I love you SO MUCH for making this mod! I was initially going to quit BG3 because i hated how much it wasnt like Dnd AT ALL. And as a player that mains Drow most of the time I was not immersed in BG3 at all; But this mod is great! So thank you! Easy endorse!
I have a question would this work with mods like Zerd's RAW? OR do you plan on one day doing your own Vintage RAW mod (I would totally pay you if you did)?
I'm going to do an update to this mod after we're sure (more or less) that Larian isn't going to change anything with another hotfix/update. I need to patch a couple of the big spell mods once they are done, and try to script thief skills to be class-exclusive.
A Vintage RAW mod would be working against how the game is built, I don't know if scripting could account for all of the 5e stuff. In 2e, the combat tables combined a multitude of factors in order to simulate what each class archetype should be capable of between lvl 1-20, so that your flat roll didn't need a giant rat's nest of modifiers. It would also do away with many classes and abilities - I'm pretty sure most people would not want to play a mod that they feel is taking things away from them, which is the main reason I only went as far as I did.
As far as compatibility with RAW - I don't know, I've never tried it, but I will check it out and do some testing.
I've tested RAW and it appears to be working fine with Vintage Rules. I made a patch to convert a few items to roll bonuses, but other than that, I've had no issues.
I love where you went with this. It irritates me that the spell-casters can wear armor, and that the Druids can wear metal armor and use metal weapons. I started playing in 1977 with a Basic D&D World of Greyhawk by Gary Gygax (et. al?). I played countless hours later at university using AD&D 2nd Edition. The later additions seem more focused on making the game more accessible to power-gamers.
What I miss the most is the alignment system. I have no problem locking out the armor, but as Kalidor835 noted, we are missing a ton of items for the mages, at least.
In my opinion, this game is poorly designed. There are parts of it that are so fun that I laugh myself sillier. Other parts are so power-gamer oriented that it frustrates me to no end.
Thank you for the changes. The change in the advantage/disadvantages for die rolls is going to probably tank the game, but I'm going to give it a go. For me, the golden-age of the game was the AD&D 2nd edition.
It still messes with my head to play the modern games, where the AC are positive numbers just going up, especially when I change back to BGII, for example. It took me forever to adjust to the new AC system, which is for me clearly designed for mentally-deficient or mentally-lazy people.
2nd edition is far too advanced for people today to understand, its really kind of eerie. They say they read the rules, but don't understand things like why the attack tables are different for each class, etc. I agree with you about the alignment system, its more necessary than ever in today's confused society, but at the same time, hard for them to accept because of the severe shortage of life experience that you need to see how people really behave. The normal routine of life surrounded by entertainment makes it impossible to find out what you're really made of; what you will or won't do in a real situation where things really matter. If you never know yourself that way, how can you ever properly interpret a believable character, or appreciate the rules for playing one?
Alignment was officially removed, and I'm summarizing in my own words here, to effectively eliminate applying labels or penalties on the desires of players...
You make an old man smile. I understand how contemporary rules are fashioned out of a need to be all inclusive in the players ultimate choice in a fantasy setting. BUT there was a logic to the limits of old-style P&P. Those limits were not so much as constraints on play style as they were more of imposing "laws of science or historic reference" into the player making ones choices have real consequences and thus making it more real. It's the D&D hardwired into my 40+ years of play that comes naturally to my thinking. The open rules fantasy D&D of BG3 ( and 5e ), I feal, is much more homogenized with no real need to optimize each role in a party since anyone can do everything. Lock picking, conjuring spells, healing and using armour are all in yesteryear specialties to a class but not so in unlimited "mary sue anime" classes of 5e. Downloading and drooling at the idea of a new run with this Mod.
Its interesting to see how today's problems arose, such as 'useless spells'. They weren't useless when everyone had a different role and helped each other, working as a party. But as you pointed out, that has been utterly lost; the Mary Sue and removal of alignments has reduced things to a costume party. Its hard to enjoy if you've experienced the world before it. I hope you enjoy the mod :)
I absolutely adore both of you!!! We used to NEED a fighter, cleric, thief, and mage. Each one concentrated on their craft. Not jumping all over the place, but really focused in specializing. We took into account the elder races, who could focus more broadly than the younger race of a human. People complain that clerics in this game are useless. Not only clerics.
My main gripe is the lack of an alignment system.
What is your life goal? Good: Help everyone else first. Evil: Help myself and those I care about first (and maybe even solely). Neutral: A mixture.
By what means will you accomplish this? Lawful: We must have laws and rules to govern our behavior, and these aid me. Chaotic: Screw the laws and rules. They hinder me. Besides, watching pandomony is my hobby, as is causing it. Muhahahaha. Neutral: I need a little of both.
Now, we have clerics, who double as thieves because of their goddess. My druid took Jahira, Halsin, and Gale into her party. This is the tale of 3 druids and a wizard.
My Priest of Lathander staked vampy when he tried to bite him. He's still trying to decide what to do with Shadowheart. He hopes to turn her to the light, but associating with undead is absolutely forbidden by his god.
My Priestess of Talos wanted to help the Shadow Druids take over the grove, then help Halsin take it back, then wipe them all out allied with the goblins. She wanted to ally herself with Ketheric. She killed Jahira, stole her panties, and wore them as a trophy. I was going to kidnap Boo after killing Minsc, but the game wouldn't let me. She convinced Gale to go for the crown, and helped Vampy ascend, then became his dark consort. She slept with the Emperor and the Incubus. Never know what might be fun, eh? She also got the gnome to blow them all up. That was so funny!!!
In BGII, my evil characters give Minsc to the dryads (who are decidedly evil beings) as their play-thing.
I am a role-play gamer. My I ever remain one. Amen.
I'm 46. I only ever played AD&D which is obviously 2nd edition.
If there is one thing I hated, was how spell casting worked. I shouldn't have to memorize magic missile 5 times and as a consequence forgo the rest of my 1st level spells. (and literally forget the spell when cast) What was the point in having under intelligence "max spells learned"? So now I forget how to write after I reach that number as well?
A fighter doesn't forget how to swing a sword.
What they do now, is what my DM envisioned but it seems he wasn't alone.
and while 2nd edition was so much better in terms of classes and races, i do love being able to play a melee elf because no -1 CON.
I don't miss alignments for the sake of this game, as if they existed, I'd know how I need to behave around certain individuals. It's too...."same boat"
ALL neutral evil characters are this way ALL lawful good characters are this way.
People are way too complex for that.
But I guess that's up to the DM too. But couldn't there be a neutral evil character that's sympathetic towards orphanages because maybe they grew up in one? Doesn't sound very evil, so not playing the alignment properly?
Alignments did not originate out of the social choices of the mortal personality. They are archetypes formed out of the interactions of the primal forces that hold the multiverse together, and define the differences between things. Humans, elves, etc will exhibit qualities drawn from the world that made them, its a mistake to presume that those were invented by the conscious self.
The fact so many people don't understand this is a fault of their DMs not reading or properly understanding the game, or in later years, the fault of a corrupt corporation deleting these parts of the game entirely. Its also a problem that so many players lack real life experience, and have never had the opportunity to realize that what you think you are free to do is not what you actually will do when a real live situation is at hand. People have alignment 'wiring' build into their subconscious, and its very hard to override it.
I agree with that. However, for the sake of game-play, it is somewhat simplified. I have this issue with all chaotic characters. People think chaotic is doing whatever you want whenever you want. In point of fact, chaotic is the true definition of anarchy. It is a lack of laws, codes, or rules defining for us what we must do.
I have been playing this game so long that I automatically think in terms of the alignment system, and love thinking about how I, as a person in my real-life, have evolved. I could only play LG characters, when I started at 10 years old with the Basic D&D, I expanded to LN, then LE. My personality was very lawful, so I needed to expand along that axis first. Then, I started exploring NE, TN, and NG. Only this last decade have I started playing chaotic characters. For me, there is no alignment where you do whatever you feel like whenever you feel like, because life just doesn't tend to accommodate that. For me, CG is "we don't need no rules and laws"! CN is the closest to "do what I want and how I feel like", but even then you should be mindful of the balancing act and willfully not following the laws, rules, or any code. TN is the true balancing act; keeping all the others in-check.
Of course, the game is not real-life, but the tags in BG3 do not suit even just good vs. evil. They have a generic "Cleric" tag, which has "good" dialogue choices; things my evil Priests/Priestesses would never say. It is, for my taste, haphazard and sloppily coded in too many places.
I think it's sad that they did not use advanced algorithms to drive-home the alignment shifts that were started in NWN and its add-ons.
I just wanted to take a moment to comment that not all armor was prohibited to wizards. In the 1st edition AD&D rules, Elven Chainmail was stated to be usable by the class. It was expressly designed for use by Elven fighter/mages, after all. It was extremely light and thin enough to be worn under clothing. The magical nature of its mithril construction allowed magic to not be hindered by it. With the 2nd edition rules, specifically the monster manual, armor made from dragon hide was usable by mages, as well. The protection value of the armor was based on the age category of the dragon whose hide was used to make it. I don't know if it would be possible to add these types of armor to the mod or not, but they would keep with the rules while allowing for slightly better protection for the party's mages. In the Dragonlance setting, Dragon Armor was worn by villainous NPC mages with no hinderances. This was not the dragon hide armor above. The late second edition Player's option: Skills & Powers book also allowed mages to purchase the ability to wear light armor using character points. Maybe the lightly armored feat could be modified to reflect this? The above doesn't even include all the various armor types usable by mages added to the 1st and 2nd edition game by articles in Dragon magazine over the years. One of these was clothing made from the wool of a mythical tree for the 2nd edition. It provided the same protection as plate mail and shield. Like with armors in that edition of the game, it could be enchanted with various abilities and to a +5 defensive enchantment. Clothing/armor of this type would definitely be a legendary class item. If you want further info on this I can try to find my issue of Dragon that had the article. It was supposed to be items based on Indian myth. Maybe this can give you ideas for future releases of the mod?
Armor isn't really necessary though. In 2e, the level 1 Shield spell lasts 5 rounds per caster level, deletes force damage, and offers the equivalent armor class of plate armor. If I changed the duration of Shield in this mod, I think things would work out ok.
With all the various items that were available in 1st & 2nd edition, I would agree. The problem is that the game doesn't have them in it. There's no Robe of the Archmagi for example in BG3. I've come across a Ring of Protection and a set of Bracers of Defense but I can't remember if those were vanilla or part of a mod. For people who play the vanilla game with few mods, protections for mages will be limited by these types of items being missing. A longer duration Shield and Mage Armor spells would certainly help, in that regard. I personally use mods that make those two spells permanent for use with Gale. While not expressly forbidden by the game, my being an old school 1st & later 2nd edition player and DM won't let me put armor on him! If only there were a true set of Elven chainmail in the game!
For the record I don't mean to sound overly critical. I like where you're going with this concept.
The Mage Armor spell wasn't in 1e, but it stacks with Shield. So if you cast Mage Armor, that gives you a 13 AC. If you wear a ring of protection and any other item that offers +1 AC (there's a number of them) then you've got 15 AC. If you cast the 2e version of Shield, it lasts 10 rounds, and gives you +5, bringing you to 20AC. Then if you have a friendly Cleric in the party who casts Shield of Faith on you, you're up to 22AC. There is a point where players should really ask themselves - am I willing to accept risks as an adventurer, or am I preoccupied with making my party invulnerable?
Yeah, I get that. A 22 armor class would basically be the equivalent of a -2 armor class in 1st and 2nd editions, with the RAW max being a -10. The former is a luxury for a low-level character. The latter could be accomplished by level 12, depending on the magic level of the game the DM was running. Keep in mind, I'm not saying that a character at level 1 should have a -10, or 30 armor class under 5th edition rules. By the time you reach the end of the game, it should be a possibility. I know that might be beyond the scope of what you're doing. The fact that you have been able to change the game so that it runs a lot of the 1st edition rules is amazing in and of itself. I guess I'm just reminiscing about the old days, when I ran a human paladin/mage in the 2nd edition game back in the early '90s who had a set of the dragon hide armor I mentioned in an earlier reply.
> Yeah, I get that. A 22 armor class would basically be the equivalent of a -2 armor class in 1st and 2nd editions
That's not how it works. In 2nd edition most fighting classes get a -1 THAC0 every level, so it ends up at a +20 bonus (20 --> 0 THAC0) at level 20. In 5th Edition you start at +2 bonus and end up at +6 (base proficiency) level 20. The scaling just isn't comparable, and thus, AC isn't comparable. -2 AC in 2ED != 22 AC in 5th edition, because of different scaling. 22 AC stays relevant a lot longer than -2 AC, even though they are technically the same "target roll"; it gets way easier to hit -2 in 2ED as you level up than 22 AC in 5th edition.
Ironically, -2 AC is harder to hit at level 1 in 2ED than 22 AC in 5th Edition because you start at +0, but it swiftly becomes way easier to hit as you go beyond 5th level or so.
AC isn't comparable. -2 AC in 2ED != 22 AC in 5th edition, because of different scaling
Yes, 1/2e had an 'attack matrix' for each class, which determined the needed roll 'to-hit' any armor class from 10 to -10. The to-hit goals were easier for combat classes, and they scaled with your level. This was to represent the kinds of combat training, and tactics available for different archetypes. It was all replaced in 4/5e with what we have now, which is a desperate scramble for feats, 'action economy', multiclassing, and other metagaming tricks. I mean, if you want extra frustration have at it, but that stuff was never actually needed.
Would it be possible to alter concentration or is that hardcoded? For instance, change it to have: 1 Major concentration slot for the more complex, important spells and 1 or 2 minor concentration slots for utility spells & debuffs
I'm aware that concentration could be removed from all the spells and they could be given a duration instead, but certain spells are better with a toggle.
Creating additional concentration slots isn't possible by any means I know of. I realize that a lot of things might seem better or more convenient, or simpler, or more desirable, but they don't align with what 1e originally presented, and would kind of undo the goal of this mod.
The problem with it is that there are a lot of concentration spells which will never be prioritised over the meta ones in a battle. This leads to very repetitive fights with little complexity through combinations.
"they don't align with what 1e originally presented"
5E used concentration to nerf casters because they were too powerful in earlier editions.
Actually no. In 2e concentration is explained as affecting all spells with duration: "The successful casting of a spell requires intense, uninterrupted concentration from the caster. If the caster's concentration is interrupted by an attack, a sudden noise, or any other distraction, the spell is lost." The same goes for impaired movement (armored, webbed, etc) and impaired speech (silence), regarding the somatic and verbal components, respectively. Casters become too powerful when you remove these kinds of restrictions, or let them wear armor. This thread is becoming an example of how history can easily be repeated at will: players have desires that will ultimately ruin the game if permitted. It is a DMs responsibility to not let that happen, but WotC are bad DMs.
So ever since First Edition, spellcasters could only maintain 1 concentration spell at a time? I've played Neverwinter so I'm aware that there is a different kind of concentration, which deals with interrupting spells, but not the mechanism I am talking about changing.
It sounds like you have the basis for a new mod planned out - as far as I know there aren't any concentration overhauls for BG3 yet, so you'd likely be able to get some great feedback and ideas as you go.
Not much of a plan if it's something that even Script Extender can't handle, but I figured you might have looked into it since this aims to roll back things to the style of previous editions. The fact that nobody has touched it is a hint... 😣
I'm not sure anybody has even thought of it. Modding gameplay rules seems to me at least, to have a lot to do with interpreting how Larian is using their methods and variables, and how far we can bend their use toward this kind of stuff.
Only Elves could do that, and only with magical Elven armors. Race had to do with many other things as well, such as the availability of Wizard subclasses (formerly known as specializations). Many of these were restricted to Human or Half-Elves only, due to the nature of the magic being incompatible with other races. For example, the Elven immunity to Sleep and Charm was part of their nature that also made it impossible for them to be an Illusionist.
Thanks for this! Talk about a trip down memory lane. 2e was my first experience playing D&D all those many eons ago. I have honestly felt a little lost in 5e. We used to spend so many hours pouring over the Player's Handbook so we could get the right class, race, spells, because there was very little forgiveness. You had to know what you were doing or your campaign was going to be very short lived! (unless you had a rather soft hearted DM). Anyway, thanks again, you took me back to my teens again. And if that isn't dating myself, I don't know what is!
Yes indeed, perhaps the DarkSouls era is just a rehash of the old days? From what I've seen over the years, the equity that came with 4/5e actually destroyed the diversity, which is really weird to say, but that's actually what has happened. I hope you enjoy the mod :)
You raise a good point. I don't think this mod is quite up my alley, but I nonetheless hope that people find enjoyment in playing it and that you find fulfillment in making it.
Really cool mod but would it be possible for Rogues to use scrolls since Thieves had that ability in AD&D? Otherwise, this is really great and i hope you'll have time to update it in the future, this is good work.
Thanks, I've been trying to figure out a way to do that. For now, we can just presume that any thieves who decided to learn how to decode scrolls are actually Arcane Tricksters.
46 comments
Generally: we don't need Mod Fixer anymore, unless your version of BG3 is earlier than Patch 7
I have a question would this work with mods like Zerd's RAW? OR do you plan on one day doing your own Vintage RAW mod (I would totally pay you if you did)?
A Vintage RAW mod would be working against how the game is built, I don't know if scripting could account for all of the 5e stuff. In 2e, the combat tables combined a multitude of factors in order to simulate what each class archetype should be capable of between lvl 1-20, so that your flat roll didn't need a giant rat's nest of modifiers. It would also do away with many classes and abilities - I'm pretty sure most people would not want to play a mod that they feel is taking things away from them, which is the main reason I only went as far as I did.
As far as compatibility with RAW - I don't know, I've never tried it, but I will check it out and do some testing.What I miss the most is the alignment system. I have no problem locking out the armor, but as Kalidor835 noted, we are missing a ton of items for the mages, at least.
In my opinion, this game is poorly designed. There are parts of it that are so fun that I laugh myself sillier. Other parts are so power-gamer oriented that it frustrates me to no end.
Thank you for the changes. The change in the advantage/disadvantages for die rolls is going to probably tank the game, but I'm going to give it a go. For me, the golden-age of the game was the AD&D 2nd edition.
It still messes with my head to play the modern games, where the AC are positive numbers just going up, especially when I change back to BGII, for example. It took me forever to adjust to the new AC system, which is for me clearly designed for mentally-deficient or mentally-lazy people.
I hope you enjoy the mod :)
My main gripe is the lack of an alignment system.
What is your life goal?
Good: Help everyone else first.
Evil: Help myself and those I care about first (and maybe even solely).
Neutral: A mixture.
By what means will you accomplish this?
Lawful: We must have laws and rules to govern our behavior, and these aid me.
Chaotic: Screw the laws and rules. They hinder me. Besides, watching pandomony is my hobby, as is causing it. Muhahahaha.
Neutral: I need a little of both.
Now, we have clerics, who double as thieves because of their goddess. My druid took Jahira, Halsin, and Gale into her party. This is the tale of 3 druids and a wizard.
My Priest of Lathander staked vampy when he tried to bite him. He's still trying to decide what to do with Shadowheart. He hopes to turn her to the light, but associating with undead is absolutely forbidden by his god.
My Priestess of Talos wanted to help the Shadow Druids take over the grove, then help Halsin take it back, then wipe them all out allied with the goblins. She wanted to ally herself with Ketheric. She killed Jahira, stole her panties, and wore them as a trophy. I was going to kidnap Boo after killing Minsc, but the game wouldn't let me. She convinced Gale to go for the crown, and helped Vampy ascend, then became his dark consort. She slept with the Emperor and the Incubus. Never know what might be fun, eh? She also got the gnome to blow them all up. That was so funny!!!
In BGII, my evil characters give Minsc to the dryads (who are decidedly evil beings) as their play-thing.
I am a role-play gamer. My I ever remain one. Amen.
If there is one thing I hated, was how spell casting worked. I shouldn't have to memorize magic missile 5 times and as a consequence forgo the rest of my 1st level spells. (and literally forget the spell when cast) What was the point in having under intelligence "max spells learned"? So now I forget how to write after I reach that number as well?
A fighter doesn't forget how to swing a sword.
What they do now, is what my DM envisioned but it seems he wasn't alone.
and while 2nd edition was so much better in terms of classes and races, i do love being able to play a melee elf because no -1 CON.
ALL neutral evil characters are this way
ALL lawful good characters are this way.
People are way too complex for that.
But I guess that's up to the DM too. But couldn't there be a neutral evil character that's sympathetic towards orphanages because maybe they grew up in one? Doesn't sound very evil, so not playing the alignment properly?
The fact so many people don't understand this is a fault of their DMs not reading or properly understanding the game, or in later years, the fault of a corrupt corporation deleting these parts of the game entirely. Its also a problem that so many players lack real life experience, and have never had the opportunity to realize that what you think you are free to do is not what you actually will do when a real live situation is at hand. People have alignment 'wiring' build into their subconscious, and its very hard to override it.
I have been playing this game so long that I automatically think in terms of the alignment system, and love thinking about how I, as a person in my real-life, have evolved. I could only play LG characters, when I started at 10 years old with the Basic D&D, I expanded to LN, then LE. My personality was very lawful, so I needed to expand along that axis first. Then, I started exploring NE, TN, and NG. Only this last decade have I started playing chaotic characters. For me, there is no alignment where you do whatever you feel like whenever you feel like, because life just doesn't tend to accommodate that. For me, CG is "we don't need no rules and laws"! CN is the closest to "do what I want and how I feel like", but even then you should be mindful of the balancing act and willfully not following the laws, rules, or any code. TN is the true balancing act; keeping all the others in-check.
Of course, the game is not real-life, but the tags in BG3 do not suit even just good vs. evil. They have a generic "Cleric" tag, which has "good" dialogue choices; things my evil Priests/Priestesses would never say. It is, for my taste, haphazard and sloppily coded in too many places.
I think it's sad that they did not use advanced algorithms to drive-home the alignment shifts that were started in NWN and its add-ons.
In the 1st edition AD&D rules, Elven Chainmail was stated to be usable by the class. It was expressly designed for use by Elven fighter/mages, after all. It was extremely light and thin enough to be worn under clothing. The magical nature of its mithril construction allowed magic to not be hindered by it.
With the 2nd edition rules, specifically the monster manual, armor made from dragon hide was usable by mages, as well. The protection value of the armor was based on the age category of the dragon whose hide was used to make it. I don't know if it would be possible to add these types of armor to the mod or not, but they would keep with the rules while allowing for slightly better protection for the party's mages.
In the Dragonlance setting, Dragon Armor was worn by villainous NPC mages with no hinderances. This was not the dragon hide armor above.
The late second edition Player's option: Skills & Powers book also allowed mages to purchase the ability to wear light armor using character points. Maybe the lightly armored feat could be modified to reflect this?
The above doesn't even include all the various armor types usable by mages added to the 1st and 2nd edition game by articles in Dragon magazine over the years. One of these was clothing made from the wool of a mythical tree for the 2nd edition. It provided the same protection as plate mail and shield. Like with armors in that edition of the game, it could be enchanted with various abilities and to a +5 defensive enchantment. Clothing/armor of this type would definitely be a legendary class item. If you want further info on this I can try to find my issue of Dragon that had the article. It was supposed to be items based on Indian myth.
Maybe this can give you ideas for future releases of the mod?
For the record I don't mean to sound overly critical. I like where you're going with this concept.
There is a point where players should really ask themselves - am I willing to accept risks as an adventurer, or am I preoccupied with making my party invulnerable?
That's not how it works. In 2nd edition most fighting classes get a -1 THAC0 every level, so it ends up at a +20 bonus (20 --> 0 THAC0) at level 20. In 5th Edition you start at +2 bonus and end up at +6 (base proficiency) level 20. The scaling just isn't comparable, and thus, AC isn't comparable. -2 AC in 2ED != 22 AC in 5th edition, because of different scaling. 22 AC stays relevant a lot longer than -2 AC, even though they are technically the same "target roll"; it gets way easier to hit -2 in 2ED as you level up than 22 AC in 5th edition.
Ironically, -2 AC is harder to hit at level 1 in 2ED than 22 AC in 5th Edition because you start at +0, but it swiftly becomes way easier to hit as you go beyond 5th level or so.
For instance, change it to have:
1 Major concentration slot for the more complex, important spells
and 1 or 2 minor concentration slots for utility spells & debuffs
I'm aware that concentration could be removed from all the spells and they could be given a duration instead, but certain spells are better with a toggle.
The problem with it is that there are a lot of concentration spells which will never be prioritised over the meta ones in a battle.
This leads to very repetitive fights with little complexity through combinations.
"they don't align with what 1e originally presented"
5E used concentration to nerf casters because they were too powerful in earlier editions.
"The successful casting of a spell requires intense, uninterrupted concentration from the caster. If the caster's concentration is interrupted by an attack, a sudden noise, or any other distraction, the spell is lost."
The same goes for impaired movement (armored, webbed, etc) and impaired speech (silence), regarding the somatic and verbal components, respectively.
Casters become too powerful when you remove these kinds of restrictions, or let them wear armor. This thread is becoming an example of how history can easily be repeated at will: players have desires that will ultimately ruin the game if permitted. It is a DMs responsibility to not let that happen, but WotC are bad DMs.
I've played Neverwinter so I'm aware that there is a different kind of concentration, which deals with interrupting spells, but not the mechanism I am talking about changing.
GJ