Dear post#3132721, don't blame me. I'm just the interpreter.

[the Jester]

...But in general, bumping for the sake of bumping isn't such a great idea.

But continuing a discussion is good.

Heck, I sometimes bump a thread I'm interested in to see if I can renew discussion, especially if it has a good (but not too lengthy) bit of discourse in it already.

I guess it's a matter of taste and opinion.

 

[Thurbane]

But continuing a discussion is good.

Heck, I sometimes bump a thread I'm interested in to see if I can renew discussion, especially if it has a good (but not too lengthy) bit of discourse in it already.

I guess it's a matter of taste and opinion.

It's definitely on a case-by-case basis, and a matter of personal judgement.

 

[Driddle]

I can agree somewhat - sometimes you have to weigh up the lesser of two evils - thread necromancy, or creating multiple threads on the same topic each time one passes it's "use by" date. But in general, bumping for the sake of bumping isn't such a great idea.

*BUMP*

 

[Piratecat]

Man, I'm so tempted to sticky this bad boy... but that would ensure that no one would ever read it.

 

[frankthedm]

3 measly months is hardly dead. I 'bumped' this thread because I finally found the blasted thing. I've been advancing monsters for a while and an 'in progress' CR20 'starspawn' Space creature Green Dragon reminded me of this thread.

Most monsters have fort saves so high that many casters don't feel fort saves are even an option. Dragon's saves are good all around and their only dump stat is Dex. Reflex saves against a dragon work better than the other saves but, Ranged touches work so much better it is not funny.

 

[Felon]

This thread was originally titled "Dragon saves are too high." This thread should not have been bumped.

I don't see where the thread was "bumped". Somebody who had something to say posted to it. If somebody has something to add to a thread, and its still topical, why shouldn't they go ahead and continue the discussion? Threads aren't jugs of milk, you know.

 

[Felon]

Most monsters have fort saves so high that many casters don't feel fort saves are even an option.

That's demonstrably not the case, at least if you mean the Fort saves are high relative to other saves. Only about half the creature types in the DMG have good Fort saves.

The discussion's been had before. If a caster wants to throw some save-or-die spell at a monster, he should figure out a way to debuff those saves first. Basic strategy.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Actually, the thing I think should not have been done is changing the title and the first post.

Making another thread would have been a far better way to complain about it.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Actually, the thing I think should not have been done is changing the title and the first post.

good point very good point

 

[frankthedm]

Well, there is the thread that was inspired by this one to continue the discusion.

Casters, are the fort saves on most monsters too high?

Most monsters have fort saves so high that many casters don't feel fort saves are even an option.

That's demonstrably not the case, at least if you mean the Fort saves are high relative to other saves. Only about half the creature types in the DMG have good Fort saves.

1. I did said many "many casters don't feel" based on the above poll results.
2. Half don't have agood fort save? Including those immune to most save or die? And those who's Con bonuses push thier fort saves to good range or better? If so, that sounds like a fine argument for most monsters being a touch too resilaint.

The discussion's been had before. If a caster wants to throw some save-or-die spell at a monster, he should figure out a way to debuff those saves first. Basic strategy.

When that is the Only stratagy to get the spells to work, it stops being basic and those spells become jokes IMHO.