"Flipping" saves to attacks

[F4NBOY]

Of course, it's easy to fix; just roll one attack per victim.

That's a good option. Some players really love to roll a lot

But if they do things closer to SAGA (and they already announced that the fireball damage is not 1d6/lvl anymore) don't forget that in SAGA the caster roll is not only used to overcome the target's Saving throw (or Defense), but also to determine the spell effects.
It works like this in SAGA.
Fireball
Roll caster level check:
15: deals 2d6 points of damage
25: deals 4d6 points of damage
30: deals 6d6 points of damage

something like that. So if it comes to be the case in 4E, rolling for each target is gonna complicate more than it simplificates

 

[Plane Sailing]

Will this make some combats anti-climactic?

The wizards wins initiative, casts a fireball (assuming there are analogs to current fireball in the game) and his spell attack roll exceeds the horde of attackers' defense. All of them crisp and die. Fighter, cleric, and rogue look on in boredom.

With individual saves, there's at least a chance of some leakers to challenge the group. Or do you just throw more bad guys at the party so they can't get over with one spell?

I think the scenario would only look like that if the fireball is used to clear out mooks because frankly, Fireballs are rubbish against anything other than mooks in 3e... And thus the scenario where the wizard wins initiative and clears out the first 20ft radius group of goblins looks cool and moves the story along without getting bogged down in all the mook-handling.

And if the wizard doesn't win initiative he stands around looking on in boredom (for even longer) while the fighter and rogue and cleric whittle the mooks down over a period of rounds that might take 30mins of real time!

So I doubt this would actually be a problem.

Cheers

 

[Plane Sailing]

Everyone was deathly afraid of 20 1st level fighters because on average one of them would hit each round and it would be for double damage.

I would have thought that a situation where a PC was outnumbered by 20 to 1 and he was 'deathly afraid' would be considered a feature, not a bug! It seems hugely preferable to me to a situation where the PC faces 20 fighters and laughs in their face before cutting them to ribbons in almost perfect safety...

All the classic heroes of fantasy literature that I can think of would treat those kind of numbers with respect at the very least.

If they come up with a different fix for this problem, then I don't mind.

One easy solution to the problem you outline is to say that a 20 is an automatic crit *unless* you were otherwise unable to hit without a 20, in which case it is just an automatic hit.

You could also reign in crit damage significantly by just multiplying weapon damage and not multiplying any of the extras from strength, magic, etc. That would still make them good, but would reign in some of the more horrible numbers.

 

[fuindordm]

The advanced GM handbook is a great book. In it Skip does a nice little math comparsion where he lowers all weapon's crit damage by one multiplier and eleminates a confirmation roll. Math is nearly identical as far as per damage per average encounter.

So how much extra damage does a x2 weapon do? None?

Makes the rapier kinda pointless.

Ben

 

[DonTadow]

Honestly, this is the first 4E change I've heard that I'm not wild about. I don't like the idea of my spell having zero effect on any of the six monsters I blasted with it just because I rolled a 1. It really seems too all-or-nothing to me.

But don't attacks work like that? Why are spellcasters a notch above everyone? Their spells always hit and do some type of damage. If we're comparing it to fantasy fiction this happens all the time. The big spell misses or doesnot work properly. If you're good enough, even a 1 won't matter.

 

[DonTadow]

So how much extra damage does a x2 weapon do? None?

Makes the rapier kinda pointless.

Ben

2x weapons stay at 2x and their threat raises by 1. Because 2x weapons that hit on 20 are already at the low end of the totem poll, the damage averages out when the other weapons are included in the equation. There's a long essay as he's explaing it but it is very sound. Of course the math isn't perfect, but we're playing d and d not high end calculus.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

So how much extra damage does a x2 weapon do? None?

Makes the rapier kinda pointless.

Ben

There was also a bit of math that equates a 19-20/X2 to an X3 and a 18-20/X2 to an X4(Pick).

Rapier would get converted to an X4, then the conf roll removal brings it to X3.

 

[Grog]

But don't attacks work like that?

Attacks don't usually target more than one enemy at a time.

Why are spellcasters a notch above everyone? Their spells always hit and do some type of damage.

Not always. Lots of spells have no effect if the enemy makes their saving throw. But at least, if one enemy made their save, others might fail. Or vice-versa.

The problem with a spellcaster making a single attack roll to target a group of enemies is that it's all or nothing, and both options cause big problems. In 1st, 2nd, or 3rd edition, if you cast a Confusion spell on a group of six enemies, and three failed their saving throws, your party members still had to deal with the other three enemies (maybe with a little help from the confused ones, but they were still a threat). Under this system, if a wizard casts a Confusion spell on a group of six enemies, he either wins the fight with one spell, or accomplishes absolutely nothing. The former is no fun for the rest of the party, and the latter is no fun for the wizard. This is a problem.

And another problem is when these kinds of spells get cast on the players. If an enemy wizard casts Confusion on the party, all it takes is one lucky roll on the DM's part and it's a TPK. In 3E, it would have taken four unlucky rolls to make that happen - much less likely.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

SAGA put in a rule that non-heroic class characters with a CR < the PCs Level CANNOT Crit. So Stormtroopers can crit a 1st level hero, but not a 4th. Anyone with a PC class (including most named NPCS) can crit as normal.

That's not a rule in Saga.

However, one of the things that is usually missing from the "I hate it when every mook hit is a critical on my hero!" is an examination of the damage.

Remember that this change (no confirming crits) was not done in a vacuum. There are three interrelated rules:

1. A natural 20 always hits and always scores a critical.
2. All weapons have a 20/x2 critical "stat" unless modified by high level abilities.

--and the big one--

3. All heroic characters get a bonus of 1/2 their heroic level to damage.

So, a mook will be rolling 3d6x2 for his critical hit (he's using a blaster pistol). That's an average of 21 points of damage.

Your 10th-level hero, however, will be rolling 3d6+5 on a normal attack with a blaster pistol, for an average of 15.5. In other words, a hero's normal attacks are roughly equivalent to a mook's critical hits, even before you start accounting for things like Rapid Shot, Burst Fire, Deadeye, and the like.

 

[F4NBOY]

That's not a rule in Saga.

However, one of the things that is usually missing from the "I hate it when every mook hit is a critical on my hero!" is an examination of the damage.

Remember that this change (no confirming crits) was not done in a vacuum. There are three interrelated rules:

1. A natural 20 always hits and always scores a critical.
2. All weapons have a 20/x2 critical "stat" unless modified by high level abilities.

--and the big one--

3. All heroic characters get a bonus of 1/2 their heroic level to damage.

So, a mook will be rolling 3d6x2 for his critical hit (he's using a blaster pistol). That's an average of 21 points of damage.

Your 10th-level hero, however, will be rolling 3d6+5 on a normal attack with a blaster pistol, for an average of 15.5. In other words, a hero's normal attacks are roughly equivalent to a mook's critical hits, even before you start accounting for things like Rapid Shot, Burst Fire, Deadeye, and the like.

So what's the point in keeping the critical hits rule?

If it means nothing for a mook to critical hit the PC character, and the opposite is also true, since you can one-hit kill any mook anyway, with or without a critical hit, what's the point?

Two equally powerful characters fighting each other, no matter their ACs, will critical hit each other 5% of the time, so what's the point?

I hope 4E doesn't go back to 2E, please!