D&D 5E Losing Concentration

[Agamon]

when I read the thread topic, all I could hear in my head was r.e.m. Singing " losing con-cent ration" to the tune of " losing my religion")

That's me in the corner
that's me with the goblins
losing concentration
trying to stay alive
but I don't know if I can do it
oh no, I cast a buff
but didn't roll high enough

 

[Xodis]

How broken when it could be easily negated?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

How broken when it could be easily negated?

It can't. You just made it both nearly-impossible to break AND nearly-impossible to save against (except for Clerics).

 

[Thaumaturge]

That's me in the corner
that's me with the goblins
losing concentration
trying to stay alive
but I don't know if I can do it
oh no, I cast a buff
but didn't roll high enough

Thaumaturge.

(I'm out of xp.)

 

[Xodis]

It can't. You just made it both nearly-impossible to break AND nearly-impossible to save against (except for Clerics).

Im not sure how to put a Wizard at a disadvantage although Im sure there is a way, but by giving a character an advantage you negate his disadvantage against the save and thats a simple Cleric Cantrip.

 

[Obryn]

How broken when it could be easily negated?

How would you easily negate it?

Saving throw math is weird in 5e, for one. You don't get better at your bad saves but the DC gets tougher. If a Fighter already needs to roll a 16 to resist Domination, giving him Disadvantage is just crazy. (It also forbids him from getting Advantage through Inspiration.)

So you're left with "beat up on the caster," but you've made that extra hard, too.

Im not sure how to put a Wizard at a disadvantage although Im sure there is a way, but by giving a character an advantage you negate his disadvantage against the save and thats a simple Cleric Cantrip.

You can't go relying on a cleric cantrip to fix a broken feat.

 

[Xodis]

You can't go relying on a cleric cantrip to fix a broken feat.

It was just an idea, but once you start adding feats, whos to say there are not other feats that allow another proficiency in a save (Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, etc..) new abilities or spells that put casters at a disadvantage (mage hunter ability where you just have to be in melee range), might not be as broken as you think. Then there is always just a simple magic item that may do the trick.

 

[Obryn]

It was just an idea, but once you start adding feats, whos to say there are not other feats that allow another proficiency in a save (Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, etc..) new abilities or spells that put casters at a disadvantage (mage hunter ability where you just have to be in melee range), might not be as broken as you think. Then there is always just a simple magic item that may do the trick.

Fundamentally, your feat idea creates a problem. It breaks core assumptions of the game.

Cantrips, other feats, other spells, magic items... It doesn't matter. You're better off not breaking the game in the first place.

 

[CM]

It was just an idea, but once you start adding feats, whos to say there are not other feats that allow another proficiency in a save (Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, etc..) new abilities or spells that put casters at a disadvantage (mage hunter ability where you just have to be in melee range), might not be as broken as you think. Then there is always just a simple magic item that may do the trick.

Let's not go down that rabbit hole. 3e did that, and it turned into a morass of charop madness. Feats ought to give new options, not change numbers.

 

[Agamon]

It was just an idea, but once you start adding feats, whos to say there are not other feats that allow another proficiency in a save (Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, etc..) new abilities or spells that put casters at a disadvantage (mage hunter ability where you just have to be in melee range), might not be as broken as you think. Then there is always just a simple magic item that may do the trick.

Yeah, I'm with the others. House rule as you like, but in my opinion, this way lies madness. The fact that they are giving one only certain select proficiencies when mutliclassing (and I think we can easily guess which ones aren't included) shows that they're trying to keep this kind of stuff to a minimum.