D&D 5E Weak Saving Throws

[BryonD]

The fighter is still scared if his save is 5+ points lower than the rogue's over the course of his career, though.
Again, I don't get how you need the wonky scaling, "bounded accuracy" should ensure that the difference in ability scores take care of the fighter's lower chance to dodge a fireball ( or what have you ).

You are missing the point. I agree that the fighter is scared both ways.

You are turning words around now, and losing some continuity. But to try to repeat: you said " ""Low chance of success" is one thing, "bad scaling" or "no scaling at all" is another thing entirely."
In context you were allowing that low chance of success is ok (and you further reinforced this point by stating that DC should just be made high).
I am stating that within a bounded DC system "no scaling at all" is NOT "another thing entirely" from low chance of success.

On the other hand, if your only solution is to keep saves close together but make something scary by making DCs really high, then you are forcing it to be scary to the rogue also. It might be a little less scary to the rogue. But to the extent that you require the saves to be close together you also require the scariness to be close together.

 

[Thaumaturge]

A challenge 5E may face is that it appears the base set is neither fish nor fowl. Anyone who truly prefers a prior style will need to change some things.

On an interesting note: in the Tome Show podcast that came out yesterday, Mearls said (my paraphrase) they learned from the playtest that most people aren't married to a particular style or edition. People have preferences, but they can enjoy games that are (to use your metaphor) a mixed breed. Obviously, this isn't universal, but that understanding of their data is likely why 5B is what it is. This is the midpoint that most of the silent majority will play and enjoy. They expect.

Dude, my point was "he took the best approach to fixing his stats willingly", which does not preclude the fact that I think giving up customization just to function at high levels is a bad thing. So yes, he's free to feel bad for everything he had to give up just to be viable, thankyouverymuch
Would you feel better if I wrote: "since he doesn't want to suck at level 20, he decided to spend everything on ability score increases and couldn't choose feats"?

Yeah. Because it changes the scenario. I really believe there will be people who only play 5B, so I think their experience should be considered also. You appeared to be considering them. Now you aren't. I wouldn't have pointed out the discrepancy if you'd used your new wording. Your new phrase presents a different player who is making a different choice. Now I can feel sorry for him. Until the PH(B) releases, anyway.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Obryn]

I disagree that this produces quality results. You are back to tying the chances of the fighter avoiding the fireball to the rogue who may or may not be there.

The chance should be a function of the fighter and the fireball.

In 5E as written I can scare the fighter with a threat that doesn't look so bad to the rogue.

Anyway, going off this, is it the intention of the system that you can't scare the Fighter at 1st level? Or is the fighter adequately scared by Dex saves at 1st level?

If so, should the Fighter should be disproportionately more scared at 20th? That's where the issue is. Because if it's scary already at 1st, that d20 isn't getting any more sides on it, you know? And if it's not scary at 1st, isn't that a problem?

 

[pemerton]

Why are we making PCs fight PCs, again?

Because in 5e NPCs are built along the lines of PCs.

You can build powerful warriors with strong will.

There is no way in Basic, at least that I've noticed, that lets a fighter get WIS or CHA save proficiency, which is the mechanical realisation of "strong will" in Next.

I look at 5e as a supplement to AD&D, or, 5e as the new base supplemented by TSR editions.

But in TSR editions, fighters at high levels had the best saves in the game (except for clerics vs poison/death).

The structure of fighter saves in 5e in no way resembles TSR editions. The only previous edition that it resembles is 3E.
[MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION] and I aren't expressing concerns because we're unfamiliar with TSR editions. We're expressing concern at departure from the TSR model in favour of (what we see as) the flawed 3E model for saving throw scaling.

 

[Njall]

You are missing the point. I agree that the fighter is scared both ways.

You are turning words around now, and losing some continuity. But to try to repeat: you said " ""Low chance of success" is one thing, "bad scaling" or "no scaling at all" is another thing entirely."
In context you were allowing that low chance of success is ok (and you further reinforced this point by stating that DC should just be made high).
I am stating that within a bounded DC system "no scaling at all" is NOT "another thing entirely" from low chance of success.

On the other hand, if your only solution is to keep saves close together but make something scary by making DCs really high, then you are forcing it to be scary to the rogue also. It might be a little less scary to the rogue. But to the extent that you require the saves to be close together you also require the scariness to be close together.

Then make saves far apart from the get go and keep them at the same distance? Why does the gap increase somehow make it scarier? Keep it consistent across all levels.

 

[beej]

Because in 5e NPCs are built along the lines of PCs.

Are we sure about this?

So far I have yet to see an NPC that maxed out at 20 on its primary stat (basic says that most non-adventurers are probably 18 at most.) I also see that NPC's do not necessarily use proficiency bonuses in the exact same way PCs do.

On topic: Is it really the norm in 5e to increase DCs as players increase in level? I've tended to avoid this during the playtest, myself. If I want the level 20 fighter to have a moderate chance of saving against the NPC's Meteor Swarm, I'd set the DC at 15-ish. This is also the DC I'd set if I want a level 5 fighter to have a moderate chance of saving against the NPC's fireball.

If the DM's in the habit of raising DCs, then sure, the Math's broken. I think.

 

[Obryn]

On topic: Is it really the norm in 5e to increase DCs as players increase in level? I've tended to avoid this during the playtest, myself. If I want the level 20 fighter to have a moderate chance of saving against the NPC's Meteor Swarm, I'd set the DC at 15-ish. This is also the DC I'd set if I want a level 5 fighter to have a moderate chance of saving against the NPC's fireball.

If the DM's in the habit of raising DCs, then sure, the Math's broken. I think.

Yes, you make NPC spellcasters like PC spellcasters and they cast real spells. At least as of the most recent rules.

 

[beej]

Yes, you make NPC spellcasters like PC spellcasters and they cast real spells. At least as of the most recent rules.

Oh. I must have missed those rules in the playtest. My apologies, then.

Can someone help me find these NPC rules in the playtest? I need to read up.

 

[Remathilis]

Wading into the muck...

1.) The playtest offers a ring of protection: +1 to AC and saves. I suspect they will be rather popular. As will items like ring of mind-shielding, gauntlets of dexterity, armor in invulnerability, etc.

2.) If those items AREN'T in the DMG/Basic adjunct, I don't wager it will be too hard to make them for any DM or aspiring module writer.

3.) If you REALLY don't want the magic item route, what about offing 1/2 proficiency (+1 to +3) to all non-proficient saves? Its a house rule, but...

 

[MJS]

Because in 5e NPCs are built along the lines of PCs.

There is no way in Basic, at least that I've noticed, that lets a fighter get WIS or CHA save proficiency, which is the mechanical realisation of "strong will" in Next.

But in TSR editions, fighters at high levels had the best saves in the game (except for clerics vs poison/death).

The structure of fighter saves in 5e in no way resembles TSR editions. The only previous edition that it resembles is 3E.

@Obryn and I aren't expressing concerns because we're unfamiliar with TSR editions. We're expressing concern at departure from the TSR model in favour of (what we see as) the flawed 3E model for saving throw scaling.

Right, and I wouldn't assume you weren't familiar with old-school. I was referring to a broader split in gamers - those comfortable with house ruling and those who would prefer not to.
I haven't played enough d20 to have known about this concern.
I think I grok the situation now -
are we assuming that, in full-blow 5e, saves will be player-customized via feats, thus improving at higher levels? But that in 5B, the PCs are getting hosed?
So either the DM adjusts DC's , or perhaps ports over the classic saves.