D&D 5E Weak Saving Throws

[Thaumaturge]

I have that feat that (will likely exist) gives me +1

That feat is called "Ability Score Improvement". A wizard can only take it enough times to make his total DC 8+5+(proficiency).

Thaumaturge.

 

[Sadrik]

That feat is called "Ability Score Improvement". A wizard can only take it enough times to make his total DC 8+5+(proficiency).

Thaumaturge.

I think we might see a spell focus type feat. I think the hard cap on stats at 20 is for normals, add in some magic and you might see stats above 20. I think the DC 19 cap is a soft cap.

 

[the Jester]

Scaling only adds in if you have proficiency in that save. So whether a 0 level 8 stat or a level 20 8 stat it does not matter they have the same chance of failure.

Yes... I am not sure what your point is here.

I thought magic implements were in the playtest btw. I may be wrong though.

They appeared very early on, but I don't think we've seen anything like them since either the Caves of Chaos release or maybe the Blindingstone release (or whatever it was called).

Again, I might be wrong, but I would be very surprised to see generic +1 implements and their ilk in the game. The magic implements in 4e were a math fix that 5e simply doesn't need.

 

[MerricB]

Scaling only adds in if you have proficiency in that save. So whether a 0 level 8 stat or a level 20 8 stat it does not matter they have the same chance of failure.

I thought magic implements were in the playtest btw. I may be wrong though.

Wands and the like are, yes, but not as +1 items or better. They're back to their pre-4E versions of spell-items or special ability items.

Note also that magic items that give more than a +1 to something were extremely rare in the playtest - the vorpal sword managed to make it to +3 if you attuned it. An attuned ring of protection is +1 to saving throws in the Interim Rules document.

Cheers!

 

[Thaumaturge]

I think we might see a spell focus type feat. I think the hard cap on stats at 20 is for normals, add in some magic and you might see stats above 20. I think the DC 19 cap is a soft cap.

And I disagree.

Fortunately, we'll find out. Not for sure until after the DMG, probably. Even then, not for sure until 6e comes out and we can look back.

Still, I doubt we'll see one in the launch window.

Thaumaturge.

 

[pemerton]

Otto's takes effect without a save, so works for at least 1 round automatically.

OK, I missed that! (I really don't understand the rationale behind the absence of a targetting/attack/save line.)

Personally, I find the notion of a 1st level commoner with an 8 Wisdom having a good chance of avoiding a 20th level wizard's charm spell- or, hell, even a decent chance of avoiding it- far more troubling than the reverse.

I'm not worrid about "1st level commoners." I'm more thinking of 20th level fighters, who strike me as being highly vulnerable to Dominate Person.

 

[the Jester]

OK, I missed that! (I really don't understand the rationale behind the absence of a targetting/attack/save line.)

I'm not worrid about "1st level commoners." I'm more thinking of 20th level fighters, who strike me as being highly vulnerable to Dominate Person.

If that fighter has gone through 20 levels of play with an 8 Wisdom, sucking up the failed saves all that time, then he has made the choice to have a bad save, especially given how easily he could bump that Wisdom up a few notches.

Not only that, he has options to reroll that failed save from class abilities, he probably has buddies there to back him up, etc.

I much prefer the approach that all pcs are weak against certain opponents (the wizard is screwed when facing a golem, the fighter is screwed against an enemy enchanter) than the sort of "everyone is equally capable against every foe" approach that 4e took. (Mind you, I love my 4e game, too.)

 

[Bluenose]

II much prefer the approach that all pcs are weak against certain opponents (the wizard is screwed when facing a golem, the fighter is screwed against an enemy enchanter) than the sort of "everyone is equally capable against every foe" approach that 4e took. (Mind you, I love my 4e game, too.)

I'm not sure 5e golems will be very effective against invisible flying wizards. And I'm absolutely certain that being good at saving against all sorts of effects was a feature of high-level Fighters (actually, of every class) in versions of D&D before 3e.

 

[Savage Wombat]

If that fighter has gone through 20 levels of play with an 8 Wisdom, sucking up the failed saves all that time, then he has made the choice to have a bad save, especially given how easily he could bump that Wisdom up a few notches.

Not only that, he has options to reroll that failed save from class abilities, he probably has buddies there to back him up, etc.

I much prefer the approach that all pcs are weak against certain opponents (the wizard is screwed when facing a golem, the fighter is screwed against an enemy enchanter) than the sort of "everyone is equally capable against every foe" approach that 4e took. (Mind you, I love my 4e game, too.)

While I agree with you, I do hope the PH has feats and the DMG magic items that help you improve poor saves. I have a theory that there will be items that give you proficiency in a save category.

 

[Obryn]

If that fighter has gone through 20 levels of play with an 8 Wisdom, sucking up the failed saves all that time, then he has made the choice to have a bad save, especially given how easily he could bump that Wisdom up a few notches.

Well, let's take a look at that. If you use the array, you have an 8, and Wisdom is one place to put it, I suppose!

Each 2 points of increase costs a feat - and one he's not spending on strength, constitution, etc. So to go from 8 to 20 takes 6 feats. Sounds kind of pricey, but we wouldn't want to be a dirty min maxer, would we? So we'll do that.

So now the wisest Fighter in the land has a massive +5 to save vs. Wisdom. This means he still has the privilege of saving vs. Hold Person 35% of the time. What a bargain! It only cost him 6 feats!

As for the rest, I'm totally on board with PCs having weaker saves.

I'm totally not on board with how 5e is doing it, with this disparity getting worse as you increase in level.