AD&D Saving Throws in 3rd Edition

[airwalkrr]

AD&D saving throws really were simpler. Every spell was equally hard to resist. Every breath weapon was equally difficult to dodge. So what if you used a new saving throw system in which saving throws were like the old AD&D saving throws. Keep the categories, but make the saving throws static.

Fighters would have a progression that looks like this for example:
1st-2nd F 14, R 17, W 17
3rd-4th F 13, R 16, W 16
5th-6th F 11, R 14, W 14
7th-8th F 10, R 13, W 13
9th-10th F 8, R 11, W 11
11th-12th F 7, R 9, W 9
13th-14th F 5, R 7, W 7
15th-16th F 4, R 6, W 6
17th+ F 3, R 5, W 5

Cloaks of resistance would become much more valuable. Increasing their price would probably be the simplest way of keeping that balanced. Any other thoughts?

 

[comrade raoul]

I think if you did this balance would be the least of your worries.

 

[3d6]

Well, at high levels, effects with saving throws, such as most spells, would be mostly useless. At low levels, wizards would dominate the game as thier spells would be very, very difficult to resist. A basilisk would inflict terrible damage on a 5th level part for which is is supposed to be a moderate challenge.

You'd have to rework basically every creature and character that used saving throws. It would be much easier to just go back to a previous edition of D&D and houserule in anything you like about 3rd edition.

 

[Hawken]

What are you going to do about multi-classing? Stick with the AD&D thing of getting the best save for the most favorable class/level?

Not only would that cause you to jack up your prices for cloaks of resistance for the sake of 'balance', but other things as well. Suddenly, items that boost Dex, Con and Wis are also a lot more valuable/powerful as well. You're also throwing DCs for spells out the window as well as a lot of other things. However, spells and other effects would be more potent, as they should be, and with saves like that, a 10th level wizard tossing a lightning bolt or fireball is again a scary opponent.

And, class abilities like Evasion (and the ones that do the same for Fort and Will saves) likewise become VERY powerful as well. That would result in even more multi-classing into Rogue or Monk just for the Evasion alone.

It changes the dynamic of the game in making you want to have a low save instead of a high modifier, just like wanting to have a low AC and a low THAC0 (I wonder how many people nowadays even know what that is?). It also makes it less likely for low level characters to survive having to make saves, while high end characters will almost never fail.

 

[Sadrik]

I think this works better: flat saveshttp://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=175722

 

[jeffh]

Every spell was equally hard to resist. Every breath weapon was equally difficult to dodge.

I think you just made the case against your suggestion better than I could.

 

[3catcircus]

I think you just made the case against your suggestion better than I could.

Not if he is looking to not have to worry about calculating spell save DCs for every NPC caster...

 

[airwalkrr]

Yes, as I said, simplicity is the key. But when you think about it, how much can things like breath weapons really differ from each other in difficult to avoid. For that matter, how much more difficult is any area effect to avoid? A fireball fills an area just as well as a cone of cold or a red dragon's breath weapon. Why is it the breath weapon is so much harder to dodge? Does the fire spew out faster or something? Anyway, just some thoughts. I am only suggesting this because saving throws were so much simpler in old days and I am looking for a way to simplify things as much as possible. Realism takes a back burner for ease of use and speed of play with me these days. If you don't value such things as highly as I do, my suggestions probably aren't for you.

 

[Lackhand]

Why not just set some static DCs, then? All cones of less than 15 feet are DC 15 to avoid, 15-30 are DC 20, and anything more DC 25, all spheres of radius 5 or less DC 10, radius 10-20 DC 15, more than that DC 20, etc etc?

Not that I think this is a good idea, but it would make things a bit simpler, if that's the part that's complex in your experience.

Actually: what exactly are you trying to solve? which aspect of the save is too complex, the DC to hit, or the (player's) calculation of the score?

 

[silver_wizard]

Why not just set some static DCs, then? All cones of less than 15 feet are DC 15 to avoid, 15-30 are DC 20, and anything more DC 25, all spheres of radius 5 or less DC 10, radius 10-20 DC 15, more than that DC 20, etc etc?

Not that I think this is a good idea, but it would make things a bit simpler, if that's the part that's complex in your experience.

QFT

You'd have to rework basically every creature and character that used saving throws. It would be much easier to just go back to a previous edition of D&D and houserule in anything you like about 3rd edition.

Also QFT.

Like other posters said, this sort of chance will have major repercussions. Seamingly simple chances may not seem so simple if you think about the amount of work you may have to do to accommodate the changes. For example, substituting Attack Bonus with THAC0 may look essentially the same, just inverted, but then you need to also change the Armour Class and everything that's connected with it.

That said, now think about the change you suggested: it's not just making something that goes up go down (a plus into a minus sort of thing); you change the nature of the mechanic. For the sake of consistency, then, you'll have to change the way certain feats or special abilities work (e.g. Evasion, as already suggested), magic items, spells that grant Dex bonuses and other stuff. Too much work for too little payoff.