Mike Mearls said:
•Saving throws against effects that take you out of the fight, like a ghoul's paralysis, mess up monster scaling. A ghoul is equally deadly to a 3rd- or 17th-level fighter. If either one blows a saving throw, the fighter is out of the battle.
•Our skill DCs are out of whack. They don't match up well with the actual bonuses that characters accrue at all levels.
I'm glad to hear that they realize this and are working on solutions. With so few changes to the game's core math in well over a year, I was afraid that what we had was pretty much set.
Mike Mearls said:
•We're instituting a consistent bonus progression for characters that ranges from +1 at 1st level to +6 at 20th level for attacks, checks, and saving throws.
•For characters who are truly experts in some areas, that bonus can go as high as +12 for checks. For example, rangers can hit +12 on Wisdom checks and rogues could hit it on Dexterity checks. You won't reach that height for attacks. We might allow characters to gain that on saving throws if it fits a character archetype. For instance, a dwarf fighter might eventually reach +12 on Constitution saving throws.
• The optional skill system allows you to reach +12, but only for specific checks that map to the traditional D&D skill system as seen in 3rd Edition and 4th Edition. For instance, a 20th-level cleric who maxes out the Sense Motive skill might be at +6 for Wisdom checks and at +12 for Sense Motive checks.
The +1 to +6 bonus sounds fine. +12 does not. That large of a bonus seems contrary to the goal of bounded accuracy. This is very close to the total bonuses in 4e. A 20th level character in next can have a +17 total bonus, assuming a 20 ability score. A 20th level character with a 20 ability score in 4e had a +20 (10 from half level, 5 from skill training, 5 from ability). So a whopping 3 point difference. That's "bounded"? I think not!
I also strongly dislike the class bonus to all checks with an entire ability score (such as Rangers getting a bonus to all Wisdom checks). What if I prefer to have skills in my game? It sounds to me like the +12 bonus is the maximum, so any skill that uses Wisdom would be useless to a Ranger, who already has the maximum bonus for all Wisdom checks. I may be wrong, but that's how it sounds to me.
Mike Mearls said:
•We're plotting out monster saving throw DCs by level so that lower level critters have lower save DCs than higher level ones. In other words, a creature's DCs play a big role in determining its level and XP value.
Sounds good, though the number of times monsters can invoke these effects is a much bigger problem than the Save DC. Ghouls, for example, get 3 attacks per round and can inflict paralysis on each and every attack. Even with a low Save DC, when you're having to make a save 3 times a round, you're going to fail eventually. It's worse when you have more than one such creature attacking you. A character with 3 ghouls attacking him might have to make as many as NINE saving throws per round! Even with a low save DC, the odds are good you'll fail at least one of those. This is the bigger problem that needs to be fixed. Also, why are low level monsters ever getting multiple attacks, anyway? If a low level fighter doesn't get to make 3 attacks per round, no low level monster should be able to, either.
Mike Mearls said:
•We're pushing the DCs used by player character casters down a bit and factoring effective spell level into the equation. Thus, a high-level wizard has lower saving throw DCs for weaker spells and higher ones for stronger ones.
Lowering caster's Save DCs will no longer be necessary, now that characters are getting a +6 to +12 bonus to saving throws. That more than makes up for the +5 spellcasting bonus that casters get! And factoring the spell level into the Save DC is the worst bit of news I've heard. The level-neutral save DCs was one of the things about Next's magic system that I praised. This is just going to have the same problems it caused in 3e, where low level spells became all but useless.