I came up with this after noticing that mono-class Rangers have the least incentive to take Warcaster, but retain a significant incentive nonetheless b/c so many of their spells are sustained spells requiring concentration. Some examples include Hunter's Mark, Zephyr Strike, Conjure Animals and Guardian of Nature. This is in contrast to Paladins, whose concentration spells are mostly smites.
Of course, any spellcasting class may take this feat, though I have designed it so that stacking with Warcaster would waste half a feat.
Please let me know what you think. Is it too weak? Not useful enough? Etc.
1) Advantage to concentration checks when your are injured or disrupted while maintaining a concentration spell.
2) If you lose concention on a spell, you may spend your reaction to roll a d10. If the result of the roll is 1-4, nothing happens. If the result is 5-7, you recover a lower level spell slot than the spell you just lost concentration on. If the result is 8-10, you recover a spell slot of the same level you lost concentration on. You may only recover a spell slot lower than 6th level this way and you cannot recover the spell slot of your highest spell level.
I'd take a look at the Warcaster feat for the wording on the first effect of this feat.
Perhaps add a rest between uses of this feat? One could abuse its effect to effectively get half of their spell slots back every day, if they make sure to keep a spell requiring concentration going at all times. This is more common at mid to high tier.
You're right. It is rather abusable. I think I would need to only work once or twice per long rest. I've also been thinking of just homebrewing a version of the Ranger base class that has disruption-free concentration as a class ability through sacrificing a spell slot and time spent on a ritual. This would only work for Ranger spells, of course, to prevent it from being abused by min/maxers.
Not really sure there's a need, to be honest. A Ranger utilizing melee weapons has as much need for War Caster as a palladalladingdong at the same table does, assuming they're using two-weapon fighting (which they should be, what with Hunter's Mark) - they gain advantage on concentration and the ability to ignore somatic components with their hand stuffed full of sword. neither class gains a great deal of benefit from the spell-as-AoO option unless they get ahold of a cantrip somehow, so a wash there. If they're using a longbow or other ranged weapon then they gain a lot less benefit from War Caster, but they also have less need for War Caster, so I feel like that evens out.
Frankly, this is more useful for regular casters than War Caster is; if I were a melee Ranger picking between the two I'd favor War Caster over this one. Interesting idea, though. Defo worth workshopping.
Not really sure there's a need, to be honest. A Ranger utilizing melee weapons has as much need for War Caster as a palladalladingdong at the same table does, assuming they're using two-weapon fighting (which they should be, what with Hunter's Mark) - they gain advantage on concentration and the ability to ignore somatic components with their hand stuffed full of sword. neither class gains a great deal of benefit from the spell-as-AoO option unless they get ahold of a cantrip somehow, so a wash there. If they're using a longbow or other ranged weapon then they gain a lot less benefit from War Caster, but they also have less need for War Caster, so I feel like that evens out.
Frankly, this is more useful for regular casters than War Caster is; if I were a melee Ranger picking between the two I'd favor War Caster over this one. Interesting idea, though. Defo worth workshopping.
I asked the question about Warcaster for Pallies and Rangers on another thread and the general response was that since most DMs don't strictly adhere to the spell focus rule in re: to Rangers and Paladins anyway, most people just take Resilient unless they are planning a multi-class with another casting class, since, as you made note of yourself, these two classes don't get cantrips. I feel like half the reason for Wizards and Clerics in taking the feat is Because of the cantrip-as-opportunity attack usage of it.
Honestly, it might actually balance the feat a bit to only allow Rangers to use it.
Okay, but if it was only for Rangers, then shouldn't I just homebrew that all Rangers get this ability at, say, level 8? The point of making it a feat is to allow more than one class to allow access to it.
How about this: What if the feat allowed a caster to use magical energy from a previously concentration-disrupted spell to increase your concentration for a new concentration spell? IOW, Spell #1 gets disrupted. The feat would increase your next concentration save bonus by 2X the level of Spell # 1 to improve your concentration for Spell # 2 provided that the amount of hit point damage ruining concentration was at least equivalent to your caster level.
What do you think?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I came up with this after noticing that mono-class Rangers have the least incentive to take Warcaster, but retain a significant incentive nonetheless b/c so many of their spells are sustained spells requiring concentration. Some examples include Hunter's Mark, Zephyr Strike, Conjure Animals and Guardian of Nature. This is in contrast to Paladins, whose concentration spells are mostly smites.
Of course, any spellcasting class may take this feat, though I have designed it so that stacking with Warcaster would waste half a feat.
Please let me know what you think. Is it too weak? Not useful enough? Etc.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________-
Esoteric Entanglement
Your character gains the following:
1) Advantage to concentration checks when your are injured or disrupted while maintaining a concentration spell.
2) If you lose concention on a spell, you may spend your reaction to roll a d10. If the result of the roll is 1-4, nothing happens. If the result is 5-7, you recover a lower level spell slot than the spell you just lost concentration on. If the result is 8-10, you recover a spell slot of the same level you lost concentration on. You may only recover a spell slot lower than 6th level this way and you cannot recover the spell slot of your highest spell level.
I'd take a look at the Warcaster feat for the wording on the first effect of this feat.
Perhaps add a rest between uses of this feat? One could abuse its effect to effectively get half of their spell slots back every day, if they make sure to keep a spell requiring concentration going at all times. This is more common at mid to high tier.
You're right. It is rather abusable. I think I would need to only work once or twice per long rest. I've also been thinking of just homebrewing a version of the Ranger base class that has disruption-free concentration as a class ability through sacrificing a spell slot and time spent on a ritual. This would only work for Ranger spells, of course, to prevent it from being abused by min/maxers.
Not really sure there's a need, to be honest. A Ranger utilizing melee weapons has as much need for War Caster as a palladalladingdong at the same table does, assuming they're using two-weapon fighting (which they should be, what with Hunter's Mark) - they gain advantage on concentration and the ability to ignore somatic components with their hand stuffed full of sword. neither class gains a great deal of benefit from the spell-as-AoO option unless they get ahold of a cantrip somehow, so a wash there. If they're using a longbow or other ranged weapon then they gain a lot less benefit from War Caster, but they also have less need for War Caster, so I feel like that evens out.
Frankly, this is more useful for regular casters than War Caster is; if I were a melee Ranger picking between the two I'd favor War Caster over this one. Interesting idea, though. Defo worth workshopping.
Please do not contact or message me.
Honestly, it might actually balance the feat a bit to only allow Rangers to use it.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I asked the question about Warcaster for Pallies and Rangers on another thread and the general response was that since most DMs don't strictly adhere to the spell focus rule in re: to Rangers and Paladins anyway, most people just take Resilient unless they are planning a multi-class with another casting class, since, as you made note of yourself, these two classes don't get cantrips. I feel like half the reason for Wizards and Clerics in taking the feat is Because of the cantrip-as-opportunity attack usage of it.
Okay, but if it was only for Rangers, then shouldn't I just homebrew that all Rangers get this ability at, say, level 8? The point of making it a feat is to allow more than one class to allow access to it.
How about this: What if the feat allowed a caster to use magical energy from a previously concentration-disrupted spell to increase your concentration for a new concentration spell? IOW, Spell #1 gets disrupted. The feat would increase your next concentration save bonus by 2X the level of Spell # 1 to improve your concentration for Spell # 2 provided that the amount of hit point damage ruining concentration was at least equivalent to your caster level.
What do you think?