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

[Li Shenron]

How about we keep 6 saves and actually have spells and effects that call for STR, INT, and Cha saves,?

This. What 5e could have done better is make the 6 saves more equal rather than 3 being more useful than the others.

For example, all effects that block movements (incl. petrification/paralysis) could have granted Str saves on the ground that you could resist them actively by physically exerting force against them. Illusions could use Int saves. Many mental effects could switch to Cha saves if it makes sense to resist them with force of personality.

Sometimes I think the game suffers from the old concept that Wisdom must include savvyness (only to allow low-Int characters to do the "right thing" without understanding why) and willpower. What if Wisdom was more or less entirely about Perception? It would still be hugely important, but some chunks of its usefulness could be relocated to Int and Cha or even Con.

In addition, I'd rather have the game evolve forward than backwards, so thanks but no to going back to older editions saves.

 

[Charlaquin]

The 6 saves system is (IMO) one of the worst ideas of d&d 5e. The designers kind of acknowledged this by making 3 of those 6 saves far better than the other 3, but I believe we would still be better off going back to fort, reflex and will. Remove the resilient feat, while we’re at it.

The 6 saves system actually works decently fine at low levels, but the math and scaling completely breaks at higher levels, to the point that expert players usually make sure to include a paladin in the party just to patch their saving throws. It’s bad.

The idea seemed nice at first because it further unified the core mechanic. Whether a PC was making a check or a save, the DM could use the same logic to determine which ability to call for a roll with. But, yeah, the payoff isn’t worth the wonky scaling it causes.

 

[Minigiant]

The 6 saves system is (IMO) one of the worst ideas of d&d 5e. The designers kind of acknowledged this by making 3 of those 6 saves far better than the other 3, but I believe we would still be better off going back to fort, reflex and will. Remove the resilient feat, while we’re at it.

The 6 saves system actually works decently fine at low levels, but the math and scaling completely breaks at higher levels, to the point that expert players usually make sure to include a paladin in the party just to patch their saving throws. It’s bad.

The 6 saves system works. Theproblem is the designers used a 3e logic in their 6 save system.

There is no reason why every class only starts with proficincy in 2 saves and only a few gain proficiency in more. A level 10 fighter shouldhave pro in STR, DEX, AND CON as they mastered their body for combat. By level 20, they should have at least 4 save profiecincies. Same with most noncasters.

 

[Horwath]

I don't remember having to think on what Save to use when there were only Fort/Refl/Will, it was so easy. If Wizards don't want the rules to be the protagonist, they should think of bringing back the 3 saves.
I just don't like the 4e way of "pick up the highest ability mod from x and y", it makes some builds more powerful than others. Pick the lowest is no different, mean or sum of 2 abilities is no standard math.
My idea is the middle ability modifier, like 13th Age.

• Fort: str/con/dex
• Refl: con/dex/wis
• Will: int/wis/car

Main 3 abilities for saves (con/dex/wis) are still important, but not that much since you get the middle of 3.

this still leaves the problem that you can now dump str and int or cha and still have great saves.

 

[Olrox17]

The 6 saves system works. Theproblem is the designers used a 3e logic in their 6 save system.

There is no reason why every class only starts with proficincy in 2 saves and only a few gain proficiency in more. A level 10 fighter shouldhave pro in STR, DEX, AND CON as they mastered their body for combat. By level 20, they should have at least 4 save profiecincies. Same with most noncasters.

Thing is, even that wouldn’t be enough to fix the scaling. Heck, even high levels monks, with their Omni-save proficiency, are basically just as good at passing high level saving throw DCs than low level characters are at passing low level DCs (not taking re-roll potential into account, only talking about numbers).
The 5e saving throw scaling is really, really poor.

 

[Minigiant]

Thing is, even that wouldn’t be enough to fix the scaling. Heck, even high levels monks, with their Omni-save proficiency, are basically just as good at passing high level saving throw DCs than low level characters are at passing low level DCs (not taking re-roll potential into account, only talking about numbers).
The 5e saving throw scaling is really, really poor.

That's why warrior classes should get Expertise in saving throws.

Warrior types get Expertise in two of STR DEX and CON saves
Skill monkeys get Expertise 2-4 skills and 1 saving throw
Casters get Expertise in Religion or Arcana and saving throw of their casting stat.

 

[Olrox17]

That's why warrior classes should get Expertise in saving throws.

Warrior types get Expertise in two of STR DEX and CON saves
Skill monkeys get Expertise 2-4 skills and 1 saving throw
Casters get Expertise in Religion or Arcana and saving throw of their casting stat.

I’m sure the 6 saving throw setup can be saved, with a lot of tweaks, effort and math revisions. I’m not sure it’s worth saving, when Fort/Ref/Will would be simpler and more intuitive.

 

[Minigiant]

I’m sure the 6 saving throw setup can be saved, with a lot of tweaks, effort and math revisions. I’m not sure it’s worth saving, when Fort/Ref/Will would be simpler and more intuitive.

Simpler isn't better.

3 saves boosts Dex even more, nerfs STR & INT more, and returns to silly ideas where vitality helps you from being knocked down.

Proper Implementation of 6 saves > Arbitrary Classic saves> Proper Implementation of 3 saves > Poor Implementation of 3 or 6 saves.

It's not hard.Just stop designing like it's 3rd edition.

 

[Olrox17]

Simpler isn't better.

3 saves boosts Dex even more, nerfs STR & INT more, and returns to silly ideas where vitality helps you from being knocked down.

Proper Implementation of 6 saves > Arbitrary Classic saves> Proper Implementation of 3 saves > Poor Implementation of 3 or 6 saves.

It's not hard.Just stop designing like it's 3rd edition.

Personally, I’m a fan of the 4e implementation, with fort/ref/will as static NADs, and Str/Con linked to Fort, Dex/Int contributing to Reflex, and Wis/Cha contributing to Will.
But I realize that ship has probably sailed.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I very much agree with @Olrox on this.
When we finish the current campaign, the homebrew rules I'm going to use will have the intuitive 4e saving throw system. But I'm also going to change a wad of other mechanics...one day