?

Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
Irony is... 
7th-Jul-2008 08:55 am
Disney-Cat Awww

Realizing that you and your group has been using a 3.5 rule incorrectly for 5 years… the week before you switch over to 4th edition.


Please tell me that my group isn't the only one that was under the impression that if a spellcaster took damage, they had to make a concentration check on their next turn in order to cast? What's scary is that I've been a part of 3 groups and every one worked that way. So, maybe it is the correct rule? But when we went digging this week, all we could find was concentration checks for if you take damage during a 1 round or longer spell, take damage as an AoO when casting a spell, or are taking continuous damage when you cast a spell. We can't find ANYTHING on making concentration checks after you take damage. I feel like a total moron. How could we have been playing this wrong all this time?

((Not that I'm complaining, having been the spellcaster in question, but still!))
Comments 
7th-Jul-2008 02:03 pm (UTC)
I've played it so that there was no concentration check if I took damage in the previous round, but if I was doing a full round action and took damage I had to check then to see if I could hold it. I think they leave it open ended because someone people would want to play literally and others wouldn't. I'm sure someone else will have a more technical response.
7th-Jul-2008 02:11 pm (UTC)
You might check the old 3.0 SRD to see if the rules used to work that way (though I don't think it did). I know of a number of people who seem to have ignored that certain things changed at the 3.5 switch.

But no, I've never heard of anyone saying "if you take damage this round, it makes it harder for you to cast next round." That's pretty weak. :p
7th-Jul-2008 02:16 pm (UTC)
Well, I would have thought of it as you are still reeling, the pain is still fresh in your mind. But I'll admit it was a pain in the butt.
7th-Jul-2008 02:24 pm (UTC)
No, it's only if you take damage while you're actually casting the spell. Otherwise wizards would suck.
7th-Jul-2008 02:41 pm (UTC)
*lol* So, I guess that means that Lori (our always-plays-a-sorcerer-player) and I (always plays a divine spellcaster) are just that cool that we've been doing this for years. Oh, well.
7th-Jul-2008 03:00 pm (UTC)
You've started a debate elseWhere as to whether that's really an example of irony or not! ... yes, I fear some people have too much time on their hands!

7th-Jul-2008 05:02 pm (UTC)
*chokes* Are you serious? *ROLF* Okay, I'm curious (and feeling self-conscious), where?
7th-Jul-2008 03:14 pm (UTC)
As far as I can tell, you only make the "owie" Concentration check if struck while casting. Not before.
7th-Jul-2008 05:27 pm (UTC)
Offline! I know; how low tech is that!
7th-Jul-2008 07:25 pm (UTC)
If my wizard goes on a 13, and has declared that he's casting a spell, and a goblin (who goes on a 19) hits me, I have to make a concentration check in order to get the spell off.

That's how we've always played it, at least.
7th-Jul-2008 07:52 pm (UTC)
That's how we've played it, too. Apparently, that's not in the PHB. I've nothing against house rules and we have several, but usually if we are playing with house rules, we at least know and acknowledge that they are house rules. I just found the whole thing funny.
7th-Jul-2008 11:10 pm (UTC)
Pretty much what we did for a while too; we did notice that we'd got it wrong but not 'til after one long campaign and a couple of sessions of another. Although we didn't declare in advance, it was more a case of "hit the wizard, then maybe he won't get a spell off on his turn".

We did figure that it would work if the e.g. archer held an action to shoot the wizard as he cast though. I'm not sure, from what was said in these comments, if even that is right now though.
7th-Jul-2008 08:14 pm (UTC)
Wait, so do you play that you have to declare your action at the beginning of a round? If not, how do you know that you were going to cast a spell when the goblin hit you?
7th-Jul-2008 08:40 pm (UTC)
It sounds like a holdover from 2e to me. In 2nd ed, each round was a full minute, and everyone went simultaneously.
7th-Jul-2008 08:43 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I know. Which is part of why I was asking.
7th-Jul-2008 10:02 pm (UTC) - bzzzzt
wrong. I am not sure how you came to that conclusion, actually, but well done at sticking with it. I have too many players who try interesting readings of the rules as written when they don't like how the rules are being executed, but you guys stuck with it, it seems. I'm impressed. :)
This page was loaded Nov 18th 2017, 5:43 pm GMT.