Changing Saving Throws and DC's

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Multiclassing benefits are out of control. I also dont need any convincing on this either.

Slightly off-topic, but: use fractional saves... problem solved.

 

[Sadrik]

Slightly off-topic, but: use fractional saves... problem solved.

This solves nothing. If anything it makes it worse!

 

[Spatzimaus]

This solves nothing. If anything it makes it worse!

Actually, it makes it much better, but only if you don't give the +2 bonus for a level 1 "good" save multiple times. Done this in all my campaigns, and it helps.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

This solves nothing. If anything it makes it worse!

As Spatzimaus said, it actually is an iron-clad solution to the problem of multiclassing and save bonuses getting too high.

Save = (<number of levels in all classes which get a good save> / 2) + (<number of levels in all classes which get a poor save> / 3)

Round down. Add +2 if you have at least one level in a class which has a good save of that type.

e.g. Rogue 3/Ranger 6/Fighter 4/Barbarian 1

Using standard multi-classing save accretion rules:

Fort: +12
Ref: +9
Will: +4

Using fractional saves:

Fort: (11 / 2) + (3 / 3) + 2 = +8 1/2 = +8
Ref: (9 / 2) + (5 / 3) + 2 = +8 1/6 = +8
Will: (0 / 2) + (14 / 3) + 0 = +4 2/3 = +4

Compare to a 14th level barbarian:

Fort: +9
Ref: +4
Will: +4

and a 14th level ranger:

Fort: +9
Ref: +9
Will: +4

There's nothing magical about fractional saves. I've been using fractional saves and BABs ever since I first cracked open the 3.0 Player's Handbook to the section on multiclassing and saw how they added the lines in the experience tables to get the total BAB and save bonuses. What people call 'Fractional saves/BABs' is the mathematically accurate way of adding saves and BABs. The default method in the PHB is a shortcut to save players from overly complex arithmetic, with the drawback being the loopholes that can be exploited in the stacking.

I'm curious to know why you think fractional saves don't work. Sorry for knocking this excellent thread off-track.

Edit: typo

 

[Sadrik]

As Spatzimaus said, it actually is an iron-clad solution to the problem of multiclassing and save bonuses getting too high.

Save = (<number of levels in all classes which get a good save> / 2) + (<number of levels in all classes which get a poor save> / 3)

Round down. Add +2 if you have at least one level in a class which has a good save of that type.

Actually, it is not fractional saves that fix the multi-class problem it is removing the +2 for a good save. Fractional saves is just a neat way to more accurately account for the bonuses. Which I approve of. But lets not kid ourselves removing the +2 when multi-classing is the fix here that you are sighting not the fractional saves.

I'm curious to know why you think fractional saves don't work. Sorry for knocking this excellent thread off-track.

Fractional saves are fine and even pretty cool. Why I said that is not a fix was because I didnt know you were subtracting out the +2 for a good save. Now that I know that, subtracting out the +2 is a fix to the multi-classing problem of save stacking. And fractional saves just make sense if you are going to knock out the +2 when you multi-class. Otherwise, characters with a lot of low level classes would not add up to a whole bunch. Lets look at your example of the: Rogue 3/Ranger 6/Fighter 4/Barbarian 1 without the fractional and knocking out the +2:

Without fractional saves and knocking out the +2:
Fort +8
Ref +7
Will +4

With fractional saves and knocking out the +2:
Fort +8
Ref +8
Will +4

So, without using fractional saves but knocking out the +2 this 14th level character loses 1 point is his reflexes save. Both are fine IMHO. But either way is way better than using the standard rules which create this monster:

Fort: +12
Ref: +9
Will: +4

Sadrik, I like it.

What do you like about it

 

[Spatzimaus]

Actually, it is not fractional saves that fix the multi-class problem it is removing the +2 for a good save.

Not to get too far from the original post, but I just want to add a bit to this instead of bumping half a dozen old threads.

Problem is, if you do one without the other, you make the problem much worse. The fractional system, applied to BAB and saves, increases both. Removing the extra +2s decreases saves. Doing one without the other just makes multiclassing weak, at least in regards to BAB/saves.

IME, there are two other big problems with multiclassing:
> Too much stuff at character level 1. x4 skills, max HP... these encourage people to take their first level in a high-skill (Rogue) or high-HP (Barbarian) class, and then never take another level of that class. (Well, okay, they might take a second level; Evasion or Uncanny Dodge are very nice.)
> Too much stuff at class level 1 in most classes. Full weapon and armor proficiencies, and even the non-scaling classes like Fighter pack an extra bonus into the first level.

For the first one, in the system we started using in my latest campaign, you don't get the x4 skills or max HP at level 1. This, in general, adjusts CRs by 1 (a level 3 character under this system is basically equivalent to a level 2 under the old one). But, adults start at level 3; level 1 characters are small children, level 2s are teenagers. (It's a bit more complex than that; you can't enter a caster class at level 1, for instance.)

And for the second, we added weapon proficiency groups (similar to the old AD&D system, but only 8 groups), and most classes only start with 0-2, so multiclassing one level of Ranger doesn't give you all non-exotic weapons. It's a bit too long to go into here.

 

[Sadrik]

IME, there are two other big problems with multiclassing:
> Too much stuff at character level 1. x4 skills, max HP... these encourage people to take their first level in a high-skill (Rogue) or high-HP (Barbarian) class, and then never take another level of that class. (Well, okay, they might take a second level; Evasion or Uncanny Dodge are very nice.)
> Too much stuff at class level 1 in most classes. Full weapon and armor proficiencies, and even the non-scaling classes like Fighter pack an extra bonus into the first level.

I agree with the class level 1, the low levels of classes are very good. Almost too good. BAB stacks, saves stack (and they offer the best benefit at level 1), generally the best class features are at level 1. Then their are things that annoyingly dont stack! like caster levels.

I dont mind that character level 1 stuff is good. For instance max hp at first level doesnt bother me. The skill system is a bunch of bad anyway. I have a different system for them in my game, shown here:
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=174872

In that system it is extremely important to know what skills you get at first level and not necessarily what you add later on. So, in a way if a player wanted to min/max in my skill system they would take rogue at first and then go into whatever they wanted later.

If all "class features" were tied to overall character level rather than class level it would be more balanced. However it would be hard to adjudicate this because all class features are not equal. Trap sense vs. eldritch blast? I really like the true20 concept of you get 4 class features/feats at first level and 1 every level thereafter. And your classes are similar to the generic classes in the unearthed arcana. This could easily be incorporated into d&d 3.x Just change all class features into feats (the hardest part).

I actually have a whole variant system written up. I posted on enworld several years ago but it was eaten by the crash.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Sadrik, adding the +2 only once IS part of fractional saves. Fractional saves isn't some arbitrary formula that punches out some good-looking numbers; that's what the PHB multiclassing is. Fractional saves is the real, mathematical representation of adding saves/BABs from two different classes. The PHB method is a simplification provided by the designers because it involves zero math.

Look at it this way: the point of fractional saves is to calculate saves/BAB for single-classed and multiclassed characters identically. If single-classed characters can only add +2 once, why would multiclassed characters be able to add the +2 more than once?

But enough about that... what I like most about what you're proposing is that it solves problems like high-level characters being able to swallow poisons like they were candy. It moves the scale towards realism and away from cartoony, which may not be everyone's cup of tea, but is certainly mine.

You mentioned in your last post that you're annoyed by caster levels not stacking... also a pet peeve of mine. Have you considered a BAB-like approach to caster level? Fighters and the like get 1/2 caster level per level; Bards, Rangers, etc. get 3/4; and Wizards, Clerics, etc. get full caster level?

 

[ValhallaGH]

Sadrik, adding the +2 only once IS part of fractional saves. Fractional saves isn't some arbitrary formula that punches out some good-looking numbers; that's what the PHB multiclassing is. Fractional saves is the real, mathematical representation of adding saves/BABs from two different classes. The PHB method is a simplification provided by the designers because it involves zero math.

Then why have I seen fractional save systems that include the initial +2 from each and every class that has it?

But you're correct, this is going off topic.

Base Caster Bonus is one of the few ideas from Legends of Sorcery that I really, really liked. Each class got a base caster bonus that could range from +0 per level to 5/4 per level depending upon just how powerful you wanted that class to be with a magic progression (the nromal were the 1/4, 1/2, 1/1). While it was used for a skill-like casting system, you could easily translate it into SRD standard caster levels.

So I shall second Ulorian's suggestion with regards to that. Just dial in the casting power at the level you want it and go nuts.

 

[Sadrik]

If single-classed characters can only add +2 once, why would multiclassed characters be able to add the +2 more than once?

I understand what you are saying I however dont think that it is part of the UA rules that I thought you were sighting.

But enough about that... what I like most about what you're proposing is that it solves problems like high-level characters being able to swallow poisons like they were candy. It moves the scale towards realism and away from cartoony, which may not be everyone's cup of tea, but is certainly mine.

Agreed poisons and diseases would be dangerous at level 1 and at level 20. Which totally makes sense a first level guy should be as succeptable to a disease as easily as a 20th level guy. Do 20th level guys need to be able to quaff poisons and just laugh about it? Yeah they do but to a certain extent. A 20th level guys is going likely have a big bonus to his con (amulet of +6 con) and will likely have a vest or cloak +5. So therefore a lot more resistant by that simple gage.

Under this system I would also give an improved iron will- indomitable will an improved great fortitude- supreme fortitude and an improved lightning reflexes- unconscious reflexes. They would give an extra +2 to the save.

You mentioned in your last post that you're annoyed by caster levels not stacking... also a pet peeve of mine. Have you considered a BAB-like approach to caster level? Fighters and the like get 1/2 caster level per level; Bards, Rangers, etc. get 3/4; and Wizards, Clerics, etc. get full caster level?

Yes I have given a lot of thought to this.
Non casters would be 1/4
Ranger and paladin would be 1/2
Bard would be 3/4
Wizard, cleric, druid, sorcerer would be 1/1

The problem here is how do you mesh the sorcerer's spells known, the wizards spellbook and the clerics spell list. My idea to deal with this was to have 3 different kinds of casters.
My untested as of yet spell caster system:
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=176219