-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Weak Saving Throws
- Thread starter Savage Wombat
- Start date
jbear
First Post
It would also be an interesting exercise to work out how a 10th level fighter would stack up against a 20th level wizard supposing the fighter could get the jump on the wizard and have his full compliment of actions, using his most effective combination. What would his chance be to bring the wizard down before the wizard can cast a single spell?
Also, at least they have released the most CORE elements of the rules only in this digital format. If this is a glaring problem and shows itself to be such when people start reaching higher levels, then correcting any important issues will be a fairly simple matter that should be able to avoid affecting the published content. People can just download the errated doc again.
That being said, those that have identified this as an issue, what would be the most simple and elegant math fix in your opinion?
Also, at least they have released the most CORE elements of the rules only in this digital format. If this is a glaring problem and shows itself to be such when people start reaching higher levels, then correcting any important issues will be a fairly simple matter that should be able to avoid affecting the published content. People can just download the errated doc again.
That being said, those that have identified this as an issue, what would be the most simple and elegant math fix in your opinion?
Last edited:
It just so happens, I did this exercise (well close). The answer is...extremely low.
20th level Wizard
Dex 12, Con 14: Assuming Mage Armor.
AC: 13+1 (dex) = 14 AC.
HP: 112.5
11th level Fighter with Longsword (Dueling Style)
Str: 20, Prof: +4 - +9 to hit, Crits on 19-20
Damage: 11.5 (16 on crit). Assuming 4 attacks through action surge.
Fighter DPR: 38.6 (with surge), 19.3 normal.
Takes 4.8 rounds to kill the wizard.
To put it in context, if the fighter did nothing but get crits on EVERY attack, it would take 3 rounds of attacks to kill the wizard.
To compare the difference, lets take the fighter up to 20th.
20th level Fighter Dueling Style
Str: 20, Prof: +6 - +11 to hit, Crits on 18-20
Damage: 11.5 (16 on crit). Assuming 8 attacks through action surge.
Fighter DPR: 88.2 (with surge), 44.1 normal.
Takes 2 rounds to kill the wizard, assuming 1 action surge. It is technically possible to kill the wizard in 1 round...but you would have to roll very well and likely get several crits. Even if you hit on every attack but still got average damage you would not kill him.
A interesting note is that barring magical weapons there is no difference in the individual swing of an 11th vs 20th level fighter except for a slight increase to crit. The extra damage comes completely from more attacks.
Again, it depends how the designers envision saving throws working. There is no 'right' answer. 3e presented a massive shift in how saving throws worked for a reason.
The simplest fix would be to drop modifier and proficiency from the DC. That would bring the saving throws more closely in line with the pre-3e style.
Make the save DC 16 - ( victims proficiency + victim's modifier) (or in other words, saving throws have a base DC 16 and the victim adds proficiency and modifier).
At 1st level, a high good save would be 16 - (2 + 3) = 11 and a typical poor save would need a 16.
At 17th level, a high good save would be 16 - 11 = 5 and a typical poor save would be 15.
This is closest to pre-3e style for saving throws.
One complaint from that era is spell caster aptitude didn't impact saving throw difficulty.
A secondary fix that takes the strength of magic into account would be adding the spell level rather than proficiency + modifier. At low levels, saving throws get 4 points easier. At high levels, that drops to 2. Coupled with the serious reduction in high-level slots, that may be sufficient to curb the problem. I'd probably consider increasing the base to 10 from 8 because people do the math easier. I would be tempted to use the spell level rather than the slot level to limit impressive DCs to high-level spells.
A first level spell, a save requires 11 (10 +level 1 spell) and a first level target gets up to +5 for a good save and about +0 for a poor save.
At 17th level , the save requirement goes to 19 for a 9th level spell. A good save has increased to +11 whereas a poor save has probably increased to +1 or so. The saving grace is the caster gets at most one a day.
Last edited:
Obryn
Hero
I disagree, actually. It looks to me like the sort of accident that arises when you pick your universal mechanic - in this case, generic "proficiency" - and get weird side effects.
Without a developer providing insight, it is impossible to say. I hope that now that they have the algorithm in place they adjust their expectations across the rest of the system otherwise it should get entertaining quickly.
Only Hold, in Basic at least.
WIS seems to be the main save for avoiding save-or-suck (Hold, Dominate). I guess petrification is the other classic - does anyone know what the save for that is based on?
One possible intention is that Hold and Dominate are expected to be negated via damage forcing concentration checks, rather than via successful saving throws.
I personally don't like that dynamic, because it will be the classic damage-dealing class (the fighter) being rescued by some other PC (probably a caster) dealing damage to the mage. But that may nevertheless be what the designers have in mind.
What happens to the level 20 numbers if you assume the Wizard takes Shield as one of his spell mastery spells effectively giving him +5AC at all times?
Also 12dex, 14con at 20 seems low. Assuming you use the base array and go high lef you are looking at Dex 16, Int 16, Con 13. Two ability bump go into Int then maybe one into Dex, Wis and Con for 18/15 or some similar combination.
Of course things might change a lot when feats come in but your stat suggestions seem low.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Obryn said:
This is only an issue if you're going to fail to improve upon your weaknesses.
Which is to say, yes, if you dump a stat and don't do anything to pump it up, it will be the point at which you can be reliably attacked by significantly higher-level characters. This is literally a character using their STRONGEST ability against another character's WEAKEST ability.
If that shouldn't almost always (20's excepted) result in the strong character actually having their effect take, I don't know that it would be satisfying at all to play the strong character.
This is the equivalent of a high-level fighter hitting that dude without armor and with an 8 in DEX. Yes, that fighter SHOULD be hitting.
Now, it's important that the effects of hitting aren't over-stated. And given that a lot of suck spells are Concentration, this seems fine. Yes, if your weak point is WIS, you might lose a turn and have to have your friends help you out of a pinch. This is not all that dire of a penalty to face for basically letting your WIS be for crud and expecting to be fine.
If you maximise your poor saving throw -- take the stat all the way to 20 -- your saving throw still sucks.
DC 19 and you have a +5. You still fail 65% of the time. You can't get any better and the cost of accomplishing that much in terms of sunk stat increases in quite large. If you started with a 14 in Con as a Wizard, half your increases went into it. If you want to maximise your prime requisite, you have no points left to improve Dex let alone your "good" save in Wisdom.
