Upcoming Changes To Stalwart Defender

[*Neethanial]

There's an entire universe of difference between mystically dominating (and thus subconsciously controlling) a character as opposed to calling their mother a lich licking gutter slut to get them pissed off at you.
Taunting is not some magical effect that's cast. If you want to taunt someone in pvp, taunt them.

[*Mander]

Taunting is a skill you use to lower people's stats. It's mechanical, so why wouldn't the super-version of it be?

[*Ninefingers]

The taunt skill doesn't take away my control of my character.

[*Mr_Otyugh]

Even dominate doesn't make their subject carry out self-destructive commands over. :P And that's some literal mind-control, not just aggravating a person to attack themselves. Also again, a wizard doesn't spend years learning how to cast spells just to forget about it the moment someone calls their mother a hamster. :P Lets say even in case of situation that doesn't consent lethal force (which utilizing invigorating challenge isn't) a spellcaster has way more effective non-lethal spells to counter-humiliate someone taunting them or to make them pay for their mistake.

Also rage doesn't mean you take out your fists to punch them, rather than take your most devastating spell and level down the entire city block. You generally don't want to piss off a mage, because they stop using any rational inhibitors for tactics and just let the magic rain.

[*Strawberry Jam]

I dunno if you're trying to cast a spell and someone starts mimicking you with sad clown face and super falsetto baby voice while twirling their fingers mocking your life's work .... that might be annoying enough to lose concentration.

[*Mr_Otyugh]

Well you only make concentration check if someone is attacking you... :P because getting a sword stuck on your guts is still way more disrupting than some guy blowing raspberries at you.

[*Strawberry Jam]

Actually you can also make a check in table top to cast during rain, rough sea, even casting in a blizzard.

But those are usually only 20 or 30 concentration DC.

[*Tomekk]

So, an aggro function, in a MMO-like enviorment, wherein you call out someone to attack you is too much against the poor wizard... but we're still okay with them altering the fabrics of space and time. Ok :P

[*Mr_Otyugh]

I'm yet to see someone who is more distracting than a raging sea while I'm sailing. :P so I think anyone with 30 concentration or higher is safe.

Aggro mechanics have always been about NPCs, not PCs.

[*Plaxy100]

Even dominate doesn't make their subject carry out self-destructive commands over. :P And that's some literal mind-control, not just aggravating a person to attack themselves. Also again, a wizard doesn't spend years learning how to cast spells just to forget about it the moment someone calls their mother a hamster. :P Lets say even in case of situation that doesn't consent lethal force (which utilizing invigorating challenge isn't) a spellcaster has way more effective non-lethal spells to counter-humiliate someone taunting them or to make them pay for their mistake.

Also rage doesn't mean you take out your fists to punch them, rather than take your most devastating spell and level down the entire city block. You generally don't want to piss off a mage, because they stop using any rational inhibitors for tactics and just let the magic rain.

Except dnd has expicit rules barring a mage from casting most spells while in a state of rage.

While raging, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except for Balance, Escape Artist, Intimidate, and Ride), the Concentration skill, or any abilities that require patience or concentration, nor can he cast spells or activate magic items that require a command word, a spell trigger (such as a wand), or spell completion (such as a scroll) to function. Source Dndsrd.

Basically if a spell has somantic or vocal components he cant cast. Though guess if the mage had both silent and still metamagic he could.