You are confusing the spell's effect (there is only one, as per PH p 202 ("The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect." <= singular) and the various game effects created by the spell. The spell's duration is concentration, but the first effect is clearly instantaneous.
Not really, no. And no, if we go by RAW and your own words that spells only persists during their duration then the effects of a spell with duration C is not Instantenous. You can't have it both ways.
Again, you are confusing the spell's effect (only one) with the game effects created by the spell effect. In the case of Wall of Fire, the sequence is clear from RAW:
No, you are making up things as you go along. There is nothing in the rules that says that there are different durations for "the spell's effect" and "the game effects". Even if you did change the rules the way you propose, it would go against your previous claims for how long spells persists.
You cast the spell, so that means that you get the Spell's effect. There is no reason in the rules to deny this. It might be instantaneous, it might have a zero duration, but if you don't allow the effect to happen at all, you are, for not RAW reason, preventing the casting of the spell. Unless there is a special effect or rule that prevents a spell from being cast, which is not the case here, the spell effect happens.
Then you just read the spell description / effect: You create a wall of fire
Then you continue reading: When the wall appears, each creature within its area must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, a creature takes 5d8 fire damage, or half as much damage on a successful save.
The effect has been put in place, therefore the wall has appeared, therefore it has done damage
How long will that effect last ? You then check the rules on concentration spell: "Some spells require you to maintain concentration in order to keep their magic active." You can't have concentration, so the magic is not KEPT active. It does not prevent it from having been active at the time the spell was cast.
So the spell effect ends, duration concentration, it's fine. It does not prevent the GAME effect which is the power of the SPELL effect to have taken place, instantaneously if you want to put a word to it.
SPELL EFFECT: Concentration, finr
GAME EFFECT 1 = akin to simultaneous.
Sorry, can't find anything the rules that talk about "akin to simultaneous". The durations in question are "instantenous" and "concentration".
I'm just applying the exact wording of that specific spell. The question are simple:
Is the spell cast ? YES
Is the wall created ? YES, because the spell starts with "You create a wall of fire"
Does the wall appear ? YES, see above
Is damage dealt ? YES, because the spell says "When the wall appears..."
Now, for me, it is very suspiciously like a fireball, which has a duration of instantaneous and does about the same thing. You might want to say it differently, but the reasoning above is absolutely RAW and incontroversible.
Well, that is your interpretation of the rules but RAW they are completely different since one spell is Concentration and the other is Instantenous. You can check for yourself on pages 241 and 285 of the PHB.
I know them very well and have no problem with them, as specific beats general, and the Wall of Fire specific rules, incontroversible as shown above, show that the initial effect applies even if you strop concentrating on the spell the moment it's cast.
I'm not interested in you moving the goalposts, I'm interested in you showing us the rules for changing the duration of spells from Concentration to Instantenous just because you change the time you concentrate on it. Again, if you want to interpret the rules that way I see no problem with it but it isn't RAW.
And again, you are strawmanning, because I have never proposed changing the duration of a spell. What I've proven to you on multiple occasions now is that the specific rules of some spells (in particular wall of fire) do damage instantaneously on casting them, which is enough to cover this edge case completely without any doubt.
Well, no. Since you claim that effects that persist during spells that have concentration takes place "instantenous". By RAW they do not. You have yet to show proof that WoF have a duration that, according to the rules, have is anything other than Concentration. Your interpretation that "some of the effects happen when the spell is cast" does not change the RAW duration of the spell. Simple as that.
And you can claim all you want in terms of general rules, absolutely everything, but you cannot go around the facts that:
No, I'm pointing out that your claims doesn't follow RAW, despite you claiming them to do so.
Specific beats general
The rules in WoF are more specific than ANY global spellcasting rules.
When you cast the spell, as per its SPECIFIC description, the WoF appears and does damage. This is independent of any duration, it's just reading the spell description as a specific rule.
After that, you can do whatever you want with the duration, but the spell has been cast and its SPECIFIC effect has been applied, RAW.
I choose to call that SPECIFIC effect instantaneous because it behaves EXACTLY like an instantaneous effect like Fireball. There is zero technical difference. If you want to call it anything else, fine, but you cannot prove from the RAW that preventing concentration prevents a spell from being cast. It is therefore cast and you apply its specific rules before any other general rules. This is the RAW.
There can be multiple interpretations of RAW, particularly in edge cases like this.
Absolutely. No-one has ever claimed that there can't be. I'm just pointing out the fact that as soon as you start interpreting things, you are no longer in the realms of RAW.
I'm not going to go through the evidence again, because you are obviously not reading them and/or have your head locked on one interpretation of the words on the page.
No need to be rude. I've never said that there is anything wrong with the way you want to interpret the rules but, as has been pointed out numerous times, interpretations aren't RAW.
This is a good example of what I was talking about earlier, where two people can read the same rule in two completely different ways and be unable (or unwilling) to see any alternative.
If you are unwilling to see things from other people's perespective, that's on you. I'm just sticking to the facts. :)
And one last thing. Concentration is NOT a duration as some has claimed. Concentration is something you need to maintain (for some spells) during the duration.
According to the rules, you are wrong. Or do you have some kind of explanation that explains why, as Lyxen points out "spells only persists during their duration" and there are a bunch of spells that has "concentration" mentioned as their duration?
This is a 'lost in the weeds' tangent but what you're looking for is the distinction between zero and null.
This has nothing to do with null vs zero. This is just pointing out the fact that, as Lyxen has just pointed out, the duration of a spell is important. Some spells have "concentration" as the duration, other spells have "instantenous" as the duration. Nowhere in the RAW does it state that concentrating for zero time changes the duration from "concetration" to "instantenous".
Well, if you concentrate for zero seconds, and the spell duration is concentration... then, your concentration was itself instantaneous, and so therefore so too was the duration.
Check the work:
Zero seconds = Instantaneous
Duration = Concentration
zero second concentration = instantaneous concentration = instantaneous duration
Can you quote the number of the page that says that concentrating for zero time turns the spell's duration from "Concentration" to "Instantenous"? Because if we go by RAW, those two are not the same.
Check. The. Work.
zero seconds = instantaneous
duration = concentration
zero second concentration = instantaneous concentration = instantaneous duration
This is patently false. There is nothing in the RAW that backs up this claim. Rules-wise, following the game mechanics as written in the rules, you are wrong. The fact that you can't quote a page number is evidence of this.
And one last thing. Concentration is NOT a duration as some has claimed. Concentration is something you need to maintain (for some spells) during the duration.
According to the rules, you are wrong. Or do you have some kind of explanation that explains why, as Lyxen points out "spells only persists during their duration" and there are a bunch of spells that has "concentration" mentioned as their duration?
They don't, the rules says this about duration.
Duration
A spell's duration is the length of time the spell persists. A duration can be expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years. Some spells specify that their effects last until the spells are dispelled or destroyed.
No mention of duration there. It is mentioned later though as an extra requirement for some spells.
Concentration
Some spells require you to maintain concentration in order to keep their magic active. If you lose concentration, such a spell ends.
If a spell must be maintained with concentration, that fact appears in its Duration entry, and the spell specifies how long you can concentrate on it. You can end concentration at any time (no action required).
Concentration isn't the duration, it is something that you need to do to be able to maintain the spell for it's full duration (if you wish to keep it going).
And one last thing. Concentration is NOT a duration as some has claimed. Concentration is something you need to maintain (for some spells) during the duration.
According to the rules, you are wrong. Or do you have some kind of explanation that explains why, as Lyxen points out "spells only persists during their duration" and there are a bunch of spells that has "concentration" mentioned as their duration?
They don't, the rules says this about duration.
Duration
A spell's duration is the length of time the spell persists. A duration can be expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years. Some spells specify that their effects last until the spells are dispelled or destroyed.
No mention of duration there. It is mentioned later though as an extra requirement for some spells.
Concentration
Some spells require you to maintain concentration in order to keep their magic active. If you lose concentration, such a spell ends.
If a spell must be maintained with concentration, that fact appears in its Duration entry, and the spell specifies how long you can concentrate on it. You can end concentration at any time (no action required).
Concentration isn't the duration, it is something that you need to do to be able to maintain the spell for it's full duration (if you wish to keep it going).
I’ve been ignoring this thread since my extremely correct initial post back on page 1, but I have to step in to express how unbelievably and obviously wrong this position is. Every single concentration spell says “Duration: Concentration” in its info block. It is as unambiguously black and white as any rule in this game can possibly be. If your position relies and straight-up ignoring the rare example of rules text that is perfectlyclear, there is truly no hope of reasonable discussion whatsoever.
I’m honestly inclined to believe you’re coming at the entire topic in bad faith and are just trolling.
As soon as you start casting a spell or using a special ability that requires concentration, your concentration on another effect ends instantly."
Since this is clearly referring to rules already present in the PHB - it can only be referring to the rules stating that concentration on a spell ends when you cast another spell requiring concentration. This is NOT a new rule. It is not a fourth condition. It is a clarification that concentration BEGINS when you start casting a spell or using an effect requiring concentration and this instantly ends any other effect currently requiring concentration.
The underlined bit. You're making that up, whole cloth.
Reread your own quoted text, the bolded bit. It makes no mention of starting concentration whatsoever. None. You're making it up. It only says that your concentration ends on a previous effect when you start casting. Which is totally irrelevant to our question topic.Why?
You wouldn't be concentrating on a previous effect if you were incapable of concentrating.
So it is irrelevant when your concentration of a previous effect would end, in this case, entirely irrelevant. And that rule* for sure says absolutely nothing about starting any concentration on your new spell or effect. Any such notion is entirely fabricated.
*rules are not found in optional supplement books, only optional rules are.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I’m honestly inclined to believe you’re coming at the entire topic in bad faith and are just trolling.
I disagree on this sharply, there has been a lot of good discussion in this post (minus the whole "what does instantaneous mean" tangent) by both sides of the argument. I think both sides are coming from places of genuine well considered opinion, and that the discussion has really gone into the nuts and bolts of something people might otherwise just gloss over superficially only.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I’m honestly inclined to believe you’re coming at the entire topic in bad faith and are just trolling.
I disagree on this sharply, there has been a lot of good discussion in this post (minus the whole "what does instantaneous mean" tangent) by both sides of the argument. I think both sides are coming from places of genuine well considered opinion, and that the discussion has really gone into the nuts and bolts of something people might otherwise just gloss over superficially only.
My assessment there is not on any “side” but rather the specific instance of one person choosing to pretend that “Concentration” isn’t listed as a duration on every concentration spell in the game. It’s a special kind of magical thinking that I simply can’t believe comes sincerely to that person. Most of the debate has been largely well-intentioned.
It all depends on the casting time of the spell your using
the casting time decides how long a player concentrates on the cast
while duration decides how long you concentrate to maintain its effects
so if casting time is instant
and there is a instant effect produced on a target
that would be the only effect of the spell cast in this scenario
As Lyxen pointed out, the spells only persists for tehir duration. Duration is either Instantenous OR Concentration. There are no spells that have both.
And one last thing. Concentration is NOT a duration as some has claimed. Concentration is something you need to maintain (for some spells) during the duration.
According to the rules, you are wrong. Or do you have some kind of explanation that explains why, as Lyxen points out "spells only persists during their duration" and there are a bunch of spells that has "concentration" mentioned as their duration?
They don't, the rules says this about duration.
Duration
A spell's duration is the length of time the spell persists. A duration can be expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years. Some spells specify that their effects last until the spells are dispelled or destroyed.
No mention of duration there. It is mentioned later though as an extra requirement for some spells.
Concentration
Some spells require you to maintain concentration in order to keep their magic active. If you lose concentration, such a spell ends.
If a spell must be maintained with concentration, that fact appears in its Duration entry, and the spell specifies how long you can concentrate on it. You can end concentration at any time (no action required).
Concentration isn't the duration, it is something that you need to do to be able to maintain the spell for it's full duration (if you wish to keep it going).
I was going to reply more indepth to this but SagaTympana already answered it. Concentration literally is the duration. Changing the amount of time you concentrate doesn't change the duration from C to I. At least no-one has been able to show any evidence to support that claim.
OK, I'm not going to get back into this discussion, except to address these two points:
No need to be rude. I've never said that there is anything wrong with the way you want to interpret the rules but, as has been pointed out numerous times, interpretations aren't RAW.
First of all, I was in no way being rude. I apologise if it came across as such.
However, all rules require interpretation of some kind. When something is written in plain English, it will often have multiple ways in which it can be read. In this case, there are multiple valid ways to interpret the way the rules have been written. This is still discussing RAW, because it is an attempt to understand what the written rules mean. D&D isn't written in a technical language with only one possible meaning for everything. There is not always going to be One True RAW. That is certainly the case in this particular instance.
If you are unwilling to see things from other people's perespective, that's on you. I'm just sticking to the facts. :)
Erm, really?!?! I have said from the very beginning that I believe both interpretations to be valid. You, on the other hand, don't appear to have made any effort to "see things from other people's perspective". Anything you believe is "sticking to the facts", and everything which disagrees is "not RAW". Try taking a long hard look in the mirror before accusing someone in this manner.
P.S. Putting a smiley face on the end of a sentence in which you have just insulted someone doesn't suddenly make it OK.
It all depends on the casting time of the spell your using
the casting time decides how long a player concentrates on the cast
while duration decides how long you concentrate to maintain its effects
so if casting time is instant
and there is a instant effect produced on a target
that would be the only effect of the spell cast in this scenario
As Lyxen pointed out, the spells only persists for tehir duration. Duration is either Instantenous OR Concentration. There are no spells that have both.
And one last thing. Concentration is NOT a duration as some has claimed. Concentration is something you need to maintain (for some spells) during the duration.
According to the rules, you are wrong. Or do you have some kind of explanation that explains why, as Lyxen points out "spells only persists during their duration" and there are a bunch of spells that has "concentration" mentioned as their duration?
They don't, the rules says this about duration.
Duration
A spell's duration is the length of time the spell persists. A duration can be expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years. Some spells specify that their effects last until the spells are dispelled or destroyed.
No mention of duration there. It is mentioned later though as an extra requirement for some spells.
Concentration
Some spells require you to maintain concentration in order to keep their magic active. If you lose concentration, such a spell ends.
If a spell must be maintained with concentration, that fact appears in its Duration entry, and the spell specifies how long you can concentrate on it. You can end concentration at any time (no action required).
Concentration isn't the duration, it is something that you need to do to be able to maintain the spell for it's full duration (if you wish to keep it going).
I was going to reply more indepth to this but SagaTympana already answered it. Concentration literally is the duration. Changing the amount of time you concentrate doesn't change the duration from C to I. At least no-one has been able to show any evidence to support that claim.
So, the section on Duration doesn't say that "Concentration" is the duration, or even that "concentration" is a valid duration. The section on Concentration says that if it requires concentration that that fact will be listed in the Duration entry... but... it doesn't actually say that concentration IS the duration. Only that section of the spell is where it will be noted if it required concentration.
It requires you to sort of make up something that isn't actually written to say that concentration is the duration. The duration is "expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years". THAT is the duration. Concentration will simply also be noted alongside the duration if it is required. But concentration itself isn't the duration... the listed duration is the duration.
Ex. The duration of Alter Self is 1 Hour. Not "concentration". However, concentration is required to keep it active and if lost the spell ends early, before its full duration.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I’m honestly inclined to believe you’re coming at the entire topic in bad faith and are just trolling.
I disagree on this sharply, there has been a lot of good discussion in this post (minus the whole "what does instantaneous mean" tangent) by both sides of the argument. I think both sides are coming from places of genuine well considered opinion, and that the discussion has really gone into the nuts and bolts of something people might otherwise just gloss over superficially only.
My assessment there is not on any “side” but rather the specific instance of one person choosing to pretend that “Concentration” isn’t listed as a duration on every concentration spell in the game. It’s a special kind of magical thinking that I simply can’t believe comes sincerely to that person. Most of the debate has been largely well-intentioned.
They're allowed to express their opinion on the rules without getting called a troll for doing so. Especially since they're correct.
Take a look at this page for us. What do you see listed for these spells Duration? Do you see intervals of rounds, minutes, hours, and years... or do you see a solid column of just the word "concentration"?
You see their duration. Rounds. Minutes. Hours. Years.
Duration isn't Concentration. Concentration isn't duration. It is only noted in the spell's duration section if it is required. That doesn't make it the duration, only that it is simply where it lists when it is required.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
7 pages of this nonsense and you're still arguing?
Can anyone give an example of something that would make Concentration impossible without doing damage?
It's clear that if you take damage while casting you have to make a check or lose the spell. Slot gone, at will ability used, whatever. You get nada. If the check is impossible for some reason, like taking 100 points of damage from one hit, it makes no difference what the duration would have been or if concentration was required to maintain it. You get nothing.
7 pages of this nonsense and you're still arguing?
Can anyone give an example of something that would make Concentration impossible without doing damage?
It's clear that if you take damage while casting you have to make a check or lose the spell. Slot gone, at will ability used, whatever. You get nada. If the check is impossible for some reason, like taking 100 points of damage from one hit, it makes no difference what the duration would have been or if concentration was required to maintain it. You get nothing.
The initial discussion was of an effect which made concentration impossible without any other effects on spellcasting. As there are no such effects in official content, this is all hypothetical.
I do agree that this has gone on for far too long, especially as it is repeating the same points over any over. It comes down to the fact that there are 2 perfectly valid but completely conflicting ways to read the rules. There are elements who view only their own reading as remotely valid and ignore the other side, which has led to 7 pages of mostly repeated arguments without resolution.
As this is a situation which cannot occur without a homebrew effect, the real answer is that it depends what the homebrew effect says happens, or failing that what the DM says when he comes across the effect. It could be either and we cannot really know until the situation presents itself.
Can anyone give an example of something that would make Concentration impossible without doing damage?
Yes there are rules on things that could cause loss of concentration. Damage is not the only reason to lose concentration. Only one of them.
Normal activity, such as moving and attacking, doesn't interfere with concentration. The following factors can break concentration:
Casting another spell that requires concentration. You lose concentration on a spell if you cast another spell that requires concentration. You can't concentrate on two spells at once.
Taking damage. Whenever you take damage while you are concentrating on a spell, you must make a Constitution saving throw to maintain your concentration. The DC equals 10 or half the damage you take, whichever number is higher. If you take damage from multiple sources, such as an arrow and a dragon's breath, you make a separate saving throw for each source of damage.
Being incapacitated or killed. You lose concentration on a spell if you are incapacitated or if you die.
The DM might also decide that certain environmental phenomena, such as a wave crashing over you while you're on a storm-tossed ship, require you to succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw to maintain concentration on a spell.
There are three in bullet points, damage being one of them. However, take a look at the bit I highlighted in blue. This is straightforward advice to the DM that any other effect they want could prevent concentration with a save. So, I'm not so sure this is even an homebrew effect so much as an underutilized official rule?
Edit: Oh! There is even an effect in PHB that does exactly this:
If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging.
It just also prevents you from casting them.
So this is a situation in which you cannot concentrate on them but can still cast.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If it is a homebrew effect... I'm going to suggest it be altered in this way...
Old Sleet Storm:
If a creature is concentrating in the spell’s area, the creature must make a successful Constitution saving throw against your spell save DC or lose concentration.
Errata'd Sleet Storm:
If a creature starts its turn in the spell's area and is concentrating on a spell, the creature must make a successful Constitution saving throw against your spell save DC or lose concentration.
So this would cause the effect to be checked at the start of the victim's turn. A clear trigger point, and clear effect. It sidestep's the whole issue of "can you cast a concentration spell while being unable to concentrate."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Can anyone give an example of something that would make Concentration impossible without doing damage?
There are several game features that require concentration, that are not themselves spells. I'm not sure if they count for this discussion.
E.g. Draconic Presence (Sorcerer, Draconic, 18). Visions of the Past (Cleric, Knowledge, 17). Invoke Duplicity (Cleric, Trickery, 2). Dark Delirium (Warlock, Archfey, 14). Minor Alchemy (Wizard, Transmutation, 2).
Several magic items might require concentration, depending on how you read them. E.g. marvellous pigments.
The most obvious effect would be something environmental. Maybe the deck of a ship in a wild storm. Perhaps during a massive earthquake.
It all depends on the casting time of the spell your using
the casting time decides how long a player concentrates on the cast
while duration decides how long you concentrate to maintain its effects
so if casting time is instant
and there is a instant effect produced on a target
that would be the only effect of the spell cast in this scenario
As Lyxen pointed out, the spells only persists for tehir duration. Duration is either Instantenous OR Concentration. There are no spells that have both.
And one last thing. Concentration is NOT a duration as some has claimed. Concentration is something you need to maintain (for some spells) during the duration.
According to the rules, you are wrong. Or do you have some kind of explanation that explains why, as Lyxen points out "spells only persists during their duration" and there are a bunch of spells that has "concentration" mentioned as their duration?
They don't, the rules says this about duration.
Duration
A spell's duration is the length of time the spell persists. A duration can be expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years. Some spells specify that their effects last until the spells are dispelled or destroyed.
No mention of duration there. It is mentioned later though as an extra requirement for some spells.
Concentration
Some spells require you to maintain concentration in order to keep their magic active. If you lose concentration, such a spell ends.
If a spell must be maintained with concentration, that fact appears in its Duration entry, and the spell specifies how long you can concentrate on it. You can end concentration at any time (no action required).
Concentration isn't the duration, it is something that you need to do to be able to maintain the spell for it's full duration (if you wish to keep it going).
I was going to reply more indepth to this but SagaTympana already answered it. Concentration literally is the duration. Changing the amount of time you concentrate doesn't change the duration from C to I. At least no-one has been able to show any evidence to support that claim.
So, the section on Duration doesn't say that "Concentration" is the duration, or even that "concentration" is a valid duration. The section on Concentration says that if it requires concentration that that fact will be listed in the Duration entry... but... it doesn't actually say that concentration IS the duration. Only that section of the spell is where it will be noted if it required concentration.
It requires you to sort of make up something that isn't actually written to say that concentration is the duration. The duration is "expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years". THAT is the duration. Concentration will simply also be noted alongside the duration if it is required. But concentration itself isn't the duration... the listed duration is the duration.
Ex. The duration of Alter Self is 1 Hour. Not "concentration". However, concentration is required to keep it active and if lost the spell ends early, before its full duration.
Well, you are still wrong even if you don't care to admit it. If the actually text in the book is not enough to convince you, I don't know what is.
But I take it that your current stance means that you are disagreeing with Lyxen's claim that spells only persist during their duration?
Well, you are still wrong even if you don't care to admit it. If the actually text in the book is not enough to convince you, I don't know what is.
But I take it that your current stance means that you are disagreeing with Lyxen's claim that spells only persist during their duration?
This doesn't seem like a meaningful contribution to the topic. Declaring people "are wrong" with only vague reference to "the book" is quite literally the opposite of helpful.
Edit; And no, I agree with Lyxen that spells only persist for their duration. Though things can of course end them earlier.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Well, you are still wrong even if you don't care to admit it. If the actually text in the book is not enough to convince you, I don't know what is.
But I take it that your current stance means that you are disagreeing with Lyxen's claim that spells only persist during their duration?
This doesn't seem like a meaningful contribution to the topic. Declaring people "are wrong" with only vague reference to "the book" is quite literally the opposite of helpful.
I have referred to the relevant rules numerous times, as have many others. I have also asked were I kind find the rules for changing the duration of a spell from "duration" to "instantenous" but no-one has been able to provide it.
Edit; And no, I agree with Lyxen that spells only persist for their duration. Though things can of course end them earlier.
Excellent. So you agree with what I just said then. You can't change the duration of a spell from "concentration" to "instantenous".
Well, you are still wrong even if you don't care to admit it. If the actually text in the book is not enough to convince you, I don't know what is.
But I take it that your current stance means that you are disagreeing with Lyxen's claim that spells only persist during their duration?
This doesn't seem like a meaningful contribution to the topic. Declaring people "are wrong" with only vague reference to "the book" is quite literally the opposite of helpful.
Edit; And no, I agree with Lyxen that spells only persist for their duration. Though things can of course end them earlier.
So, I don't think anyone's references have been all that vague if you take everything in total, but I'll try to collect everything together for you. As I said, every single concentration spell explicitly lists "concentration" as its duration.
Every.
Single.
One.
Concentration is explicitly listed as a duration alongside (but distinct from) "Instantaneous" as one of the two durations that require more explanation than the simple "x rounds/minutes/hours/etc."
The book is unbelievably clear about this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
No, you are making up things as you go along. There is nothing in the rules that says that there are different durations for "the spell's effect" and "the game effects". Even if you did change the rules the way you propose, it would go against your previous claims for how long spells persists.
Sorry, can't find anything the rules that talk about "akin to simultaneous". The durations in question are "instantenous" and "concentration".
No, I'm pointing out that your claims doesn't follow RAW, despite you claiming them to do so.
So it's not RAW? Glad you admit that. Thanks!
Absolutely. No-one has ever claimed that there can't be. I'm just pointing out the fact that as soon as you start interpreting things, you are no longer in the realms of RAW.
If you are unwilling to see things from other people's perespective, that's on you. I'm just sticking to the facts. :)
According to the rules, you are wrong. Or do you have some kind of explanation that explains why, as Lyxen points out "spells only persists during their duration" and there are a bunch of spells that has "concentration" mentioned as their duration?
This is patently false. There is nothing in the RAW that backs up this claim. Rules-wise, following the game mechanics as written in the rules, you are wrong. The fact that you can't quote a page number is evidence of this.
They don't, the rules says this about duration.
No mention of duration there. It is mentioned later though as an extra requirement for some spells.
Concentration isn't the duration, it is something that you need to do to be able to maintain the spell for it's full duration (if you wish to keep it going).
I’ve been ignoring this thread since my extremely correct initial post back on page 1, but I have to step in to express how unbelievably and obviously wrong this position is. Every single concentration spell says “Duration: Concentration” in its info block. It is as unambiguously black and white as any rule in this game can possibly be. If your position relies and straight-up ignoring the rare example of rules text that is perfectly clear, there is truly no hope of reasonable discussion whatsoever.
I’m honestly inclined to believe you’re coming at the entire topic in bad faith and are just trolling.
The underlined bit. You're making that up, whole cloth.
Reread your own quoted text, the bolded bit. It makes no mention of starting concentration whatsoever. None. You're making it up. It only says that your concentration ends on a previous effect when you start casting. Which is totally irrelevant to our question topic.Why?
You wouldn't be concentrating on a previous effect if you were incapable of concentrating.
So it is irrelevant when your concentration of a previous effect would end, in this case, entirely irrelevant. And that rule* for sure says absolutely nothing about starting any concentration on your new spell or effect. Any such notion is entirely fabricated.
*rules are not found in optional supplement books, only optional rules are.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I disagree on this sharply, there has been a lot of good discussion in this post (minus the whole "what does instantaneous mean" tangent) by both sides of the argument. I think both sides are coming from places of genuine well considered opinion, and that the discussion has really gone into the nuts and bolts of something people might otherwise just gloss over superficially only.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
My assessment there is not on any “side” but rather the specific instance of one person choosing to pretend that “Concentration” isn’t listed as a duration on every concentration spell in the game. It’s a special kind of magical thinking that I simply can’t believe comes sincerely to that person. Most of the debate has been largely well-intentioned.
It all depends on the casting time of the spell your using
the casting time decides how long a player concentrates on the cast
while duration decides how long you concentrate to maintain its effects
so if casting time is instant
and there is a instant effect produced on a target
that would be the only effect of the spell cast in this scenario
As Lyxen pointed out, the spells only persists for tehir duration. Duration is either Instantenous OR Concentration. There are no spells that have both.
I was going to reply more indepth to this but SagaTympana already answered it. Concentration literally is the duration. Changing the amount of time you concentrate doesn't change the duration from C to I. At least no-one has been able to show any evidence to support that claim.
OK, I'm not going to get back into this discussion, except to address these two points:
First of all, I was in no way being rude. I apologise if it came across as such.
However, all rules require interpretation of some kind. When something is written in plain English, it will often have multiple ways in which it can be read. In this case, there are multiple valid ways to interpret the way the rules have been written. This is still discussing RAW, because it is an attempt to understand what the written rules mean. D&D isn't written in a technical language with only one possible meaning for everything. There is not always going to be One True RAW. That is certainly the case in this particular instance.
Erm, really?!?! I have said from the very beginning that I believe both interpretations to be valid. You, on the other hand, don't appear to have made any effort to "see things from other people's perspective". Anything you believe is "sticking to the facts", and everything which disagrees is "not RAW". Try taking a long hard look in the mirror before accusing someone in this manner.
P.S. Putting a smiley face on the end of a sentence in which you have just insulted someone doesn't suddenly make it OK.
So, the section on Duration doesn't say that "Concentration" is the duration, or even that "concentration" is a valid duration. The section on Concentration says that if it requires concentration that that fact will be listed in the Duration entry... but... it doesn't actually say that concentration IS the duration. Only that section of the spell is where it will be noted if it required concentration.
It requires you to sort of make up something that isn't actually written to say that concentration is the duration. The duration is "expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years". THAT is the duration. Concentration will simply also be noted alongside the duration if it is required. But concentration itself isn't the duration... the listed duration is the duration.
Ex. The duration of Alter Self is 1 Hour. Not "concentration". However, concentration is required to keep it active and if lost the spell ends early, before its full duration.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
They're allowed to express their opinion on the rules without getting called a troll for doing so. Especially since they're correct.
Concentration Spells
Take a look at this page for us. What do you see listed for these spells Duration? Do you see intervals of rounds, minutes, hours, and years... or do you see a solid column of just the word "concentration"?
You see their duration. Rounds. Minutes. Hours. Years.
Duration isn't Concentration. Concentration isn't duration. It is only noted in the spell's duration section if it is required. That doesn't make it the duration, only that it is simply where it lists when it is required.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
7 pages of this nonsense and you're still arguing?
Can anyone give an example of something that would make Concentration impossible without doing damage?
It's clear that if you take damage while casting you have to make a check or lose the spell. Slot gone, at will ability used, whatever. You get nada. If the check is impossible for some reason, like taking 100 points of damage from one hit, it makes no difference what the duration would have been or if concentration was required to maintain it. You get nothing.
<Insert clever signature here>
The initial discussion was of an effect which made concentration impossible without any other effects on spellcasting. As there are no such effects in official content, this is all hypothetical.
I do agree that this has gone on for far too long, especially as it is repeating the same points over any over. It comes down to the fact that there are 2 perfectly valid but completely conflicting ways to read the rules. There are elements who view only their own reading as remotely valid and ignore the other side, which has led to 7 pages of mostly repeated arguments without resolution.
As this is a situation which cannot occur without a homebrew effect, the real answer is that it depends what the homebrew effect says happens, or failing that what the DM says when he comes across the effect. It could be either and we cannot really know until the situation presents itself.
There are three in bullet points, damage being one of them. However, take a look at the bit I highlighted in blue. This is straightforward advice to the DM that any other effect they want could prevent concentration with a save. So, I'm not so sure this is even an homebrew effect so much as an underutilized official rule?
Edit: Oh! There is even an effect in PHB that does exactly this:
It just also prevents you from casting them.
So this is a situation in which you cannot concentrate on them but can still cast.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If it is a homebrew effect... I'm going to suggest it be altered in this way...
Old Sleet Storm:
Errata'd Sleet Storm:
So this would cause the effect to be checked at the start of the victim's turn. A clear trigger point, and clear effect. It sidestep's the whole issue of "can you cast a concentration spell while being unable to concentrate."
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
There are several game features that require concentration, that are not themselves spells. I'm not sure if they count for this discussion.
E.g. Draconic Presence (Sorcerer, Draconic, 18). Visions of the Past (Cleric, Knowledge, 17). Invoke Duplicity (Cleric, Trickery, 2). Dark Delirium (Warlock, Archfey, 14). Minor Alchemy (Wizard, Transmutation, 2).
Several magic items might require concentration, depending on how you read them. E.g. marvellous pigments.
The most obvious effect would be something environmental. Maybe the deck of a ship in a wild storm. Perhaps during a massive earthquake.
Well, you are still wrong even if you don't care to admit it. If the actually text in the book is not enough to convince you, I don't know what is.
But I take it that your current stance means that you are disagreeing with Lyxen's claim that spells only persist during their duration?
This doesn't seem like a meaningful contribution to the topic. Declaring people "are wrong" with only vague reference to "the book" is quite literally the opposite of helpful.
Edit; And no, I agree with Lyxen that spells only persist for their duration. Though things can of course end them earlier.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I have referred to the relevant rules numerous times, as have many others. I have also asked were I kind find the rules for changing the duration of a spell from "duration" to "instantenous" but no-one has been able to provide it.
Excellent. So you agree with what I just said then. You can't change the duration of a spell from "concentration" to "instantenous".
So, I don't think anyone's references have been all that vague if you take everything in total, but I'll try to collect everything together for you. As I said, every single concentration spell explicitly lists "concentration" as its duration.
Every.
Single.
One.
Concentration is explicitly listed as a duration alongside (but distinct from) "Instantaneous" as one of the two durations that require more explanation than the simple "x rounds/minutes/hours/etc."
The book is unbelievably clear about this.