Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9790345" data-attributes="member: 29398">Given my druthers I'd get rid of spell concentration as a game mechanic entirely (other than for a very few spells, all of them non-passive illusions) and go back to spells having fixed durations.I'm of the mindset that if I can hit you with something like a Hold Person and get through your defenses, I shouldn't have to worry about you again for the rest of the combat: you're done.  After the fighting I can decide whether to run you through or take you prisoner or release you or just leave you there until the spell wears off.Keep in mind too that "person" carries - or IMO should carry - a fairly narrow definition.  It's not Hold Demon or Hold Dragon or Hold Slaad, nor IMO should it be Hold Undead in any form; and most major opponents aren't going to be people once parties get beyond lowish level.Tough.  Not evryone is going to be involved every moment, fact of life.Yep, and that's the player-side joy of it when it works like that.  Maybe higher-level foes need better saves against such spells, though, such that the spell becomes a longshot rather than a mostly-guaranteed success.Lockdown has loads of variety already. Hold Person, Web, Entangle, Earthbind*, Paralysis, Sleep are (or at one time were) all lower-level options that accomplish much the same end, namely locking down your foe(s) without killing them right away so you can leave them for now and - if you want - deal with them later be it through conversation or swordpoint or whatever.* - may have the name wrong: it's the spell where a hand comes out of the ground, grabs you, and glues you in place.</blockquote>

Verification