Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 6294184" data-attributes="member: 3400">I'm not sure that optimized characters rarely fail weak saves against opponents meant to challenge their level and degree of optimization. I'd agree that would be the case with strong saves, but I'm not convinced that's true with weak saves. Rather, I think the tendency is toward finding immunities to specifically avoid having to make a save. That too drives part of the christmas tree effect as you need to have devices (or wands) to provide death ward, immunities to poison, immunity or other resistance to fire or cold, mind-affecting spells, free action, and so on.I don't think I agree with that because it doesn't work if you look at it from both directions. Should a character's advantage (or disadvantage) against one of his same-level peers grow as the character's develop toward 20th level? With respect to their specialties, that may be true. The ability of a fighter to fight should grow significantly past a wizard's ability to do the same thing, same with a wizard's manipulation of magical power compared to a fighter's ability to do the same. But when it comes to saving throws, I'm not sure we should expect a difference to grow. A 20th level spellcaster should be able to overpower a target's defenses better than a 1st level spellcaster - and against lower level opponents, this is certainly true. But against a peer, shouldn't that really remain about constant and not change that much with level - barring additional doohickeys or other specializing development choices? Wouldn't it be unnecessarily unbalancing if one gained ground against the other? Should the wizard have an easier time against his peers than at 1st level, or conversely, should he have a harder time? I would think balance suggests he should have about the same difficulty (again, barring a few development choices along the way).</blockquote>

Verification