Multiple Damage during spell casting

[Infiniti2000]

What's 3.0?

Something only dcollins and apparently Tobold Hornblower uses.

 

[Nim]

So, at what point do you stop counting damage and have the wizard roll his Concentration check?

IF one were going to add up all of the damage and have the caster make a single check, the only logical time to have them do it would be at the instant the casting is completed, before the spell takes effect. Not saying it's a good idea, just that if you were going to do it, that'd be the way to go.

 

[Artoomis]

I think that the two are very analogous, particularly in the way you are trying to view the concentration check. Certainly, this is only my opinion, but I just hope I'm giving you pause for thought because I don't like the idea of lumping the damage together for the concentration check.

Nope. No pause for thought. When interrupting a spell (at least one done via readied actions or mutiple AoOs from different opponents) all blows come at essentially the same time to interrupt the spell.

For massive damage, the rule VERY clearly limits it to one blow.

...."If you take 50 points of damage or more from multiple attacks, no one of which dealt 50 or more points of damage itself, the massive damage rule does not apply."

Such clarity is NOT present for concentration checks.

Personally, I think it such be really, really HARD to cast spells when you are being beaten up.

Just to be clear, I'm pretty sure the "offical" rule is that each source of damage get's its own, independent concentration check.

 

[Infiniti2000]

For massive damage, the rule VERY clearly limits it to one blow.

Do you think that the rule for concentration checks is not clear, then? I thought I read a post that you agree.

Edit: Just saw your change . . .
I'm responding to your opinion, not the rule. If you want to lump together readied damage as a concentration check, it would only be consistent to lump together readied damage for massive damage. Moreover, you never responded to Patryn's question about full round spells.

 

[Tobold Hornblower]

What's 3.0?

Something only dcollins and apparently Tobold Hornblower uses.

Hi I2K,

You've been very helpful to me over at the Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil board. Thanks. I appreciate it.

I've been quick to adopt the 3.5 rule as my house rule in the few cases the 3.0 rule seems unclear or too poor to use.

In this case, 3.5 doesn't seem to make it more clear, but the jury here seems set on seperate attacks. That's the way I was leaning, because spell damage is clearly a seperate check, though calculated with the same formula. If getting hit on the head with a spiritual weapon is a seperate check from getting hit with real weapon, I'd just assume do them all seperate.

Either way, it wouldn't make a difference to me as to when to check; I'll let the player roll all his concealment checks when the spell should go off--only then does anyone find out whether or not he held it together.

Seperate checks will reward the spell caster who's maxed Concealment, and bum out the spell caster who's neglected it, especially if his armor class is low enough to get hit by a +2 or +4 on less than a 20. In my group that means the Fire Baller will automatically maintain concentration, and the Flame Striker will will have to check if hit by a 20. I'll enjoy rolling fistfulls of d20s and looking for those 20s.

The Swarm stuff seems cool, but wouldn't work for the Druid. She has a wide variety in her flock: Cardinals, gold finches, blue jays, mocking birds, small owls, bats, night hawks, humming birds...; she keeps near 100 of these, along with a couple eagles--one of which her monkey rides, and a few other tiny creatures. Generally casts Animal Friendship twice a day. Not much attrition. She has a young brass dragon cohort that can speak to animals and help her keep them all in line.

They also won't function so much like a swarm, but will keep spread out rather than bunch up.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Yeah, druids got a big revision in the animal companion department in 3.5. I'm quite honestly not sure which way is better. I like the idea of having the one animal companion and advancing it, but I think I like the idea of multiple animals companions better. I wish there were an option in 3.5 where you could choose multiple animals, but have them be weaker than if you had a single companion.

As for swarms, in 3.5, it's not possible to have a swarm animal companion. I think the idea was to treat it like one for attack purposes only, but I'm not sure that's what you are looking for. One thing it would do, though, is greatly simplify the combat. Having to make 36 attacks rolls or actions has got to bring the game to a screeching halt whenever the druid takes a turn.

 

[IcyCool]

As for swarms, in 3.5, it's not possible to have a swarm animal companion.

Actually, I'm pretty certain there's a feat for it in Dragon Magazine ...

 

[werk]

Actually, I'm pretty certain there's a feat for it in Dragon Magazine ...

Vermin lord has swarm as a companion IIRC.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Actually, I'm pretty certain there's a feat for it in Dragon Magazine ...

I need a feat to be able to keep track of all the feats.

 

[Tobold Hornblower]

...I'm not sure that's what you are looking for.

My players are in a standoff with a Treant who is plowing under the wagon road--the road that they agreed to help clear of monsters and reopen to merchant traffic. We quit playing a half hour early last time, because the Treant's animated trees frightened them, and they wanted to wait for the sorceror and rogue party members who weren't there. I figure their side is adding 2 players, the Treant aught to have a neighboring friend show up. A charizmatic halfling girl surrounded by cute little animal friends seemed ideal. She even has a Ring of Animal Friendship.

Acting Hitchcock Birds like on the spellcasters was one little thing her friends could do. It would put a real hurt on a low level spell caster, but won't annoy my party too much, if it comes to a fight. Maybe the players will build the 3 mile tunnel they negotiated with the Treant. If it comes to a fight, after only one round of dive bombing the birds will probably get the signal to scatter, the druid will hit them with Insect Plague, Ice Storm, and Entangle from high altitude. My players will hustle to start flying. It'll be fun.

That's what I'm looking for. And I want to get the concentration check right. The players might ignore the birds, ignore the druid on the dragon 1000 foot up, ignore the Treant hiding off in the woods, and just fight with animated trees, making for many rounds dive bombing birds.

Having to make 36 attacks rolls or actions has got to bring the game to a screeching halt whenever the druid takes a turn.

I don't think so...

Just timed myself for 36 attacks. Rolling d20s 6 at a time, 6 times, counting 19s and 20s. It took me 14 seconds. Damage is always 1 point, so with seperate concentration checks the DC will always be the same. But we might have to wait for the guy with Combat Reflexes and the Reach weapon to resolve his attacks of opportunity.