D&D 5E Attacking with spells instead of saves

[NotAYakk]

from a mechanical perspective, it would also add disadvantage to many spells when you cast them in melee

from just feelcrafty perspective, it would seem to me that it would slow the game down, as DM it seems faster to roll myself and check than having player roll, asking what he rolled and then adding the save bonus and resolving whether that is enough or not

That is why you replace Saves with Defences; 14+ATTR+PROF is your Defence.

Now the player is rolling their spell attack and asking if it hits. The target number is pre-calculated, and 2 units of math is done per target (an addition and a comparison).

It does tempt the DM into telling the player the Defence, just like attacks tempt DMs into exposing AC.

 

[JeffB]

As DM, I just don't want to roll if I can help it. Letting the players roll the saves might work out.....thanks so far everyone, for the suggestions!

Find a 3.5 SRD site and check out the players always roll section from UA or 13th Age also does basically the same thing as 4E-everything has 3 defenses- AC, Mental Defense, and Physical Defense. pool three of the appropriate related attribute mods, and then use the one that falls in the middle for PD and MD scores.

For example from 13A- the Cleric

Armor Class (heavy armor)	14 + middle mod of Con/Dex/Wis + Level
Armor Class (shield and heavy armor)	15 + middle mod of Con/Dex/Wis + Level
Physical Defense	11 + middle mod of Str/Con/Dex + Level
Mental Defense	11 + middle mod of Int/Wis/Cha + Level

And the players roll variant-

Players Roll All The Dice :: d20srd.org

www.d20srd.org

 

[jayoungr]

One thing I liked about 4e was that spellcasters rolled to attack with spells, instead of targets rolling to save.

Has anyone experimented with changing this, so the players roll to attack, instead of the monsters roll to save (or vice versa)?

I'm assuming you realize that some spells in 5E do use attack rolls, and you're only talking about the subset that require saves!

If you change this, one thing to consider is how you will handle Legendary Resistance for boss monsters. It's an important way of giving them some guaranteed survivability in 5E.

 

[Garthanos]

Find a 3.5 SRD site and check out the players always roll section from UA

I liked the players always roll its one of those it actually depends on your players I have had players whom it really wakes them up and gets them describing how they defended themselves more, others want to hear your interpretation of course who does that part of the process isn't actually dependent on who is doing the rolling but the "I feel involved" when I am rolling a defense AND rolling an attack is "a good thing".

Mechanically/Numerically identical and fully adjustable.

 

[Tony Vargas]

If you change this, one thing to consider is how you will handle Legendary Resistance for boss monsters. It's an important way of giving them some guaranteed survivability in 5E.

Yep. It'd be negating hits, instead of saving automatically. It'd work on more spells. Heck, you wouldn't have to limit it to spells.
Similarly, Magic Resistance would become Disadvantage on spell attacks, meaning fewer spells would bypass it - still pretty easy to bypass, though, and not that meaningful if attacking a low stat w/o proficiency bonus to that defense.

Also, fewer spells would ridiculously skate when cast in melee. No mechanics would have to employ the double-speak of granting/imposing both advantage/disadvantage at the same time (or vice versa), depending on the mechanic arbitrarily assigned to the affected attack.

Just a general ripple effect of simplification and loophole-closing, really.

 

[5ekyu]

In my 5e games (and most other games for as long as i remember) i have used players always roll (PAR)

So when a player casts charm, the player rolls d20 + the spells DC. I compare that to a Wis Difficulty (modified save) to see if it succeeds or the target resists.

Just like when an orc thriws a spear at a PC, the player rolls d20+AC against an "attack difficulty" to see if the attack strikes home or is avoided, deflected etc.

Both of these are handled normally - roll high is good for PC and meeting the dufficulty is enough. Also the odds of success and fail remain the same.

It has played great through multiple campaigns and players like having their hands on die rolls that affect them directly.

Cannot recall last time i touched dice as a GM except to loan them to someone who forgot theirs.

 

[Zaukrie]

I wouldn't do it in 5e.

If we are considering a hypothetical new game system, I would like it only if it was mathematically very simple, for example the spell attack roll be d20 + ab.mod. + prof.bonus, and the defense be equal to the target ability score.

For instance, a 1st-level Wizard with Int 14 would roll d20 + 2 + 2 against the target's Dexterity score when casting Burning Hands, target's Wisdom when casting Charm Person, and so on...

Why wouldn't you? Just curious why.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I wouldn't do it in 5e.
If we are considering a hypothetical new game system, I would like it only if it was mathematically very simple, for example the spell attack roll be d20 + ab.mod. + prof.bonus, and the defense be equal to the target ability score.

Scores range from 8-20, and most characters, and many monsters, have at least one quite low score. So that'd really make targeting the right score overly important.

But, yeah, the save formula starting with 8 + is unintuitive, as is inverting it requiring a 14+; it'd be neater if the target DC could start at 10 (generally) like AC (generally) does in 5e.

 

[Li Shenron]

Why wouldn't you? Just curious why.

Because to make it work in an existing system it would require to review other related parts of that system: prof.bonuses, ability scores, monsters stats... I would not want to start thinking how other rules should also change. But if designing a new system from scratch then I would consider the option.

 

[Zaukrie]

Because to make it work in an existing system it would require to review other related parts of that system: prof.bonuses, ability scores, monsters stats... I would not want to start thinking how other rules should also change. But if designing a new system from scratch then I would consider the option.

thanks!

I really doubt I'll make this change, but we'll see.

Thanks everyone for your input.