D&D 5E Is Concentration Bugging You?

[seebs]

Interesting questions that I would like you to think about for a few minutes before answering. Please think about them carefully based on your 5E table experience before answering:

Knowing what you now know about saving every round with most spells and concentration spells being easy to lose via damage, if the 5E rule as written was that a caster could cast as many concentration spells as he wanted to (because spells tend to only last a short time one way or another), would you still have your same opinion? Would you be on the boards here saying that it should be limited to only one spell at a time? In other words, would you take the hypothetical "5E mulit-concentration spells allowed rule" if it were written that way in the rules and be claiming here that it was not strict enough? Or are you taking your position here because that is what the current 5E rule is and that is now what you are currently used to?

Take note that 1E through 4E did not have concentration spells at all and those game systems seemed to work fine for the most part. Only some tables had problems with those spell systems.

I've been talking about the problems with buff stacking in 3.x-based systems for years, concentration struck me as really strict at first, then I thought about what it would do and realized that it would solve a problem I'd had, and I haven't had a problem with it yet. YMMV. But I'm definitely not defending the concentration rules because they're what I'm used to, because they're not.

 

[seebs]

Eldritch Blast doesn't cost any spell slots.

Point.

So readying non-cantrips is a bad bet.

 

[Celtavian]

I don't agree that it's "wasting a spell slot" to end a concentration spell. Rather, the way I think of it, if you get 1-2 rounds of usefuleness from the spell, it's more than worth the resources spent to cast it. And a "shortened spell list" varies wildly between casters depending on what spells they choose (it only loses 4-5 options if you choose 5-6 concentration spells). I don't see the narrowed selection as limiting, but rather as inspiring creative use of other spells. If I can't protect my allies from my wall of fire, that's not a limitation, that's just a reason to not use it in the thick of melee. Constraints birth creativity, and I've found so far that the Concentration constraint has me looking at old (especially lower-level) spells in a new way.

I feel it is a waste. I've always been a caster that likes to use my resources in a very efficient fashion. I don't like casting spells unless they're needed. 1-2 rounds of usefulness is about all you need in this game. I don't usually get even that. I usually have to cast a protective or utility concentration spell, so that I cannot even use my concentration offensive spells.

I find that tactics largely solve this issue. Bunching up has never been smart, and 5e spellcasters are built to be able to take a wallop or two. A powerful hit you take that disrupts Concentration is one less hit the party healer takes. And if you're casting spells in melee with dragons, well, you're kind of asking for trouble...

Can your spellcasters take a 50 point + breath weapon and a 10 point lair action hit easily? I'm a gnome with a 16 on. I have 72 hit points. AoE attacks and the like chew through them pretty quickly. Concentration checks are tough even for me with a good Con Save.

You don't have much of a choice but to bunch up with mobility as it is. First, spells like fly and protection from energy are touch. If you prebuff, that helps. But you still have to stay within a certain range because if concentration drops, you'll have to rebuff your party.

If you spread out, the creature with high mobility starts to pick you off piecemeal. If it is an intelligent creature, it will go after casters first same as an intelligent party would. If you're a wizard or cleric, you stand too far away and you make it so your martials can't engage the creature while it hammers you then flies out of range. It really doesn't care about AoOs from casters. Casters, arcane at least, don't want to use their reaction on an AoO to preserve it for a spell.

A creature that can move 80 feet per round and unleash a 60 foot wide cone can generally get a majority of your party unless you spread out very, very wide. Then it attacks you piecemeal killing the casters.

It's one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't situations.

See, I'm kind of digging it. I'm not paranoid about a failed check. I'm VERY happy to be able to harass my enemies for a few turns, long enough to get their attention like that. I'm finding it makes my choices more interesting.

It's not making my choices more interesting. It's making them less interesting. That is why it isn't fun. I get one concentration spell up and my list shrinks by four or five spells. I've been sifting for non-concentration spells that will be effective and have found few.

Which isn't to discount others' experiences, it's just to point out that there's some disagreement on the issue that points to something other than Concentration itself as the root of the issue.

It's a bunch of factors. Concentration is definitely one of my biggest problems.

I cast fly. Then I can't cast slow, wall of force, wall of fire, protection from energy, most illusion spells, hypnotic pattern, bigby's hand, conjure elemental, conjure minor elemental, invisibility, flesh to stone, globe of invulnerability, haste (let's be real, this spell is worthless now), heroism, or polymorph. It's a huge limitation that takes a lot of options from your spell list. You don't think that is a lot of interesting spells removed from your list of options for casting one buff spell?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

So readying non-cantrips is a bad bet.

5E has a lot of variance-by-table. If I'm DMing, I'll let you hold that readied spell for as long as your Concentration lasts, or until you do something else. I'll probably even let you change the conditions for releasing it on a round-by-round basis. It's not really clear what is supposed to happen by RAW though.

 

[DaveDash]

It's all about tactical choice.

If you're going up against a Dragon you don't cast your concentration spells until after it breaths.

The casters in my party know this. They also work together to mitigate hits, use full cover to their advantage, etc.

Also the way the game works - one big hit for lots of damage or many small hits for small damage. The big hit can be avoided with abilities like cutting words, warding flare, popping shield, etc. The smaller hits are a bunch of DC10 checks which are easy to pass with the appropriate feats.

AOE? They shut this down with counterspell or simply focus fire enemy casters down.

BBEG fights the Abjurer loads up on Mirror Image, Blink and his Arcane ward. He is IMPOSSIBLE to hit.
Bard and Cleric will usually hang back and help each other with cutting words/warding flare. They usually buff then find full cover to hide behind and pop in and out as required.
Bard took shield as part of his magical secrets.
Paladin just gets in there and smashes things in the face.

And also so people know, I use custom monsters that do MORE damage than their MM counterparts. Vampires with bows that do an extra 6D6 necrotic with melee strikes, just recently used a CR15 Banshee that hit for 15d10.

 

[Eejit]

I haven't found that to be the case. Not sure why you love Blink. It's very random. Mirror Image isn't bad, but useless against AoE attacks. Blindness/Deafness does nothing to creatures with Blindsight. And they get to save every round against it. Usually doesn't last that long. I've haven't found it very useful.

No spell is ideal for every situation, my group has found those to be pretty great though.

 

[chriton227]

Good point.

Although ambiguous, I do think that the game designers meant each separate set of damage. The same as damage resistance is used against each separate set of damage, the damage is not added up. Damage is not added up to get a grand total for anything else in the game (i.e. claw damage added to breath weapon damage added to trample), so since there are no explicit rules here to do that (to calculate total damage to get the DC), I suspect that the designers were not thinking of this here.

Someone should ask the devs, but I suspect that the answer is that a successful claw and bite attack will result in two Cons saves.

How about a middle ground of one concentration check per action? That way classic claw/claw/bite routine would be a single concentration check, but a bonus action attack would still be separate? It would solve the problem of something hitting you 3 times for 1 point each being substantially more likely to break your concentration than something hitting you once for 20 points, while still avoiding the absurd concentration DCs that could occur if you combined all the damage from a legendary that has multiattacks, damaging lair actions, and bonus action attacks.

 

[seebs]

5E has a lot of variance-by-table. If I'm DMing, I'll let you hold that readied spell for as long as your Concentration lasts, or until you do something else. I'll probably even let you change the conditions for releasing it on a round-by-round basis. It's not really clear what is supposed to happen by RAW though.

It is, however, pretty clear that you can't decide not to cast it. By analogy, if readying to shoot someone with a bow meant you automatically lost the arrow whether or not you shot it, that would sorta suck.

 

[Gadget]

Question for those dissatisfied with concentration: What would getting rid of the concentration save do for wizards? You only lose concentration if you drop to zero hp, go unconscious, are stunned, etc. How would adopting the optional spell point system in the DMG work?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Knowing what you now know about saving every round with most spells and concentration spells being easy to lose via damage, if the 5E rule as written was that a caster could cast as many concentration spells as he wanted to (because spells tend to only last a short time one way or another), would you still have your same opinion?

I think if I would entertain the idea of unlimited "concentration" spells, I would want much shorter durations on those spells -- like, 4e-style, End Of Next Turn / 50% Chance of Ending durations. A concentration spell shouldn't be lasting more than 1-3 rounds by and large (which is like an entire 5e combat, still, much of the time!). They're fairly revolutionary effects.

Would you be on the boards here saying that it should be limited to only one spell at a time? In other words, would you take the hypothetical "5E mulit-concentration spells allowed rule" if it were written that way in the rules and be claiming here that it was not strict enough? Or are you taking your position here because that is what the current 5E rule is and that is now what you are currently used to?

My position isn't one of habit (man, 5e has not been out long enough for much of a habit to form!), but one of genuine appreciation for the effects of the mechanic in play.

Take note that 1E through 4E did not have concentration spells at all and those game systems seemed to work fine for the most part. Only some tables had problems with those spell systems.

Spell interruption was part of the game up 'till 4e, and that's when we got very curtailed spell duration. This isn't a coincidence.

I usually have to cast a protective or utility concentration spell, so that I cannot even use my concentration offensive spells.

Why do you have to cast those spells? What are the melee characters doing? Why do the monsters face no obstruction to getting to you?

You don't have much of a choice but to bunch up with mobility as it is

Movement speeds are 25-30 ft. Being one move action apart is pretty well spread out.

I get one concentration spell up and my list shrinks by four or five spells. I've been sifting for non-concentration spells that will be effective and have found few.
...
I cast fly. Then I can't cast slow, wall of force, wall of fire, protection from energy, most illusion spells, hypnotic pattern, bigby's hand, conjure elemental, conjure minor elemental, invisibility, flesh to stone, globe of invulnerability, haste (let's be real, this spell is worthless now), heroism, or polymorph. It's a huge limitation that takes a lot of options from your spell list. You don't think that is a lot of interesting spells removed from your list of options for casting one buff spell?

I think part of the hinge might be what you consider "effective." If all you're looking at is concentration spells, then yeah, casting one is going to limit your options significantly. But you're a spellcaster -- versatility is a huge asset for you. Rely less on concentration spells. Try some variety!