frankthedm
First Post
4E's defenses were fairly good.
Saving Throws: What Should Become of Them?
I am the opposite. There are several things, in my opinion, that should take one out of the fight and, potentially, the campaign unless countered with magic- Petrification, Polymorphs, certain mind affecting attacks, banished/transported to other planes etc. Not doing so makes want me want to unleash profanities and did with 4e.
If a player gets taken out, DMs should let the player run some of the allies/henchmen or enemies (in a fight), etc. until the character can be restored or a new PC can be introduced.
jodyjohnson
Adventurer
I think the core question here is
'Do you want effects that bypass the hit point mechanic for ending a fight?'
If you do then you keep pre-4e pinning, disarm, petrification, poison, hold/paralysis, death, disintegration, domination, sleep, etc.
If you don't then you use a 4e-like attack and just say that effect takes place in the narrative when such an attack reduces the target to 0 hp.
I think you can write this into the 5e system with keywords. Either the effect is literal or it takes effect when the attack reduces HP to 0 depending on your table's dial.
'Do you want effects that bypass the hit point mechanic for ending a fight?'
If you do then you keep pre-4e pinning, disarm, petrification, poison, hold/paralysis, death, disintegration, domination, sleep, etc.
If you don't then you use a 4e-like attack and just say that effect takes place in the narrative when such an attack reduces the target to 0 hp.
I think you can write this into the 5e system with keywords. Either the effect is literal or it takes effect when the attack reduces HP to 0 depending on your table's dial.
And right here I think might be one of the biggest potential hurdles the designers will have to figure out going forward... figuring out the rules for just how fast/easy it is to instantly remove/kill someone from the game. Because there are quite a number of players like you, GregK, who seem to want insta-death effects... just like there seems to be players who want 1st level characters to potentially start with only 1-3 hit points. As I'm sure that there are players who are steadfast in their desire for -10 rather than -half HP to be the bleeding out point.
It's a dial for the "gritty" aspects of the game that will be interesting to see if they can put that insta-death or virtual insta-death side-by-side with more moderate dying rules and keep both sides somewhat happy.
My 3e experience tells me that "save or suck" attacks just, well, suck. Plus, the 3e save made an additional die roll necessary, which dies not speed up the game. In that way, 4E defenses are much better, because there is only one roll, the attack roll that targets a specific defense.
In addition, PCs are subject to more attacks than the individual opponent, since PCs are subject to attacks in every combat, while their opponents are most likely subject to the PCs attacks for only one combat.
So the PCs suffer more from effects like daze, stun, etc.
This can be frustrating, since, as a player, you want your character to be able to do something every round.
For this reason, 4E saving throws are basically a 55:45 chance, which is good.
Now, PCs can have the ability to reduce the chances to succeed a saving throw. And that can frustrate a GM.
So there needs to be a mechanism for the GM to shake off a saving throw effect on one of his creatures.
And 4E had that, too.
So, in general, I find the 4E saving throw mechanic plausible. It also offers many ways to narrate the effects of attacks, which is always a plus for me.
In addition, PCs are subject to more attacks than the individual opponent, since PCs are subject to attacks in every combat, while their opponents are most likely subject to the PCs attacks for only one combat.
So the PCs suffer more from effects like daze, stun, etc.
This can be frustrating, since, as a player, you want your character to be able to do something every round.
For this reason, 4E saving throws are basically a 55:45 chance, which is good.
Now, PCs can have the ability to reduce the chances to succeed a saving throw. And that can frustrate a GM.
So there needs to be a mechanism for the GM to shake off a saving throw effect on one of his creatures.
And 4E had that, too.
So, in general, I find the 4E saving throw mechanic plausible. It also offers many ways to narrate the effects of attacks, which is always a plus for me.
Knightfall
World of Kulan DM
What about allowing a save every other round for really nasty effects like being turned into stone or a dragon's fear aura. Like you said, those effects should be a whole lot harder to shrug off. And I don't think a penalty is enough.
Last edited:
Defcon 1,
I agree with you. This has been my concern from the initial announcement. However, it can be done. There are games including, my favorite, Savage Worlds (within the corebook as of Deluxe), that allow you to adjust lethality. Some have the range go from cartoon violence to Life is cheap (i.e., very gritty).
I agree with you. This has been my concern from the initial announcement. However, it can be done. There are games including, my favorite, Savage Worlds (within the corebook as of Deluxe), that allow you to adjust lethality. Some have the range go from cartoon violence to Life is cheap (i.e., very gritty).
Last edited:
Nobody said that an adventurer's life was an easy one. It is often cut short by spell or sword and, therefore, should not be entered lightly. However, survive and the rewards are worth it- women (or men depending upon prefernce), gold, glory, and immortality in bardic tales. XD
CleanCutRogue
First Post
The breakdown of Fortitude, Will, and Reflex worked well in 3e. Made perfect sense, nobody every wondered which to use for what circumstance. I honestly hope it makes its way to DnDNext.
4e's use of the effect occurring then making a player make a save each turn until he shruggs off effects (or something worse happens) is cool, adds a little tension to an encounter, and in my opinion is a really cool system. Gives a player something to do even though his character out of commission. But basing it on a flat 10+ seems arbitrary and silly. I think the two concepts would work together.
A medusa effect could be: target is paralyzed and turning to stone. Each turn he may make a FORT save to try to shrug off the effects. If he passes his save, he may act normally next turn. If he fails twice, he turns to stone and will remain that way until the medusa is killed or someone casts a heal spell (any type) on him.
something to that effect. Low level characters might take 3-4 turns to escape the effect, but high level characters can shrug it off in one turn.
4e's use of the effect occurring then making a player make a save each turn until he shruggs off effects (or something worse happens) is cool, adds a little tension to an encounter, and in my opinion is a really cool system. Gives a player something to do even though his character out of commission. But basing it on a flat 10+ seems arbitrary and silly. I think the two concepts would work together.
A medusa effect could be: target is paralyzed and turning to stone. Each turn he may make a FORT save to try to shrug off the effects. If he passes his save, he may act normally next turn. If he fails twice, he turns to stone and will remain that way until the medusa is killed or someone casts a heal spell (any type) on him.
something to that effect. Low level characters might take 3-4 turns to escape the effect, but high level characters can shrug it off in one turn.
That is fine for dials. There are several 1-3e spells that I would prefer the effect based upon the amount you missed the save rather level/hd giving you immunity.
For medusas, however, I, personally, want it all or nothing (you met the gaze or did not) and determined by one roll. You save or fail. No partial save and being, partially, transformed. No additional roll to be able to shrug it off.
Similar Threads
