Klaus
First Post
Which is an exercise in futility and frustration, if you roll a good damage and then the DM makes the save.
D&D 5E As passive as a laser cleric.
Which is an exercise in futility and frustration, if you roll a good damage and then the DM makes the save.
Can math save us! Quick and dirty (and maybe wrong) attempt.
+2 dex save vs DC 14 spell needs a 12 to save.
{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 is 11 numbers where the spell hits}, {12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 is 9 numbers where the spell fails}
this is equivalent to the player needs to roll an 10 to hit
{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 = nine numbers that fail to hit} {10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 is 11 numbers where the spell hits)
to mimic this:
option 1: spell attack = DC - 10, ref defense = save+12 (+4 vs 14)
option 2: ref defense= save + 10, spell attack = DC -12 (+2 vs 12)
option 3: ref defense=save +11, spell attack = DC -9 (+3 vs 13)
I see no elegant way to 'on the fly' swap the way around without effecting the math
Ideal solution: spell attack = DC-10, ref defense = save +10: +4 vs 12, which is a pretty big swing in probabilities
+2 dex save vs DC 14 spell needs a 12 to save.
{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 is 11 numbers where the spell hits}, {12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 is 9 numbers where the spell fails}
this is equivalent to the player needs to roll an 10 to hit
{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 = nine numbers that fail to hit} {10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 is 11 numbers where the spell hits)
to mimic this:
option 1: spell attack = DC - 10, ref defense = save+12 (+4 vs 14)
option 2: ref defense= save + 10, spell attack = DC -12 (+2 vs 12)
option 3: ref defense=save +11, spell attack = DC -9 (+3 vs 13)
I see no elegant way to 'on the fly' swap the way around without effecting the math
Ideal solution: spell attack = DC-10, ref defense = save +10: +4 vs 12, which is a pretty big swing in probabilities
Oh yeah, the math is totally congruent between attacker-rolls and defender-rolls systems (and their cousins, systems where who rolls for various things depends on whether its a player or a monster doing the attacking and targeting). The differences are that some systems require somewhat more complicated wordings on various bonuses or penalties, and, for reasons too numerous to list all of here, different people like the feel of different combinations of rolling for different sorts of things.
GX.Sigma
Adventurer
Same as rolling damage first for area attacks in 4e, or rolling tohit and damage at the same time for single target attacks.
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
In the context as psychological impression to the player, to me those are quite different.
In 4e if you roll a hit and damage at once and your hit misses, YOU rolled the miss. It's part of your dice that negates the rest.
In Next if you roll a damage and the DM rolls a save, NOTHING you roll can affect a hit or miss. So everything you roll can be good, and it can still be meaningless due to the DM's roll.
Same net game effect, but a much different feel for the player IMO.
Similar Threads
