D&D General Hot Take: D&D Has Not Recovered From 2E to 3.0 Transition

[payn]

I feel there's too much discrepency between good saves and bad saves in 5E. With things like the paladin granting a +5 to saves, they clearly don't follow their own concept of bounded accuracy/defenses. Saves are either a joke, or nearly impossible.

PF2E's numbers work more to my liking for basically everything. You have degrees of training, Trained through Legendary, which give a proficiency bonus of +2 to +8. You add your stat and level as well. Most classes bad save is only one degree of training off from their good saves, so a difference of +2. Plus, PF 2 gives more stat bumps, and with raising stats above 18 requiring more points, characters tend to be more well rounded stat wise. Each effect requiring a save has critical success (beating DC by 10), success, failure, and critical failure (failing by 10+), resulting in a wider variety of effects possible other than 5E's overly simplistic binary pass/fail.

yeaaaaah about those stat bumps. They seem more generous until you take a closer look at that +1 per level maths. Those generous stat bumps only keep you in the game so you dont die spectacularly to your foes. /Treadmill

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Thing is, those level 14s wont be the level 8 things.

I mean no... but they would server the same role both in game and in fiction...

at level 4 or 5 you fight a level 8 solo hobgoblin soldier... and it is hard. At level 12 you fight 3 normal level 11 Hobgoblin soldiers. at level 17 you fight 16 level 14 hobgoblin soldier minions... in story they are identical but you have an easier time running the solo as a solo and the minions as minions.

One point of BA that folks often overlook is it makes large number of things always relevant.

that just isn't true... I can't imagine what level 8 monsters you are throwing at your 17th level party that are not being slammed easy as a gimmie encounter...
the young Green dragon is your most likely best bet in SRD (although I'm not sure it fits thematically to fight 5 of them at once) about 700hp all togather it will be a bit, but I am betting most 17th level casters have SoS or SoD effects that can target +4 saves easy

You may not like that, but a lot of folks do.

I'm not sure what likeing or dislikeing has to do with it.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Bounded accuracy just means smaller numbers.

What if the difference between a good and bad save was 2-4 points vs 8 or more?

hey look at that, it would be bounded.

 

[Zardnaar]

my argument is that feast/famine is not the way wotc should go... so I would rather (mostly) lower effects.

You would have to remove or limit all the stun, paralyzed, exile type effects though.

They're nerfing Banishment because it's a bye bye effect on a charisma save (which is great vs NPCs).

 

[payn]

I'm not sure what likeing or dislikeing has to do with it.

Everything. If you like the idea of BA and what it does in the narrative, it works. If you dont, you want it changed because you think it doesnt. Then you hear things like "its broken and needs to be fixed" when its not doing what the person expects it to do. Perspective is the issue, not the math.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You would have to remove or limit all the stun, paralyzed, exile type effects though.

or make them 1 turn, but yes in general I don't want tasha's laugh your pants off the same level as burining hands or scorching ray and hold person... things that stun, paralyze exct should be limited resources at higher levels.

They're nerfing Banishment because it's a bye bye effect on a charisma save (which is great vs NPCs).

and I don't know how I feel but I want to try the new rules.

 

[Fanaelialae]

You would have to remove or limit all the stun, paralyzed, exile type effects though.

They're nerfing Banishment because it's a bye bye effect on a charisma save (which is great vs NPCs).

I disagree. The monk has an excess of stun, and the monk isn't even considered a top tier class.

Casters, by comparison, are generally constrained by concentration regarding such effects.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I have a bit of a mixed feelings about saves to be honest even if thematically they make sense. I think they've moved in the right direction but there are issues. Dex based PCs, especially those that get proficiency in dex saves, are too far ahead of the curve. Great for my monk, not so great for my strength based fighter.

It is up to the DM to spread the love with saves I suppose. Not sure how to fix it, but strength saving throws are rarely used while dex is every other effect. Maybe everybody gets half proficiency bonus unless they are proficient? Have a feat that gives you a plus to all saves you aren't proficient in, not just 1? Not sure.

It's hard to use the other saves more when there simply arent many effects that use them. At the time the PHB/DMG/MM was published, there were what, like 6 charisma saves total? I feel adding in Str/Int/Cha saves was basically a wasted effort and just grid filling design. Int and Cha saves simply aren't present in nearly the same degree as Dex/Wisdom/Con. Str saves are a bit more prevalent, but most of them feel like a coin flip on whether the designer used a saving throw or athletics check.

Going back to Fort/Reflex/Will would be cleaner IMO. It would result in less disparity if you could use the higher of your wis/cha for Will, the higher of your Str/Con for Fortitude, etc. Throw in half proficiency for everyone, and you've narrowed the gap to where there's still some benefit from figuring out and targeting the weak save, but not what we have now.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Everything. If you like the idea of BA and what it does in the narrative, it works. If you dont, you want it changed because you think it doesnt.

okay so I like the idea of bounded accuracy... I just want the numbers to work better. So how do I fit in there?

I honestly think the prof idea works well (although I could see playing with the number over all) but I don't think letting 4 out of 6 saves never improve but the DCs scale with prof works. I also think that giving a melee combatant a +5 prof +4 attack stat and +1 magic item for a total of +10 doesn't work if ACs at level 1 average 14 and at level 15 average 19. the two need to scale closer together

Then you hear things like "its broken and needs to be fixed" when its not doing what the person expects it to do. Perspective is the issue, not the math.

except the math is my problem...

an AoE save for half dex save at level 1 that is 11 or 12 seems cool, but at level 17 most likely will be 17+... but if you are not prof in dex saves you can go from +1 (50/50ish) to +2 (25/75ish) and wonder why you can't jump out of the way as while as you did adventures ago... and that is for 4 out of the 6 saves

 

[payn]

okay so I like the idea of bounded accuracy... I just want the numbers to work better. So how do I fit in there?

I honestly think the prof idea works well (although I could see playing with the number over all) but I don't think letting 4 out of 6 saves never improve but the DCs scale with prof works. I also think that giving a melee combatant a +5 prof +4 attack stat and +1 magic item for a total of +10 doesn't work if ACs at level 1 average 14 and at level 15 average 19. the two need to scale closer together

except the math is my problem...

an AoE save for half dex save at level 1 that is 11 or 12 seems cool, but at level 17 most likely will be 17+... but if you are not prof in dex saves you can go from +1 (50/50ish) to +2 (25/75ish) and wonder why you can't jump out of the way as while as you did adventures ago... and that is for 4 out of the 6 saves

Y'all wanted classes to be SAD.