More uses for ability scores?

[Tales and Chronicles]

Here’s one:

First, get rid of saving throws. Use an “attacker always rolls” system where the ability score is the target number for any attacks that target that ability. So sacred flame, for example, would be a ranged spellcasting attack against the target’s Dexterity instead of forcing a Dexterity save.

And maybe go with 4e saving throw (roll 10 or more on a flat d20) for ongoing effects? Yes, that could work. Would ST proficiency still apply? Like, if a class gave you prof in Dex saves, would you add your proficiency to your score? Maybe 1/2 prof, or only +2? Just to be sure to avoid having caster needing to hit a total Dex score of 26 to land a fireball, for example.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Here’s one:

First, get rid of saving throws. Use an “attacker always rolls” system where the ability score is the target number for any attacks that target that ability. So sacred flame, for example, would be a ranged spellcasting attack against the target’s Dexterity instead of forcing a Dexterity save.

This isn't a bad idea, as basically the DC for the save would work like AC does in combat with the attacker always rolling. But I think there might be some problems with this in the mechanics. First, most characters are only proficient in two saves. So for a character without proficiency in DEX saves, but with a DEX 16, would have a big advantage doing it as you suggest. Also, how would proficiency help? If the same character had a proficiency bonus of +4, would their DEX save DC be 20 instead of 16?

 

[Charlaquin]

No. Only ability checks. Attack rolls and saving throws and DCs are still the same as now. 10-11 +0, 12-13 +2.
I mean, if don't value combat as high as most people, better for you.
I hope you know the difference between an ability check and an attack roll or saving throw. Otherwise HEX is probably quite overpowered in your game.

Oh, I see. But then you’ve got different modifiers depending on whether you’re rolling an attack/save or a check.

 

[Charlaquin]

And maybe go with 4e saving throw (roll 10 or more on a flat d20) for ongoing effects? Yes, that could work. Would ST proficiency still apply? Like, if a class gave you prof in Dex saves, would you add your proficiency to your score? Maybe 1/2 prof, or only +2? Just to be sure to avoid having caster needing to hit a total Dex score of 26 to land a fireball, for example.

This isn't a bad idea, as basically the DC for the save would work like AC does in combat with the attacker always rolling. But I think there might be some problems with this in the mechanics. First, most characters are only proficient in two saves. So for a character without proficiency in DEX saves, but with a DEX 16, would have a big advantage doing it as you suggest. Also, how would proficiency help? If the same character had a proficiency bonus of +4, would their DEX save DC be 20 instead of 16?

I wouldn’t add proficiency bonus to target numbers. The math works out so that the target number is within about 1.5 of the average roll the character would get on a proficient save.

16-17: 10.5 avg + 3 mod +2 prof = 15.5
14-15: 10.5 avg + 2 mod +2 prof = 14.5
12-13: 10.5 avg + 1 mod +2 prof = 13.5
10-11: 10.5 avg + 0 mod +2 prof = 12.5
8-9: 10.5 avg -1 mod +2 prof = 11.5

With point-buy, scores of 18-19 and 20 are only possible at levels 4 and 8 at the earliest, with +3 prof bonus coming at level 5 and +4 at level 9.

18-19: 10.5 avg + 3 mod + 2 prof = 16.5
18-19: 10.5 avg + 4 mod + 2 prof = 17.5

20: 10.5 avg + 5 mod + 3 prof = 18.5
20: 10.5 avg + 5 mod + 4 prof = 19.5

So this system would make it a little harder to hit untrained and high-ability targets, and a little easier to hit trained and low-ability targets on average, but it comes pretty close in the middle ranges.

If you want save proficiencies to still matter under this system, I’d suggest adding them to rolls to end ongoing effects.

This system would also make it very difficult to affect certain monsters with spells that target certain scores. That would make choosing the right spell for the right enemy far more important, as it could make a difference of 10 or more in the DC. YMMV on if that is an acceptable change or not.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Oh, I see. But then you’ve got different modifiers depending on whether you’re rolling an attack/save or a check.

And thats the point.

 

[Charlaquin]

And thats the point.

*shrug* seems like more cognitive load than its worth to me.

 

[Nebulous]

Some official adventures will have a heavy portcullis and say that characters need a combined Strength score of 20 (or higher) to lift it.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I wouldn’t add proficiency bonus to target numbers. The math works out so that the target number is within about 1.5 of the average roll the character would get on a proficient save.

16-17: 10.5 avg + 3 mod +2 prof = 15.5
14-15: 10.5 avg + 2 mod +2 prof = 14.5
12-13: 10.5 avg + 1 mod +2 prof = 13.5
10-11: 10.5 avg + 0 mod +2 prof = 12.5
8-9: 10.5 avg -1 mod +2 prof = 11.5

With point-buy, scores of 18-19 and 20 are only possible at levels 4 and 8 at the earliest, with +3 prof bonus coming at level 5 and +4 at level 9.

18-19: 10.5 avg + 3 mod + 2 prof = 16.5
18-19: 10.5 avg + 4 mod + 2 prof = 17.5

20: 10.5 avg + 5 mod + 3 prof = 18.5
20: 10.5 avg + 5 mod + 4 prof = 19.5

So this system would make it a little harder to hit untrained and high-ability targets, and a little easier to hit trained and low-ability targets on average, but it comes pretty close in the middle ranges.

If you want save proficiencies to still matter under this system, I’d suggest adding them to rolls to end ongoing effects.

This system would also make it very difficult to affect certain monsters with spells that target certain scores. That would make choosing the right spell for the right enemy far more important, as it could make a difference of 10 or more in the DC. YMMV on if that is an acceptable change or not.

I think I'll try that, with my other ideas and suggestions from other posters in my next game.

Anyway my players always forget what their DC is and dont always understand why in case X they are rolling the dice and other case I'm rolling the dice. This new idea might make it easier for them as they will always be the one attacking.

 

[Tony Vargas]

First, get rid of saving throws. Use an “attacker always rolls” system where the ability score is the target number for any attacks that target that ability. So sacred flame, for example, would be a ranged spellcasting attack against the target’s Dexterity instead of forcing a Dexterity save.

Has the virtue of simplicity.

What about 'good' saves? Those could get pretty high if you added proficiency - and, if you don't, there's no progression, at all (rather than just none with bad saves).

 

[Charlaquin]

I think I'll try that, with my other ideas and suggestions from other posters in my next game.

Anyway my players always forget what their DC is and dont always understand why in case X they are rolling the dice and other case I'm rolling the dice. This new idea might make it easier for them as they will always be the one attacking.

Nice! I’d love to hear how it works out for you.

Has the virtue of simplicity.

What about 'good' saves? Those could get pretty high if you added proficiency - and, if you don't, there's no progression, at all (rather than just none with bad saves).

As I pointed out in my other post, the math works out such that ability score as target number is within about 1.5 of the average roll for a proficient check with the same ability, so adding proficiency to the target number would, I think, make it too difficult to hit with spells and abilities that target a score. The math does start to favor the attacker a bit at high levels, so maybe having a slower proficiency progression for non-AC defenses could work, but at that point you lose the simplicity that ability scores as NADs gives you. I would probably just accept that NADs will have no progression outside of ability score increases and magic items that give bonuses to saves.

If you want to keep save proficiencies relevant under this system, I would recommend allowing save proficiency to apply to rolls to end ongoing effects. In fact, on further reflection, I don’t think I’d get rid of saves, I’d just have them be the thing you do to end ongoing effects, while attacks against NADs replace the initial save to see if you’re affected in the first place.