• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

My @!@#! Player abusing Feather Fall

KarinsDad said:
3) Take the Improved Feint feat, Bluff as casting a spell in a move action, possibly get hit and then cast away. Note: I think this does work since actions occur within a move action all of the time and do not affect spellcasting (e.g. AoO for moving, but you still get your spell off during the standard action).

this isn't an AoO. this is a readied action.

edit: after reading the post below.. looks like you are spot on. ;)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I have to say good on the player/character. IMO this a good tactic, though I think the spell itself should be lvl 1. It seems that, from the footnote in the concentration skill, you cannot be disrupted by a readied action if your action takes less time than 1 action. However, here is the definition of the ready action:
SRD said:
READY
The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so).
Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action.
...<snip inititave stuff>...
Distracting Spellcasters: You can ready an attack against a spellcaster with the trigger “if she starts casting a spell.” If you damage the spellcaster, she may lose the spell she was trying to cast (as determined by her Concentration check result)

This says nothing about a quickened action not triggering a readied action. It looks like if you ready an attack contingent on "target casting a spell", and the target casts a spell as a swift action, then the readied attack triggers, BUT the action is too fast and is not subject to being interrupted. The target can then proceed to cast another, regular speed spell unmolested.

As has been noted, if the archers have knowledge of the tactic, (have seen it already in the battle, have been told about the mage doing this) they will split up with one group readying to fire at the mage the first time he casts a spell and the other group readying to fire the second time he casts a spell. If there is only one archer, they will guess either first or second spell each round. They should also be able to ready contingent on, "if he casts a regular-speed spell". If they have spellcraft then they can try to determine what the spell is before they take their action.

On the other hand, I will now be allowing PCs and NPCs to make a bluff check (opposed by either sense motive or spellcraft, whichever has a higher bonus) to convince others that they are casting a spell. Those with improved feint can do so as a move-equivalent action.

And since I'm already ranting so much, I'd like to note that the existence of alternatives to this tactic in no way influences wether or not the tactic is, in fact, valid.
 
Last edited:

AuraSeer said:
Or equivalently, you could say that a giant anvil with "DON'T CAST SPELLS" carved on the side falls out of the sky and lands on his head. That'll work just as well, and will piss off the player in exactly the same way.

Heh heh. I like that, too... I was of course being facetious, but I stick by my point - if you have a player who is exploiting a loophole, you find a way to punish what is very poor roleplaying. I'm not talking about being a vindictive DM - what I'm suggesting is that this player is throwing off the game balance by pulling a trick that stinks of abuse of the system. The fact that it's sparked such a debate suggests to me that he is at best working in a gray area. So, let's scrap the anvil-esque taste of his own medicine routine and suggest the following - Character X becomes so notorious for the use/abuse of this cantrip, that A) A higher level spellcaster decides to show him why cantrips aren't the best weapons in your arsenal, or B) The villains and NPCs hear about this tactic and come equipped for revenge.

I agree, AuraSeer, I was over the top in my Warner-Bros.-esque arrow trick. That said, the objection isn't the clever use of spells, it's the abuse of a low-level one that is throwing off game balance. I stick by my point that this player needs to be shown a lesson in-character.
 

tylerthehobo said:
Heh heh. I like that, too... I was of course being facetious, but I stick by my point - if you have a player who is exploiting a loophole, you find a way to punish what is very poor roleplaying. I'm not talking about being a vindictive DM - what I'm suggesting is that this player is throwing off the game balance by pulling a trick that stinks of abuse of the system. The fact that it's sparked such a debate suggests to me that he is at best working in a gray area. So, let's scrap the anvil-esque taste of his own medicine routine and suggest the following - Character X becomes so notorious for the use/abuse of this cantrip, that A) A higher level spellcaster decides to show him why cantrips aren't the best weapons in your arsenal, or B) The villains and NPCs hear about this tactic and come equipped for revenge.

I agree, AuraSeer, I was over the top in my Warner-Bros.-esque arrow trick. That said, the objection isn't the clever use of spells, it's the abuse of a low-level one that is throwing off game balance. I stick by my point that this player needs to be shown a lesson in-character.
But it is ok for the DM to meta-game the archers always targetting the player with readied actions if he casts a spell and there is nothing he can do to avoid it? I still say without spellcraft an NPC shouldn't know spell casting from yelling strange words and taking wierd poses etc. to draw thier fire.

RD
 

RuminDange said:
But it is ok for the DM to meta-game the archers always targetting the player with readied actions if he casts a spell and there is nothing he can do to avoid it? I still say without spellcraft an NPC shouldn't know spell casting from yelling strange words and taking wierd poses etc. to draw thier fire.

RD


Not at all - I'm not saying that dumb cutpurse NPCs should be able to deduce what the PC is up to. What I'm trying to say is that if in a fantasy world, a character became notorious for always using the same tactic, the NPCs would eventually learn who he is, and know what his tactic is. Let's say the DM who started this whole thread was lax and let his PC use this tactic well into the higher levels. If this is the only trick in his deck (despite high-level abilities), he's eventually going to encounter a powerful NPC (who may be dumb as dirt, but powerful) and be well aware of what the character's general tactic is. Yes, it is metagaming on the part of the DM to set up such an encounter, but I for one feel it is necessary, when you have the PCs overly relying on something.

I've been gaming for 20-odd years, and it's generally been accepted that if a party becomes too reliant on anything - an item, ability, skill, etc. - you find a way to present a challenge to the PCs that will cause them to...gasp...get creative. ;)

Don't get me wrong - I see the anti-metagaming argument that you and many others have presented, and I believe it IS valid. But, this character's one-trick arsenal is obviously ruining the fun of the game (At least for the DM...)
 

tylerthehobo said:
the objection isn't the clever use of spells, it's the abuse of a low-level one that is throwing off game balance. I stick by my point that this player needs to be shown a lesson in-character

My objection to your objection is that this seems to be precisely a case of a clever useage of spells. If a monk wields a spiked chain so he can get AoOs should he be punished for "abusing the system"? If faced with an enemy who has cast mirror image, should a mage be punished for casting magic missile to take all (or most) of the images down at once instead of sticking with "normal" spells?

It is my contention that characters are somewhat aware of how the world they live in works, and can develop appropriate strategies to take advantage of this. Nowhere is this more evident than in the turn sequence and initiative-related actions. The characters know how readying and delaying work, they know which actions provoke AoOs, and spellcasters know that if damaged while casting a spell it might make them screw up and miscast the spell.

How about this suggestion, a wizard could cast a quickened magic missile at the readied archers, forcing them to make a concentration check.

tylerthehobo: Where are you seeing that the Pc only has this one trick? It's likely that he has plenty of tricks, but that isn't the subject at hand. Sure some NPCs are probably going to learn about this tactic, and take actions to disrupt it, but that is not the same as:
tylerthehobo said:
I stick by my point that this player needs to be shown a lesson in-character.
 
Last edited:

Thanks, kinda

Thanks for all the replies, at least some of them, the helpful ones, I mean.

Background: Player X's wizard looks like a wizard. Robes. No armor. No obvious weapons in hand. Maybe a dagger on the belt. No disguise spells to look like a Paladin or whatever.

In a world where magic is extremely commonplace, a wizard is more dangerous than anything short of a raging barbarian (within charge range).

If you are a fighter with 2 of your buddies, and come across hated enemies in a cave somewhere, and one of the 4 hated enemies is obviously a wizard -- that's top priority. More scary than the archer type, the cleric type, the fighter type. One spell (fireball, whatever) can kill you -- period. Dead. Done. It takes the fighter at least 3 rounds to accomplish that (ok 2 or 1 with a critical).

Point is, "readying" an action to disrupt the spellcaster is a no-brainer obvious tactic. Int=10 gets you there easily. If you disrupt the spell, you a) don't die in a blast of fire, b) hurt him, c) maybe kill him.

What's not to like?

On the other hand, plunking a few arrows into the cleric or fighter will probably a) miss, or b) hit and do some damage, very unlikely to c) kill the heavily armored character.

??

Result? One of the fighters gets out his bow and readies an interrupt action; the other two fighters advance into melee.

So yes, in answer to some questions, intelligent (i.e. 10+ int) opponents in my world will very often ready an action to interrupt the spellcaster. Or try to do other thing like grapple, throw sticky bags of goo, nuke 'em with alchemist fire, etc.

It's not very common that enemies know about the PC's detailed tactics. That's very rare. In fact, I'm not sure how that would happen, unless an enemy escaped a battle and blabbed (and had spellcraft and knew what was going on). Could happen. But...rare.

In D&D spellcasting is very powerful. Very powerful. My main objection is that this tactic allows a PC, from low to high level, to get around readied actions that stop an important spell from going off.

Somebody said well what's the big deal? just grab a metamagic rod of quickening and you can get off spells anyway -- ?? Isn't that a problem with the rod, for goodness sake? And who wants to spend all that money when this is so much cheaper and easier? Hello?

I think even a Wizard11 should be worried about getting a spell off when surrounded by archers -- not all of them low-level grunts for goodness sake. This tactic nullified a high-level archer opponent's ability to dish out 25 points of damage per arrow and stop the spellcaster cold -- or at least have a fighting chance to do so. It hinders the balance greatly I feel.

I'm certainly not "out to get" the PC. He's used his tactic to good advantage, probably once every other combat. I did take away the cantrip, true. That's my perogative; I didn't forsee how powerful a free action spell could be. So sue me (sosumi).

I am "out to balance" things somewhat. I'll take the good suggestions and Idea's I've gleaned so far, and throw out the bad. Unfortunately, the tactic does seem to be legal... at least according to the latest point/counterpoint. I think.

[I would respectifully suggest that, by some of the posts written here, that it is likely that other campaigns feature intelligent creatures that don't use "readied" actions nearly enough -- but I can't be sure of this. It's not "strange" or "unusual" for an intelligent creature to take pains to save its skin. That seems pretty obvious to me. It shouldn't be seen as a repetitive or boring tactic. Is swinging a greatsword, time and time again, boring and repetitive? NC from me.]

BTW Player X has a good sense of humor about the thing and knows the cantrip he designed was a way to "screw" the system; he took it with good grace when I removed it. But he does still use Feather Fall without shame. Though still with a bit of a smile. In my direction.
 

azmodean said:
My objection to your objection is that this seems to be precisely a case of a clever useage of spells. If a monk wields a spiked chain so he can get AoOs should he be punished for "abusing the system"? If faced with an enemy who has cast mirror image, should a mage be punished for casting magic missile to take all (or most) of the images down at once instead of sticking with "normal" spells?

In these examples, I agree with you. But these are clever, standard uses of character abilities. The monk example is strictly tactical, and the mage example is just an experienced, clever use of his/her abilities. But, coming up with your own 0-level spell that is obviously throwing off game balance is another matter entirely. It is not tactical, and since it appears to be used in every encounter, it is not clever after the first few times it's done. Any DM worth his salt would throw a challenging encounter at the PC after it becomes obvious that this is his crutch.

I'm probably not being clear. I'll not waste anyone's time with further debate, but I'll close by saying that I believe that the DM should not allow the players to dictate game mechanics. Being a rules lawyer is one thing. Being a rules exploiter is another. Don't let your players boss you around. (And conversely, don't be a meanie who exploits character weaknesses.)

Being that I think I just created the word "exploiter" above, I'm obviously tapped out, and will just concede to the general flow of this thread. Good luck!
 

two said:
But he does still use Feather Fall without shame. Though still with a bit of a smile. In my direction.

As others have already pointed out, it sounds like he's absolutely misusing Feather Fall.

SRD said:
Targets: One Medium or smaller freefalling object or creature/level, no two of which may be more than 20 ft. apart

Where is his "freefalling object"? You can't just cast Feather Fall on yourself if you're not in freefall.
 

If it is an obvious tactic to ready an action to stop a spellcaster (and I agree it is) then how is a countermeasure to this tactic screwing the system?
This tactic nullified a high-level archer opponent's ability to dish out 25 points of damage per arrow and stop the spellcaster cold
As has been noted, this tactic does not nullify interfering with spellcasting, it just makes it less reliable. If I were running a NPC and one of their tactics that they rely upon to survive was stopped cold, I'd have them retreat and give some thought to counter-countermeasures.

About the misuse of featherfall, I think I'd allow a free action "hop" right before casting feather fall, though the player would have to come up with the idea first.
 
Last edited:

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top