Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 9437239" data-attributes="member: 6877472">Concentration annoys me.  The problem it set out to solve was spell combos and layering buffs (and probably self-buffing too), things that were a menace in 3.5.But even if most buff spells weren't nerfed into the ground (I mean, enlarge for +1d4 weapon damage?  As a second level spell slot?), all this does is prevent anyone from using them ever, as you have more important spells to concentrate on.Cast magic weapon or fly to help your BSF?  Sorry my guy, sleet storm, slow, sickening radiance, wall of force, and many more, are higher priority, and have a greater impact!And spell combos, sure, those can get nasty, but all that prevents is one spellcaster being able to pull them off.  Two or more still can, and it's trivial to have a party full of spellcasters in 5e.Then of course, the DC of concentration is fairly low- most concentration checks are going to be DC 10 anyways, and only banning feats and multiclassing is going to prevent someone from figuring out how to get an effective +9 to their check eventually (I'm reminded of the 3.5 Concentration skill, which could easily be bulked up so that casting on the defensive was an automatic feat).I know a lot of people are terrified of casters getting more powerful, lol, and removing concentration is the stuff of their nightmares (some want all spells to be interruptible, and for spells to have a chance to turn the caster inside out, for fun!), but I don't think concentration is doing what it's meant to be doing, and it's not a great balancing force on spells either.  In fact, the one thing I've noticed it does do (and the main reason why I'm loath to remove it from my game) is keep players from casting leveled spells willy-nilly, lol.  Because if my players could cast leveled spells every turn, they would, but the fact that many cool spells have concentration attached to them just narrowly avoids 5MWD's.I'll stop short of saying how I think spells should work, because that's beyond the scope of the thread's topic.</blockquote>

Verification