My @!@#! Player abusing Feather Fall

[AuraSeer]

It is common sense, especially with a DM who loves readying. It's a head fake;he's throwing away one weak spell slot to avoid a Concentration check on his important spell. The downside is that he's inviting people to shoot him, which tends to be a bad idea when you only have a d4 hit die.

Note that this only works against enemies who lack Spellcraft. If it's bothering you that much, start sending him against other spellcasters, and have them ready to interrupt only significant spells. When he starts casting they just need a DC 16 Spellcraft check to identify the featherfall spell, and ignore it. Then when he begins the second spell, a fireball lands on his head.

Even without Spellcraft, NPCs have knowledge of the gameworld; they know that some spellcasters can throw more than one spell per round. Have most of the archers ready to interrupt the first spell, but a few stay ready to interrupt the second. (This should especially be done by any repeat enemies, who have seen him use the tactic before.)

 

[KarinsDad]

although, i like the cantrip idea. i would allow it. it is what an int 20 guy should be able to do.

I totally disagree.

This is total metagaming. It has nothing to do with playing a smart PC.

In another game system like GURP or Rolemaster, this tactic wouldn't work. If it wouldn't work in another game system, it is trying to find a loop hole in the rules of the current game system and hence, metagaming.


Let me give you an example that occurred in my game a few years back.

A PC dropped unconscious next to a Giant and next to the party Druid. The Druid, fearing that the PC might be close to dead, decided to heal him, but didn't want to risk losing the spell from an Attack of Opportunity from the Giant.

So, the player declared that the Druid would move and cast a spell. He moved away 5 feet, the Giant did an AoO against him and hit him, and then he moved back 5 feet and tried to heal the fallen PC.

This is total metagaming. Nobody opens themselve up to attack so that they can open themselves up a second time and ensure that a second attack will not occur.

After a bit of an argument with the player that he couldn't do this, I said fine, you did that. Now, the Giant attacks you again while you are casting.

"How did he do that?" exclaimed the player.

"He has Combat Reflexes." I said.

PS. This is not actually how I resolved it, I forget how it got resolved. But, this makes for a better story.


The point is that if someone is going to draw an AoO or a readied action in order to make themselves perfectly safe to cast their spell which is total metagaming and abuse, I as DM might allow it once, but it would not become a tactical staple of the game.

You want protection against readied archers, move behind a rock or a fellow PC for cover.

 

[kenobi65]

Yeah, this was my question as well. Can you cast a free action spell in the same round as a standard action spell, or is there a rule about 1 spell per round period, contained in all that new "swift action" stuff?

Sure you can...there's no rule that says "only one spell per round."

It's all a matter of how many actions you can take in a round. You get one swift action during your turn, and one standard action. So, you *can* cast two spells in a round, if one has a casting time of "swift action". (Feather Fall is now an "immediate action", which works just like a swift action except that you can do it when it isn't your turn. Also, it then takes up your swift action for the following turn.)

 

[Thaniel]

Why does he do this? Even if the readied action is to disrupt the spell, to disrupt a spell they have to target the caster. It's not as if the arrow doesn't do any damage to the caster. I don't understand why a wizard would gladly accept any number of readied attacks all at once, even if it did give him free reign for his next action. Also, if his HP are high enough that he doesn't care about those hits, then he's likely high enough level so that his Concentration checks are good enough to not be distracted anyways.

 

[drunkmoogle]

Of course, if you want to ready against a PC casting "A spell other than that damn finger thing," you'll need Spellcraft ranks to determine when the player *is* casting some other spell.

Most NPC fighter-types aren't going to have too many ranks in Spellcraft, methinks.

I ready an action to disrupt a caster when he flaps his arms like a chicken. (Read: Somatic Components)
I ready an action to disrupt a caster when he reaches into his bag of mold. (Read: Material Components)

I wouldn't think you'd need Spellcraft ranks to understand the concept of spell components.A smart player will eventually figure it out. Until then, keep him guessing.

 

[drnuncheon]

This is total metagaming. It has nothing to do with playing a smart PC.

How is it metagaming? It might be annoying, but it's not metagaming - at least, not how I've heard the term used.

In character, the situation goes like this: the archer aims at the mage, ready to let fly if he sees him casting a spell.

The mage, knowing that he's going to get shot at when he casts, casts a minor spell to get the archers to fire, and then casts his main spell before they have a chance to reload and shoot at him again.

I would go so far to say that a game system that can't handle such a bluff or a fake-out is the one that is flawed.

J

 

[Lasher Dragon]

My issue with this is that I don't see how he gains any advantage. He takes damage in a round he was going to cast in, he should have to make a concentration check for BOTH spells. Actually, since featherfall is so fast, I might even rule that he gets featherfall off just fine, gets shot, and has to make a concentration check for whatever else he planned on casting that round.

 

[KarinsDad]

How is it metagaming? It might be annoying, but it's not metagaming - at least, not how I've heard the term used.

In character, the situation goes like this: the archer aims at the mage, ready to let fly if he sees him casting a spell.

The mage, knowing that he's going to get shot at when he casts, casts a minor spell to get the archers to fire, and then casts his main spell before they have a chance to reload and shoot at him again.

I would go so far to say that a game system that can't handle such a bluff or a fake-out is the one that is flawed.

It is metagaming because it is the avoidance of one game rule by the use of another unrelated game rule.


So, you think it is ok for ALL spellcasters to say:

"I use my move action to wave my arms as if casting a spell, just to be sure there are no archers out there. I then use a standard action to cast the spell."

For a readied archer, does he shoot on the move action (which emulates spell casting), or on the standard action (which is the spell casting).


Taking it one step further, the ONLY reason this tactic works is because the rule does NOT say "If you get hit at all during a round, any spell casting you attempt requires a concentration check.".

If that were the rule, then this "bluff action" as you call it wouldn't work either.

The only reason it works is because that is how the rules are written (hence metagaming, doing an action that takes advantage of the rules as opposed to doing a reasonable roleplaying action). It is not reasonable to take damage in order to safely get a spell off. Would you in the real world take a knife wound to the chest, just in order pull out your own knife. No. You would back away to pull out a knife and do it at a point in time where you wouldn't get wounded attempting it. Just like to ensure a spell goes off, you duck behind cover. You don't play games with how the readied action works.

If it were a reasonable roleplaying action to create a Screw U spell, everyone would have been doing it for years and it would be part of the game already. Instead, the player found a loophole in the rules and created a spell to take advantage of it.

That is metagaming.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I think the rules support the fact that you cannot ready an action against a Quickened Spell.

Concentration
DC: 10 + damage dealt
Distraction: Damaged during the action.²
Footnote:
²Such as during the casting of a spell with a casting time of 1 round or more, or the execution of an activity that takes more than a single full-round action (such as Disable Device). Also, damage stemming from an attack of opportunity or readied attack made in response to the spell being cast (for spells with a casting time of 1 action) or the action being taken (for activities requiring no more than a full-round action).

You can be distracted during an action that takes 1 round or more. You can be distracted during an action that takes, well, an action to complete. You cannot be distracted during an action that takes a free action / a swift action / an immediate action.

AR

 

[diaglo]

"I use my move action to wave my arms as if casting a spell, just to be sure there are no archers out there. I then use a standard action to cast the spell."

i'd even go so far as to allow him to speak as a free action in say... draconic if he knew that language or some other language if he didn't.

he is giving up his move action. and he is getting shot if there are archers.

the strategy is sound. if not foolish.
edit: in real world terms it is like saying.. hey look at me. i'm the threat.

spellcasters would know on an appropriate spellcraft check it was a bluff.

heck, make him roll a bluff/feint check. it is the same