machineelf
Explorer
Did you experiment at high level with rules as written? If so, how did that work out for your group?
-
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
Did you experiment at high level with rules as written? If so, how did that work out for your group?
sidonunspa
First Post
:::gasp:::
you mean having a "dump stat" matters now??? No!
besides if you are playing a wizard with a Con of 10, you need to rethink the way you are building your spell casters
you mean having a "dump stat" matters now??? No!
besides if you are playing a wizard with a Con of 10, you need to rethink the way you are building your spell casters
Obryn
Hero
Oh goodness.
Four things.
(1) Yes, it's fine to be worse at saves for your bad stats. However 5e, just like 3e, doubles-down on the "bad stat" idea. Your bad stats will tend to be for saves you're also not proficient in. The system dings you both for the low stat and with the proficiency bonus.
(2) You won't start out with all good stats.
(3) Even if you did, you can't keep up with them because you can push 1 stat by 2 points every 4 levels.
(4) And even if you did that, you wouldn't get to snag any feats, thus losing a huge amount of flexibility.
It's not a good solution at any step.
Falling Icicle
Adventurer
I think there are a few things to keep in mind when considering the saving throw issue.
- There aren't really any "save or die" or "save or lose" effects anymore, so the consequences of failing a saving throw at higher levels are nowhere near as harsh as they were in past editions. Most things like finger of death that would cause instant death in the past now just deal damage (and often less damage than the fighter at that level can do). Things like hold person offer a save each turn to break free of the effect, petrification requires 1 minute of concentration, etc. There really aren't any spells in this edition where a single failed saving throw means that you lose.
- Spellcasters get very few spells per day now compared to older editions, and only one each of 6th-9th level. That means that locking down monsters with powerful spells will be something that players can do far less often now.
- Many debilitating effects, such as hold person, require casters to concentrate, limiting them to one such effect at a time. This prevents a single caster from locking down an entire group with repeated castings.
- The largest difference in saving throws between someone who doesn't have proficiency and someone who does (assuming the same ability score) is 6 points - the same difference there was between good and poor saving throws at 20th level in 3rd edition.
- Spellcasters can no longer go above 20 in their primary magic ability score, so they can't add more than +5 to their saving throw DCs that way. There may be magic items that allow people to exceed that limit, but magic items are much more rare than before and not something a player can ever assume they will have. In the playtest, the only thing I recall that added to Int, Wis or Cha were Ioun stones, and they only added +1, a far cry from the cloaks of charisma and headbands of intellect +6 of 3.x. High level casters in 3.x. could easily get over 30 in their magic ability scores. They can't do that anymore.
- Saving throws are not the only way to protect yourself from harmful effects. You can have a poor saving throw and still protect yourself from fireballs with things like resistances, or protect yourself from things like hold person with freedom of movement, for example.
- There aren't really any "save or die" or "save or lose" effects anymore, so the consequences of failing a saving throw at higher levels are nowhere near as harsh as they were in past editions. Most things like finger of death that would cause instant death in the past now just deal damage (and often less damage than the fighter at that level can do). Things like hold person offer a save each turn to break free of the effect, petrification requires 1 minute of concentration, etc. There really aren't any spells in this edition where a single failed saving throw means that you lose.
- Spellcasters get very few spells per day now compared to older editions, and only one each of 6th-9th level. That means that locking down monsters with powerful spells will be something that players can do far less often now.
- Many debilitating effects, such as hold person, require casters to concentrate, limiting them to one such effect at a time. This prevents a single caster from locking down an entire group with repeated castings.
- The largest difference in saving throws between someone who doesn't have proficiency and someone who does (assuming the same ability score) is 6 points - the same difference there was between good and poor saving throws at 20th level in 3rd edition.
- Spellcasters can no longer go above 20 in their primary magic ability score, so they can't add more than +5 to their saving throw DCs that way. There may be magic items that allow people to exceed that limit, but magic items are much more rare than before and not something a player can ever assume they will have. In the playtest, the only thing I recall that added to Int, Wis or Cha were Ioun stones, and they only added +1, a far cry from the cloaks of charisma and headbands of intellect +6 of 3.x. High level casters in 3.x. could easily get over 30 in their magic ability scores. They can't do that anymore.
- Saving throws are not the only way to protect yourself from harmful effects. You can have a poor saving throw and still protect yourself from fireballs with things like resistances, or protect yourself from things like hold person with freedom of movement, for example.
Last edited:
Yes we did, my memory is a little hazy but I remember the following things:
- The saving throws were not too much of a problem, because as written the monsters have such low DCs
- Rather than non-proficient people being terrible at them, proficient people were damn near unassailable.
- At high levels, the consequences of failing a save are considerably worse than at lower levels. A 40% chance to fail at low levels means you might be in trouble, at high levels it means you are dead(ish) 4/10 times.
- Monsters resisting PCs was a problem, PCs got too many save-or-suck/die spells off.
- We quickly found that DCs and To-Hit on the monsters as written were too low. Once we changed them up a little to be similar to PCs, the proficient people were OK, proficient with a good stat were very hard to hit, but non-proficient people were getting laid to waste.
- The 4e style defender roll become much more important when you have monsters that cannot really hurt some of the party, but will demolish others. For instance an Ancient Medusa had to have the tank marking it, as the Wizard had very little chance of making his Con save if he got targetted.
- Further to that point, as saves get siloed into being great or terrible, monsters become a bit rock-paper-scissors. A creature that attacks vs Str save will devestate the back rank and not touch the front rank. Likewise with a charming creature, keep your front rank the hell away while the bard and wizard sort them out.
- Paladins with a Holy Avenger rule, as they should. Granting most of the party Adv on spell saves is awesome.
- At high levels, you can always have a spell prepared to use against the lowest save. So can NPCs.
All in all, I think it is possible that the system can work passably as is, if the monsters have very well determined DCs. I am kind of OK with the tough Barbarian only having a 5% chance of being turned to stone and the wizard having a 50% chance of avoiding it. It is not balanced for PvP at all, but I don't think that needs to be a major consideration.
The universal proficiency + advantage change was well recieved by my group, but we were starting at high level, it would have been awkward to suddenly introduce that at a particular level where the maths fix was needed.
Our high level playtest party has a Paladin with high Cha. The party pass most saves if DM doesn't modify the DC. Espcially if it is magical, which means everyone adjuscent to him gets advantage on the saving throw.
So much for the bounds.
JamesonCourage
Adventurer
The things you're saying in this thread? I agree with them. (Can't XP yet.)
Sword of Spirit
Legend
I like it that way. The rock-paper-scissors style appeals to me, and it's nice to see 5e going a bit further that direction that D&D traditionally has. That said, I can understand it might not be for everyone.
Thaumaturge
Wandering. Not lost. (He/they)
My hope is this is not a problem (maybe we find out today!).
My second hope is that, if saves are a problem, when WotC sends out surveys people will give good feedback, so WotC can update the game.
My third hope is that when I go refresh the WotC page right now, 5B is available.
Thaumaturge.
Edit: it wasn't.
My second hope is that, if saves are a problem, when WotC sends out surveys people will give good feedback, so WotC can update the game.
My third hope is that when I go refresh the WotC page right now, 5B is available.
Thaumaturge.
Edit: it wasn't.
