My @!@#! Player abusing Feather Fall

[Paragon]

my question would be how often does a mage in your game get blasted by archers or melee's with readied actions? if you get hit 4 times by people waiting for you to cast a spell common sense would say you should try something different. is it that NPC's are allowed tactis, "i ready to shoot him if he casts a spell" and pc's are not?
if the character has an ingame reason for doing it, it's not metagaming.

my 2cents

word

 

[billd91]

<snip>
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).

So what's the point of a metamagic rod? So you do the same thing this character is doing with a REAL spell (rather than just a throwaway spell) and still get another spell off later in the round free of readied arrows. This character just came up with a way to do it with his cantrip slots (and now 1st level slots). Again, I can't really see anything wrong with it and I think you are out for unwarranted payback. You might as well drop that NO SPELLCASTING anvil on him if you are going to invalidate his response to you always readying missile weapons.
I suppose one other tactic he could take to neutralize your archers would be to simply refuse to cast anything. They ready, he says "psyche" and then fires a crossbow instead. Now those archers have egg all over their faces because they not only didn't hit the spellcaster to disrupt him, but they also didn't get to take their regular attack while the caster still got to do something (perhaps even move into cover).

I personally can't see anything wrong with his tactic nor can I see it as any more metagamey than readying an action to fire at the casters. Both tactics are taking advantage of the game knowledge that getting hit right during the act of casting is worse than getting hit even a moment before or after. But, arguably, that IS something a character could know in the game.

Ultimately, the wizard character IS giving up something to use the tactic. He's still provoking their attacks from their held actions and he's still casting a real spell. He's still taking a risk of taking too much damage to actually get the spell off (due to overall damage) and he'll still provoke AoO if threatened when he takes that later standard spell casting action.

I think you should gracefully admit that the player came up with a good tactic to counter your tactic and live with it.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

Yes, Patryn, I'm revising the wording of my position.

Let me recapitulate.

To disrupt a spell, you need to ready an action with the trigger "If he starts casting a spell".

By the footnote on the Concentration skill table, it is my belief that it says that you cannot disrupt a spell that takes less than 1 action to cast.

If you ready an action to disrupt a spell, and said spell takes less than 1 action to cast, then, one of two things:
a) The spell is cast before the action that would interrupt it, which would contradict what's written about the Ready action.
b) The interrupting action isn't, in fact, triggered at all.

If a), then, two things:
a1) The tactic is even BETTER than first thought, since the arrow can't interrupt the free spell and is shot anyway before the second spell is cast
a2) Since the round is supposed to be continuous and not actually divided into actions, the arrow strikes the wizard as he is beginning to cast his 2nd spell, forcing a Concentration check (wacky idea, I know)

If b) then the archer is still readying to disrupt the spellcaster.

Anyways. Going away for the week-end, I'll see how it all turns out when I get back. Have a good one all, and it's been fun working on my (far from adequate) logic skills.

AR

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Let me recapitulate.

You give in again? I am t3h win!

To disrupt a spell, you need to ready an action with the trigger "If he starts casting a spell".

Specifically, you would "ready an action to attack him if he starts casting a spell." Agreed so far.

By the footnote on the Concentration skill table, it is my belief that it says that you cannot disrupt a spell that takes less than 1 action to cast.

Agreed - with the addition of "1 standard action to cast."

If you ready an action to disrupt a spell, and said spell takes less than 1 action to cast, then, one of two things:

a) The spell is cast before the action that would interrupt it, which would contradict what's written about the Ready action.

b) The interrupting action isn't, in fact, triggered at all.

I disagree, because you forgot the third possibility. The enemy in question readied an action to attack when the wizard begins to cast a spell.

When the wizard begins to cast a spell, the enemies get to attack. Mechanically, the attack is resolved before the spell is resolved. Cinematically, they happen simultaneously (hence my own and your examples earlier).

That in mind:

C) The interrupting action occurs, but cannot cause the wizard to lose the spell through forcing a Concentration check

They may cause the wizard to lose the spell some other way - outright killing him, silencing him for a spell with V components, blocking line of effect, etc.

If a), then, two things:
a1) The tactic is even BETTER than first thought, since the arrow can't interrupt the free spell and is shot anyway before the second spell is cast
a2) Since the round is supposed to be continuous and not actually divided into actions, the arrow strikes the wizard as he is beginning to cast his 2nd spell, forcing a Concentration check (wacky idea, I know)

If b) then the archer is still readying to disrupt the spellcaster.

Alternatively, if C:

Wizard: "Ungh! Fool - you've wasted your only shot! Calabraxes mordag!"
Archer: *dissolves in a puddle of goo*

Anyways. Going away for the week-end, I'll see how it all turns out when I get back. Have a good one all, and it's been fun working on my (far from adequate) logic skills.

Have a good one!

 

[Philip]

Any archer who readies an attack contingent on spellcasting IS metagaming.

Any sane non-metagaming archer knows that a single arrow can kill a human opponent, or at least hurt him a lot and disrupt his ability to concentrate with the arrow sticking in him.

If an archer readies such an attack he must clearly have some notion of hit points, levels etc.

 

[Fedifensor]

Okay, how about the following situation:

DM: "The archer appears to be covering you with his bow, ready to shoot if you cast."

Player: "I use my Bluff skill as part of a move action to start speaking nonsense words and wave my hand around like I'm casting." (Roll) "My Bluff check is a 20."

DM: "He shoots you - take 8 damage."

Player: "Okay, now I cast my fireball spell..."

With this tactic, you don't even waste a cantrip slot. Sure, Bluff is cross-class for Wizards...but not for Sorcerers.


Of course, a good counter-tactic for the DM to use on occasion are a few low-level wizards with a maxed-out Spellcraft. They make the roll, see he isn't casting, and their held action stays held until the character starts casting for real - at which point the magic missile spells hit him.

 

[RuminDange]

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...)

I agree with the thought that if they use the same tactic over and over or become overly reliant on anything then yeah they should be forced at some point to get creative or suffer as the world around them adapts to thier style.

I too have been gaming for 20 odd years, and many times have done just that. But who stops the DM from using the same tactic over and over again the sucks the fun out of the game for the spellcasting player?

Side note: IMC
I recently sent an character on a quest (epic level Ranger/Sorcerer/Arcane Archer character level overall around 30) for his deity and one of the requirements of the quest was he couldn't take any of his belongings (magical gear etc) with him. He had to purchase normal equipment. He was too reliant on his magical toys. He was allowed to take one other creature with him, but only one. He choose his cohort and left his familiar behind. He quickly learned that he didn't need all the other stuff and has handled the quest to this point very well.
RD

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

I'd rule that once he's attacked, all spells done that round, not just the one arrows attempt to interupt, get interupted. After all... that's what the archers are trying to do. Interupt the spell caster. By that interpretation of the rules, he can't be casting spells freely in the same round that arrows are being flung at him, regardless of if he draws their fire with a wave of his hand or whatever else.

Oh, so you'd eliminate the whole purpose of readied actions to interrupt spellcasting in the first place, huh?


BROKEN ARROWS
A Cautionary Tale

At last, the combat is joined! Al the Archer rolls for initiative and gets a whopping 23. He takes aim at Wally the Wizard (whose initiative roll was a measly 9).

The rest of his party screams, "NO, AL! WAIT UNTIL HE STARTS CASTING!"

Al smirks. "I don't have to," he says. "Doctor Shaft's given me the ability to hit him whenever I feel like hitting him this round, and the damage I do will interrupt any spell he casts. Which is good, 'cause I think his pal Frank the Fighter is going to be charging into melee with me on initiative count 18, and that would have totally hosed me if I had to wait until Wally finally goes on initiative count 9 to interrupt the spell. This way, I can take my shot and move away before Frank does anything, and still keep Wally from getting his spell off! Thanks, Doctor Shaft!"

Wally the Wizard grits his teeth and shakes his fist at the heavens (a free action). "Damn that Doctor Shaft and his off-the-cuff rules changes! I see where the 'SHAFT' part of his name came from now!"




--
another way of saying "i don't think i'd do that if i were you"
ryan

 

[Kast]

Perhaps in the best interests of all spellcasters (but especially the PCs), you should rule that Quickened spells (ie those cast as a free action) can't be interrupted by ready actions. They don't provoke AoOs after-all.

 

[Anax]

I agree with (what seems like) the majority of the people here: this sounds like smart tactics to me. A very nice trick, and well within the spirit of the game.

The bad guys, however, have ways to one up this again. If they see him do it a lot, they can look for something that isn't there. For example, Feather Fall has no somatic or material components, but most spells do. As a DM, I probably would have ruled that this prevented this specific trick from working, by the way--guards readying to attack a caster are most likely not going to shoot as soon as somebody opens his mouth. In any case, though, if this is being done a *lot*, the opposition will eventually wise up and realize it. And then they'll ready actions to "attack anyone who appears to be making arcane gestures." Or they'll stop readying and instead unload a full attack's worth of arrows into the guy in the fancy bathrobe.

Of course, this is an interesting argument that a high level non-caster has good reason to invest some skill points in Spellcraft--since that allows such a character to tell if there's actually a thread involved. You don't even need a terribly large amount to be able to distinguish well. And any character who has worked on techniques for fighting mages should certainly invest.

Of further note, I would treat this (and all other quickened spells, or reactive spells like Feather Fall) as the XPH "Immediate Action." That means that the spell counts against the quickened spells for the round--and at higher levels, the tactic will be potentially less useful if the caster has the ability (through feats or equipment) to quicken spells. I know I'd rather just try to get two fireballs off. It is perhaps more obvious in the context of psionics, though, since there are significantly more reactive psionic powers than there are reactive spells. (Whether that's because this is something they wanted to be special to psionics, or because the authors simply hadn't realized how cool it could be, I'm not sure.)

Anyway, interesting tactic. Thanks for telling about it.