hand axe... a fighter who wants to play mage hunter takes point blank, far shot and quickdraw and maybe a focus spec in hand axes along the way with his 11 bonus feats...

sure against the troll use your honking mega blade.

if you want to be sure and be able to hit a mage when he casts... ready and swing or throw... your strength still helps... a 18 strength and focus spec gives you a d6+6...

you need the right tools...

I like this idea, but what no one is mentioning is that a mage worth his salt will have up mage armor and shield, and you won't be hitting him very often with anything, especially if he has lots of Dex...As a third level fighter, you might need a natural to even hit him...

 

[Artoomis]

At third level, if the Mage has up both Shield and Mage Armor he's not as much of a threat - he's already used up two of his rather limited number of spells.

 

[apsuman]

If you have other ideas on how to tweak the rules to avoid the problem as he sees it, Drspunj and I would appreciate them. Or if you disagree with his point, and want to post your view on how it's not realistic for a melee weapon to consistantly have a good chance of disrupting a spell, I could pass along your points to our friend.

I think you are adequately describing a problem that does not exist except with this one player.

About the realism of having a beligerant (sp?) melee weapon in your face, I say this...

These are adventurers that take risks every day against people with weapons, claws, breath weapons, etc. Yet one more oaf with an ax just doesn't spook them.

After all said fighter is able to attack with a spell in his face.

So, should the fighter's abilty to attack be disrupted by the fact that the wizard is just standing there in front of him with ALL those spells?

If casting defensively bothers your player that much, which is what I have gathered from this thread, then instead of making lafe hard for the wizard, make it harder for the fighter. I propose a feat that allows fighters to select a caster in their threatened range, that caster adds 2 to all concentration check for that round. The fighter suffers -2 to his AC, BAB, and all saves during that round. Selecting the target is a free action.


g!

 

[kreynolds]

Holistically, he feels the confluence of all those rules sacrifices too much realism wrt how much a weapon in your face wielded by a determined party will disrupt your ability to cast a spell.

Then tell him to play GURPS or Ampgard (sp?).

 

[Artoomis]

apsuman

What a good idea - a feat to make it easier for a fighter to interrupt spells - I like it.

Hmmm.....

How about Reactive Attack? Somewhat like Reactive Counterspell, an FR feat that lets you counterspell wihout readying an action.

Reactive Attack [General]

Prerequisites: Improved Initiative, Alertness

You can react quickly to interrupt spells cast by opponents.

Benefit: Once per round you can attempt to interrupt a spell being cast just as if you had readied an action. This partial action may be any sort of physical attack allowable as a partial action - melee attack, ranged attack or partial charge. This partial action takes the place of your next regular action, and your initiative order changes to that of just before the spell caster. If under the effects of a Haste spell or similar magic, you may take only your extra partial action on his next turn.

Normal: Without this feat, you must use an attack of opportunity or ready an action each round you wish to attempt to interrupt a spell being cast.


[Edit - this is a House Rule, so I'll open a thread over there to dicsuss this feat]

[Edited to improve the feat and make it more like Reactive Counterspell. The discussion of this feat is still in House Rules]

 

[mikebr99]

Reactive Attack [General]

Prerequisites: Improved Initiative

Benefit: Once per round, upon observing an enemy spellcaster beginning to cast a spell, the character may take a partial action to attack the spell caster in an attempt to interrupt his spell, just as if he had readied an action. This partial action may be any sort of physical attack allowable as a partial action - melee attack, ranged attack or partial charge. The character making the partial attack gives up the actions that would normally be available to him on his next turn, and his initiative order changes to that of just before the spell caster. If under the effects of a Haste spell or similar magic, the character may take only his extra partial action on his next turn.

Normal: A character may attack to interrupt a spell using a readied action or attack of opportunity only.

Excellent!!! [evil grin from Mr. Burns]

 

[apsuman]

I think my meaning has been lost somewhat (or maybe not...)

Really I had two points.

1. The mage (with spells) is as big a threat to the fighter as the fighter (with ax) is to the mage.

Given this parity, the mage should not be extra scared of the fighter. Also, the fighter is in not any danger of losing their primary combat ability (attacks) from a mage, but mages are under the threat of losing thier combat abilities from fighters.

2. Given point number 1, if you want to make it "easier" for the fighter to disrupt the spell, make the cost high. A feat (imho) is not enough, for fighters are feat machines. So I attached a penatly to the feat, There could be an improved version of the feat that removes that penalty.



However, I really think the figher type in question could simply benefit from a few levels of barbarian. the increased movement, and rage would (eventually) make up for the neavier armor.

 

[kreynolds]

I propose a feat that allows fighters to select a caster in their threatened range, that caster adds 2 to all concentration check for that round.

You'll see something like this in the ELH.

 

[Artoomis]

I think my meaning has been lost somewhat (or maybe not...)

Really I had two points.

1. The mage (with spells) is as big a threat to the fighter as the fighter (with ax) is to the mage.

Given this parity, the mage should not be extra scared of the fighter. Also, the fighter is in not any danger of losing their primary combat ability (attacks) from a mage, but mages are under the threat of losing thier combat abilities from fighters.

2. Given point number 1, if you want to make it "easier" for the fighter to disrupt the spell, make the cost high. A feat (imho) is not enough, for fighters are feat machines. So I attached a penatly to the feat, There could be an improved version of the feat that removes that penalty.



However, I really think the figher type in question could simply benefit from a few levels of barbarian. the increased movement, and rage would (eventually) make up for the neavier armor.

Ah, but my feat suggestion simply levels the playing field a bit, giving other classes a chance to interrupt that is similar to reactive counterspelling - that is, a chance to act as if they had readied an action, at the cost of the next action they would take (sort of like a reversed readied action). I see the following two sequences as roughly equivalent:

1. Enemy mage starts spell.

2. Friendly mage sees this, and has success with Spellcraft to identify the spell being cast (or fails and uses Dispel Magic instead).

3. Friendly mage counterspells.

Or, for the fighter:

1. Mage starts spell.

2. Fighter sees this, and reacts - attacking the mage to possibly interrupt the spell.

 

[kreynolds]

Or, for the fighter:

1. Mage starts spell.

2. Fighter sees this, and reacts - attacking the mage to possibly interrupt the spell.

Here's a wrench for ya'. What if the wizard successfully casts defensively?

(Personally, I wouldn't allow the feat to be used in that situation.)