Preferences regarding "save to resist" vs. "roll to hit" mechanics?

MechaPilot · Jan 23, 2019

DM Howard said:
I actually prefer how Hackmaster 5E does it, where you compare your attack roll versus the target's defense roll.

Palladium's games do that as well. I also recall that being one of the variants in the 3e DMG.

Opposed rolls do make a certain degree of sense. However, as you mentioned, this does slow things down a little bit. I don't find the slow-down to be significant enough to be a problem. The real issue regarding "attack roll vs defense roll" for me is the swingy-ness of inserting another die roll; especially a d20. The more RNG you add to both sides of the attack, the less the results seem to reflect the skill of each character.

DM Howard · Jan 23, 2019

MechaPilot said:
Palladium's games do that as well. I also recall that being one of the variants in the 3e DMG.

Opposed rolls do make a certain degree of sense. However, as you mentioned, this does slow things down a little bit. I don't find the slow-down to be significant enough to be a problem. The real issue regarding "attack roll vs defense roll" for me is the swingy-ness of inserting another die roll; especially a d20. The more RNG you add to both sides of the attack, the less the results seem to reflect the skill of each character.

That's true, although I think that it creates a shorter divide between skilled vs non-skilled while still alowing the uber-skilled to shine through. I like the idea that DM Howard, the level 1 Commoner, still has a decent chance of landing a blow on MechaPilot, the level 19 Assassin either through dumb luck or the fact that I just happen to be holding something pointy at the right time.

MechaPilot · Jan 23, 2019

DM Howard said:
That's true, although I think that it creates a shorter divide between skilled vs non-skilled while still alowing the uber-skilled to shine through. I like the idea that DM Howard, the level 1 Commoner, still has a decent chance of landing a blow on MechaPilot, the level 19 Assassin either through dumb luck or the fact that I just happen to be holding something pointy at the right time.

I like the dumb-luck/random-chance being present as well. I think it's just a matter of preference as to the frequency at which chance can override skill. For instance, there's a lot of chance represented on a d20. Dropping it to a d12 or a d10 (depending on the bonus structure of the game in question), or using 2d10 to achieve a more normalized average roll, reduces the occurrences of luck overcoming skill without completely wiping it out.

Again, though, I think it's just a matter of preference as to how often it happens.

Jhaelen · Jan 24, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
I prefer 4e/SWSE's NADs (Non Armor Defenses) to other DnD editions' saving throws, but I prefer 5e's spell DC system for ongoing effects.

I'm not quite sure how 5e DCs work, but in general I agree:

Making attack rolls for spells as well as melee or ranged weapon attacks makes the most sense to me.
I'm less fond of 4e's saving throw rules. 13th Age is slightly better in that regard, since it supports different difficulties (you need to roll 5, 10, or 15 to succeed, depending on the strength of the continuous effect).
I wonder if it wouldn't be better to have an effect simply last a fixed number of rounds and have counter-effects that can reduce that number to end the effect early.

13th Age also features powers that don't allow saves, but only affect creatures up to a certain number of hp. Since you're comparing against the current hp, you can start by attacking them normally to bring down their hp and then finish them off with a power's special effects. It also means that in order to stay safe from such an effect you need to prevent your hp from dropping too low and quickly healing any sustained wounds becomes a priority. I like that.

doctorbadwolf · Jan 24, 2019

Jhaelen said:
I'm not quite sure how 5e DCs work, but in general I agree:

Making attack rolls for spells as well as melee or ranged weapon attacks makes the most sense to me.
I'm less fond of 4e's saving throw rules. 13th Age is slightly better in that regard, since it supports different difficulties (you need to roll 5, 10, or 15 to succeed, depending on the strength of the continuous effect).
I wonder if it wouldn't be better to have an effect simply last a fixed number of rounds and have counter-effects that can reduce that number to end the effect early.

13th Age also features powers that don't allow saves, but only affect creatures up to a certain number of hp. Since you're comparing against the current hp, you can start by attacking them normally to bring down their hp and then finish them off with a power's special effects. It also means that in order to stay safe from such an effect you need to prevent your hp from dropping too low and quickly healing any sustained wounds becomes a priority. I like that.

My idea for continuous saves would be that your save dc is the caster’s spell attack mod+8 or +10. So, more powerful casters are harder to resist. Another way might be that all effects have a level, and it’s 10+attack mod+effect level, with some effects having a built in +/- to the DC, to represent a stronger or weaker effect, but that can get complicated.

Shasarak · Jan 24, 2019

I like roll to hit mechanics together with roll to save mechanics. Seems to work well.

I dont like Traps to roll to hit my Reflex I would prefer to roll a Reflex save.

Preferences regarding "save to resist" vs. "roll to hit" mechanics?

MechaPilot

Explorer

DM Howard

Explorer

MechaPilot

Explorer

Jhaelen

First Post

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle

Shasarak

Banned

Similar Threads