D&D (2024) Return to the 3 saves for 1D&D?

[UngeheuerLich]

Super meh. Plenty of people round here cut their teeth on 3E, and it came out over 20 years ago. When someone says "classic three saves" it's clear what they're talking about, because BD&D/AD&D had more than three, so that can't be what they're referring to.

Get off my lawn!*




*just to make it clear:

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Aaaaah so this is why people who are really good at maths are also really good at sports

Exactly! Take chess as a representative sport...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No. Change the existing six saves so that they all get more usage: Strength vs any spells that push or hold, Intelligence saves when interacting with illusions, instead of investigation checks, charisma saves vs spells that dominate rather than influence etc.

I am very split on illusions and saves instead of investigation.

Since disbelieving is something active, I think it is a good use of the new study action.
I think however, that escaping should allow for automatic saves if you happen to interact with illusions accidently/passively.

So I think, when you try to escape a phantasmal force spell that attacks you, you should be granted a saving throw. When you are in front of an illusionary wall, a study check might help you find the illusion, but then, if you try to lean on a on illusionary wall, an int save would be in order if you fall through or if your mind subtely shifts your balance (on a failure), so you won't pass through.

 

[Minigiant]

Just do the 6 saves right.

• STRENGTH
  • Forced Movement
  • Knocked Prone
  • Restrants
  • Grapples
• DEXTERITY
  • Quick Direct Attacks
  • Area Elemental damage
• CONSTITUTION
  • Poison
  • Disease
  • Cold
  • Necrotic
• INTELLIGENCE
  • Illusions
  • Psionics
  • Puzzles
• WISDOM
  • Stuns
  • Charms
  • Fear
• CHARISMA
  • Emotional Damage
  • Mind Control
  • Madness
  • Possession
  • Banishment

 

[Pauln6]

I am very split on illusions and saves instead of investigation.

Since disbelieving is something active, I think it is a good use of the new study action.
I think however, that escaping should allow for automatic saves if you happen to interact with illusions accidently/passively.

So I think, when you try to escape a phantasmal force spell that attacks you, you should be granted a saving throw. When you are in front of an illusionary wall, a study check might help you find the illusion, but then, if you try to lean on a on illusionary wall, an int save would be in order if you fall through or if your mind subtely shifts your balance (on a failure), so you won't pass through.

Exactly this, yes. The two should not be mutually exclusive.

 

[Yaarel]

There are defacto 4 saves:

Strength-Constitution (Fortitude)
Dexterity-Athletics (Reflex)
Intelligence-Perception (versus Hidden, Illusion, etcetera)
Charisma-Wisdom (Will)

 

[John Lloyd1]

I'd love to go back to Fort/Ref/Will - it was the model people picked up most intuitively.

As someone who has only played B/X/1E/2E & 5E, it doesn't seem to be intuitive to me. I wouldn't object to cutting down the number of saves to DEX, CON and WIS though.

 

[tetrasodium]

Why are we adding proficiency 1/2 mods to nonproficient saves? Seems like bounded accuracy was set up to stop having to do things like this?

Also, not a big fan of use X or use Y saves. Just makes ability scores routine and boring.

I would like to go back to the fort/reflex/will saves but seem to recall a variant (stat+stat)/2 formula for them that was either a common houserule or perhaps unearthed arcana/phb2/dragon mag type thing that encouraged more distributed attribute arrays & gave certain lacking builds a slightly better footing.

 

[ECMO3]

Should 1D&D return to classic 3 saving throws?
And how would it be done?

And using all abilities with that option also?


3 Saves for 1D&D;

Fortitude save: current STR and CON saves
Reflex save: current DEX saves
Will save: current INT, WIS and CHA saves.

how to use all abilities?

Fort saves: str+con mod
ref saves: dex+int mod
will saves: wis+cha mod

Every class would have proficiency in one saving throw:

fort save: barbarian, fighter, sorcerer, artificer
reflex save: bard, ranger, rogue, monk
will save: cleric, druid, warlock, wizard

average save modifier with various abilities:
16,16,16,8,8,8 = +6 over 6 saves = +1. +6 over 3 saves = +2
14,14,14,12,12,12 = +9 over 6 saves = +1,5. +9 over 3 saves = +3

then we move base DC back to 10 from 8.

and we add half proficiency mod to unproficient saves. Round down.
just to have all saves scale somewhat with levels, not depending only on ASIs

resilient feat would add proficiency in one save. with +1 ASI included as normal.

I would not like this at all. Too much like 3E .... it makes me cringe to even think about it. It also totally screws the idea of targeting weak saves. Your casters will be strong against all mind affecting stuff, where as under the current system you can use an intel save spell on a cleric or a charisma save spell on a wizard.

With bounded accuracy you would have a bunch of players that would be nearly mmune to a certain type of spell or affect.

I've been playing since the red box and the current 5.5 is the most elegant and meaningful and fun IMO.

 

[ECMO3]

Warriors and Experts proficient in Physical Saves. Priests and Mages proficient in Mental Saves.

If we did this, I think the game would be more fun if we actually reversed this.