|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 18, 2012 3:27:37 GMT -8
I have noticed that in my 3.5 "munchkin group" that spell casters gain their DEX bonus to AC. This is in addition to their concentration check to see if a spell fails when struck.
I wonder if this is specifically by the rules as written.
In AD&D 1e, this DEX bonus to AC and concentration skill stuff does not exist. If you stand there vibrating magic words and making somatic hand gestures (hint: it's not swatting flies), then you are rooted to the spot.
10 level wizard vs 5 archers... and someone is going to tell me that wizards are high powered in AD&D 1e.
I just want to know when common sense left D&D RAW.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2012 4:41:08 GMT -8
Yes, you do not lose your DEX bonus to AC if you are spellcasting. Casting spells in DnD is a matter of a couple of words and gestures, it's not about channeling the forces of the cosmos through your inner being. Still your can prepare attacks to interrupt them, the concentration DCs are pretty large, or grapple them to stop them from casting. Of course a mid to high level caster can be easily prepared for these things in plenty of ways, even if he only has access to vanilla spells from the core books. If he is a druid, you might as well forget about it, he can become a dire bear and out-wrestle you... So yes, spell casters are overpowered in D&D 3.x I just want to know when common sense left D&D RAW. Never, common sense and D&D never saw eye to eye.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 18, 2012 4:55:52 GMT -8
When did this ridiculousness occur in the rules? When did D&D throw out the 1e mechanic: did it happen in 2nd ed? or in 3x? (This will help me understand player's expectation from edition to edition so I ask.)
I play with hand wavers so I never really thought about much at their table. In fact, not thinking is best for me.
Combat has become more involved and convoluted RAW as the editions progress but then this common sense "suggested mechanic" from 1e got dropped?! Boggles the mind. Is it a written RAW or an RAW from omission?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2012 7:35:27 GMT -8
I don't see how keeping your Dex bonus to AC when casting is ridiculous. It's gestures and words, then BOOM... spell happens. I can recite the national anthem while still being able to dodge, why the wizard with 18 int can't ?
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 18, 2012 7:57:03 GMT -8
I don't see how keeping your Dex bonus to AC when casting is ridiculous. It's gestures and words, then BOOM... spell happens. I can recite the national anthem while still being able to dodge, why the wizard with 18 int can't ? You're not well acquainted with magic practice.... Try this while running or dodging: The somatic component is not swatting flies. There is concentration. The verbal is vibration of the air not speaking into it. LBRP can be quickly done with practice and force of True Will. As I explain to players, casting is not as easy as shooting a target from the back of a horse.... but it is powerful when it comes off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2012 12:15:22 GMT -8
That video is very remiscant of the spells that take quite a bit of time to cast like Identify or Despel Magic, but combat spells wouldn't be very valuable in that case. Even in 1st and 2nd ed D&D spells only took a matter of seconds to fire off. It used to be that it took a few steps of initative order ( a few seconds) and now they take an action in a 6 second round.
In D&D/Pathfinder there are a bunch of different types of spells, not all of them are long rituals.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 18, 2012 14:06:25 GMT -8
Even in 1st ... ed D&D spells only took a matter of seconds to fire off. Rounds of combat were calculated in one minute time. Segments of rounds were calculated in 10 seconds. Action was not broken into segments but were whole 1-minute abstractions. It is possible to do this ritual in one minute. I have done it, as a minor ritual. But you cannot hold mental focus, create the effects; observe the directional points of power; and keep vibration while running, dodging or overtly concentrating on anything other than the magic. A magic user is not like a swordsman. One uses mental INTellect and the other uses STRength as the base for attack for reason. That used to be acknowledged in 1e.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2012 3:46:11 GMT -8
Don't make me quote pages from the 3.x books that are dusting in my loft, 1 round is 6 seconds, most spells are standard actions that are less than that: spells have somatic and verbal components and you CAN move while casting, so yes you can dodge.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2012 8:07:06 GMT -8
Even in 1st ... ed D&D spells only took a matter of seconds to fire off. Rounds of combat were calculated in one minute time. Segments of rounds were calculated in 10 seconds. Action was not broken into segments but were whole 1-minute abstractions. It is possible to do this ritual in one minute. I have done it, as a minor ritual. But you cannot hold mental focus, create the effects; observe the directional points of power; and keep vibration while running, dodging or overtly concentrating on anything other than the magic. A magic user is not like a swordsman. One uses mental INTellect and the other uses STRength as the base for attack for reason. That used to be acknowledged in 1e. if I remember correctly, each roll for initative was 10 seconds, and the player who rolled the lowest number went first, being that thier action was the first second, and whoever rolled a 2 happened in the 2nd second...etc. Spells had a "casting time" which was how many ticks in initative they took before resolving. Most spells did not take the full 10 initative "ticks" or what ever the units were. I dont have my 1st ed books anymore, but that is how i recall it working. I loved that timing system, but spells still werent taking multiple minutes. After having read the original dragonlance novels, and the section where Raistlin was being trained to be a battle-caster, there was a lot of discussion on how casting was sped up in that book. I believe it was Brothers in Arms? It talked about how wizards had to train to become faster at casting spells, but it has been possible since the era of Dragonlance (2E?) for sure
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 19, 2012 8:23:55 GMT -8
Rounds of combat were calculated in one minute time. Segments of rounds were calculated in 10 seconds. Action was not broken into segments but were whole 1-minute abstractions. It is possible to do this ritual in one minute. I have done it, as a minor ritual. But you cannot hold mental focus, create the effects; observe the directional points of power; and keep vibration while running, dodging or overtly concentrating on anything other than the magic. A magic user is not like a swordsman. One uses mental INTellect and the other uses STRength as the base for attack for reason. That used to be acknowledged in 1e. if I remember correctly, each roll for initative was 10 seconds, and the player who rolled the lowest number went first, being that thier action was the first second, and whoever rolled a 2 happened in the 2nd second...etc. Spells had a "casting time" which was how many ticks in initative they took before resolving. Most spells did not take the full 10 initative "ticks" or what ever the units were. I dont have my 1st ed books anymore, but that is how i recall it working. I loved that timing system, but spells still werent taking multiple minutes. After having read the original dragonlance novels, and the section where Raistlin was being trained to be a battle-caster, there was a lot of discussion on how casting was sped up in that book. I believe it was Brothers in Arms? It talked about how wizards had to train to become faster at casting spells, but it has been possible since the era of Dragonlance (2E?) for sure Hi. I am in the process of reading this document, A.D.D.I.C.T. as a complete annotated summary of the AD&D 1e combat system and I much appreciate the "scholarly" work that went into this - courtesy of the good people at Dragonsfoot.org. As I recall, initiative was for each and every 1-minute round. Segments were a measure for action order. Missile weapons had a modifier based on dexterity bonus/malus but melee weapons each had weapon speed factors and spells had casting time in segments. There were 10 segments to a round (during which time the caster was flat footed). Initiative was determined by highest party D6 roll. A result of 1 on the D6 meant surprise for a party and a tie meant action was simultaneous between two parties. That's all back in the day. 3.5 made Dex an ubber stat by making it part of everyone's initiaive determination from what I can tell. Or it might have happened in 2e with the introduction of THAC0 (to replace the "to hit" charts of 1e) .
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Sept 19, 2012 11:27:26 GMT -8
In 1st Edition a combat round was 1 minute
In 2nd Edition (I don't remember without going to look)
In 3.x and Pathfinder a combat round is 6 seconds
We can want it to be different and can house rule it to be different, but that's the way the rules read.
Combat magic (in particular) is not a ritual and thus, it makes sense that a spell caster can move, dodge, throw a fireball and still pick his nose. Now certain spells (not combat and they are well described in the rules) are ritualistic and during those times a spell caster would not be allowed their dex bonus for ac. At least not if I'm the one gm'ing. But then again who in their right mind (Ok we're talking about spell casters what does "right mind" have to do with anything?) would cast a ritual spell in the middle of a fight?
Just my 2 krupplenicks worth, your mileage may of course vary.
JiB
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 19, 2012 12:14:54 GMT -8
I was just wondering at what edition the DEX bonus began to apply to spell casters' AC while casting - given that allot of what I have read about magic-users being over powered occurs in 3.5 game topics. Beyond facelifts, the majority of spells have not changed in maginitude of power. It is still one spell per round (1-minute or 6-second timings).
Magic incorporate somatic "sign language" and verbal "incantation oritory" There is a way to use spellcraft to identify a spell from these things much like identifying a weapon by sight. Only thing is, the effect of movement does not change the ability to identify a melee weapon was it would from, say, a magic user's somatics while twirling on ice skates or speaking while joustling on horseback.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Sept 20, 2012 6:47:53 GMT -8
If memory serves (and it may not) it first showed up in 3.x.
If in our magical construct we're talking in terms of a ritual (complex gestures and a convoluted string of words) then I agree completely with your premise.
If in our magical construct we're talking in terms of a word and a gesture then I agree with the rules as expressed in Pathfinder.
All sort of revolves around how we envision the magic being cast.
Personally I rather like the idea of spellcasters being more mobile and active, but that's just me.
Cheers,
JiB
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 20, 2012 7:25:43 GMT -8
If memory serves (and it may not) it first showed up in 3.x. If in our magical construct we're talking in terms of a ritual (complex gestures and a convoluted string of words) then I agree completely with your premise. If in our magical construct we're talking in terms of a word and a gesture then I agree with the rules as expressed in Pathfinder. All sort of revolves around how we envision the magic being cast. Personally I rather like the idea of spellcasters being more mobile and active, but that's just me. Cheers, JiB Thanks JiB. I was wondering where the rule came about as I have to explain things that are different to different experiences. I already have one min-maxer that for some reason, after walking out on my game, wants to return to my game but wants to ... well, fuck, obviously wants to know all the rules and how they fit to min-max, right? So he is getting his, you-know-you-should-not-mess-with-the-book freak on. GM = System.. he just cannot grok that. And I do not need rules lawyers at my table. I might throw this fish back. Anyway, THAT is why I am so persnickety and invaded the 3.x Thread to get an answer. (For me, play should be less work and more fun.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2012 8:48:07 GMT -8
if I remember correctly, each roll for initative was 10 seconds, and the player who rolled the lowest number went first, being that thier action was the first second, and whoever rolled a 2 happened in the 2nd second...etc. Spells had a "casting time" which was how many ticks in initative they took before resolving. Most spells did not take the full 10 initative "ticks" or what ever the units were. I dont have my 1st ed books anymore, but that is how i recall it working. I loved that timing system, but spells still werent taking multiple minutes. After having read the original dragonlance novels, and the section where Raistlin was being trained to be a battle-caster, there was a lot of discussion on how casting was sped up in that book. I believe it was Brothers in Arms? It talked about how wizards had to train to become faster at casting spells, but it has been possible since the era of Dragonlance (2E?) for sure Hi. I am in the process of reading this document, A.D.D.I.C.T. as a complete annotated summary of the AD&D 1e combat system and I much appreciate the "scholarly" work that went into this - courtesy of the good people at Dragonsfoot.org. As I recall, initiative was for each and every 1-minute round. Segments were a measure for action order. Missile weapons had a modifier based on dexterity bonus/malus but melee weapons each had weapon speed factors and spells had casting time in segments. There were 10 segments to a round (during which time the caster was flat footed). Initiative was determined by highest party D6 roll. A result of 1 on the D6 meant surprise for a party and a tie meant action was simultaneous between two parties. That's all back in the day. 3.5 made Dex an ubber stat by making it part of everyone's initiaive determination from what I can tell. Or it might have happened in 2e with the introduction of THAC0 (to replace the "to hit" charts of 1e) . I must be thinking of 2nd edition then because that sounds about halfway like what I remember. (I first learned to play with a combination of 1E/2E books based on what we could scrape together, so it's likely I've jumbled things up). Once I unpack I'll have to check my D&D 2E books. I remember the 1 minute rounds, but the rules I remember asked for a d10 roll and you acted in the 6-second interval/segment of that minute that the d10 indicated.
|
|