D&D 5E Weak Saving Throws

[Khisanth the Ancient]

It should have been an outspoken design criteria to have all die rolls a player is asked to roll have at least a 20% success rate.

Why?

I can see a lot of situations where a smaller chance of success than that makes perfect sense.

EDIT: Also, there are very few ultra-high DCs in the Monster Manual.

Is this what you are talking about?

My personal concern is the 20+ DC saves for just being in the general vicinity of the Demon Lords that have come out of the Abyss.

OK, I haven't played in or read Out of the Abyss - so I didn't know about that.

How do you deal with a DC 23 Charisma save, for instance. (Yes, that's an official thing)

That does sound pretty scary, and really high compared to the stuff in the MM.

However, that fact in itself doesn't necessarily mean the writers messed up. What's the context?

Creatures of CR 21+ are supposed to be insanely hard (though it still might be a mistake when compared to ancient dragon and tarrasque Frightful Presence DCs in the MM).

Do they have warning and a chance to buff up?

And what's the consequences for failing? Are the PCs really expected to be affected by whatever-it-is and the adventure just gives them a (small) chance to avoid it entirely?

 

[jgsugden]

Is there really that much for a difference between not being able to make a saving throw and failing it 80% of the time? 80% of the time there isn't.

The system works as it does for a reason. And it does work.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

A question that arises then is when and what sorts of things should be automatic successes or failures in D&D? Does the game somewhere imply that any character should have a chance to accomplish anything? Does it imply that any high level character should have a chance to accomplish anything? Is the implication that if some characters get a chance to roll, then all characters should have a chance to roll? Is the implication that if a player is asked to roll a die, success should be possible? Is the implication that the DM shouldn't ask one player to roll and tell another player that they have no chance of success so skip the roll there, or is instead that both should roll to preserve mystery, and is one or the other or both of these situations bad?

This is getting my design analysis going.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The thing that is inciting my negative reaction is that even after five editions, the game still hasn't fixed something as profoundly basic as impossible DCs.

Or, to be honest, that incites a slightly dismayed reaction. As in "Sigh, why couldn't they have fixed this... now I have to tell my players to make a DC 23 Charisma check or DC 26 Intelligence check (or whatever) even when I'm perfectly aware that's an auto-fail for some player characters, not only now but for ever and ever". That the game would - very simply and straightforwardly - have felt more fair and be more fun if it somehow made sure that at least at top level no character had less than, say, a +6 modifier.

What incites my negative reaction, on the other hand, is how some posters go well beyond not having a problem with the thing that incited the slightly dismayed reaction, but spend considerable resources arguing that there's nothing wrong in the first place, coming up with scenarios tailor-made to paint the designers in the most beneficial light possible in order to argue there isn't a problem, not even a small one, and that the thing that incited the slightly dismayed reaction is perfectly good game design.

I'm honestly puzzled with the strength of your sentiment on this.

Would you be bothered by abilities that simply had no saving throw?

If the answer is "no", then how is it worse to have a saving throw only for some PCs? I.e., "If you have proficiency in X, and/or your ability score X is higher than Z, then you have a saving throw. Otherwise there is no saving throw."

Which, after all, is the current situation.

 

[Khisanth the Ancient]

I just checked the DCs of all CR 16+ monsters in the MM.

The majority of ultra-high (over 20) DCs are 'save for half damage' or 'knocked prone/pushed back' effects. The former can be mitigated by HP, and the latter are going to be largely hitting melee classes with high STR and likely to have proficiency in STR saves too.

The only others I found are the non-damage breaths and frightful presence of some ancient dragons and the adult gold dragon, and the pit fiend's fear and hold monster spell.

Most of these are over CR 20; the only exceptions are the adult gold dragon (CR 17/DC 21)*, pit fiend (CR 20/DC 21), ancient brass dragon (CR 20/DC 21).

*This one might be a mistake. Its frightful presence DC is 3 higher than the adult red at the same CR, and is higher than 7 out of 10 of the ancient dragons, the same as the ancient silver (CR 23) and red (CR 24), and is exceeded only by the ancient gold (CR 24).

 

[Sword of Spirit]

the adult gold dragon (CR 17/DC 21)*
...
*This one might be a mistake.

No, it is correct. Frightful Presence DCs are 8 + Prof bonus + Cha mod.

What is odd is that the damage of the ancient gold dragon's breath is only 13d10 when the adult gold dragon's is 12d10. The only significant difference is that the save DC of the ancient is DC 24 compared to the adults DC 21.

The only reasoning I can think of for doing it that way (pitiful damage die increase) is that it really is intended that almost everyone is going to fail their saves versus the ancient.

 

[Khisanth the Ancient]

No, it is correct. Frightful Presence DCs are 8 + Prof bonus + Cha mod.

Well, OK, but maybe they shouldn't have set the gold dragons' Cha quite that high. (It's odd, too, because I would have thought of silver dragons as supposed to be the more charismatic ones - aren't they the super-social-outgoing metallic dragons? But maybe it's the golds' sheer overwhelming force of personality...)

 

[CapnZapp]

I just checked the DCs of all CR 16+ monsters in the MM.

The majority of ultra-high (over 20) DCs are 'save for half damage' or 'knocked prone/pushed back' effects. The former can be mitigated by HP, and the latter are going to be largely hitting melee classes with high STR and likely to have proficiency in STR saves too.

The only others I found are the non-damage breaths and frightful presence of some ancient dragons and the adult gold dragon, and the pit fiend's fear and hold monster spell.

Most of these are over CR 20; the only exceptions are the adult gold dragon (CR 17/DC 21)*, pit fiend (CR 20/DC 21), ancient brass dragon (CR 20/DC 21).

*This one might be a mistake. Its frightful presence DC is 3 higher than the adult red at the same CR, and is higher than 7 out of 10 of the ancient dragons, the same as the ancient silver (CR 23) and red (CR 24), and is exceeded only by the ancient gold (CR 24).

You should consult the Madness chapter of the DMG.

Being asked to roll 23 on a d20 with a -1 modifier or you'll run away or get delusional for minutes and hours...

...is not fun.

I agree that if you only fall on your ass or lose some hit points then it's much more fair.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

You should consult the Madness chapter of the DMG.

Being asked to roll 23 on a d20 with a -1 modifier or you'll run away or get delusional for minutes and hours...

...is not fun.

Sounds like a good reason to use great caution when choosing which optional rules to add to your game.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Sounds like a good reason to use great caution when choosing which optional rules to add to your game.

Followed immediately by even greater caution when choosing frightful creatures/situations designed to force those "impossible madness checks"...