D&D 5E Multiple saves needs to go

[DarkCrisis]

Example: 3 saves to be turned to stone.

Why? Just to make it look easier?

I can live with a new save each turn to break an in place spell but making it 3X easier to not let the spell hit is just to far.

I’d even say it bogs things down.

My usual 5E group tried an older Ed recently and one of players who’s only ever played 5E said that only one save made him feel like it made making a save more important.

And yeah he gets it and I agree.

Thoughts on the multi-saves of 5E?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Disagree. Save or suck or save or die were not fun to deal with on either side of the screen and multi-saves are one of the better ways to keep concepts like turning to stone in the game.

I was hoping this thread was about having 6 saving throws for no good reason though.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

I have to agree with Vaalingrade.

I also have to agree with DarkCrisis.

Sometimes I want to play but sometimes I want to Play.

 

[pukunui]

Multiple saves to avoid being turned to stone (and saves per round to break out of being paralyzed and such) were introduced in 4e and carried across to 5e. The devs' reasoning has always been that player feedback indicated that the "save or die/suck" effects from previous editions were not fun.

That said, there are still elements of this in 5e ... just the other day my fighter got whacked by a DC 15 stun effect, and although he does actually have a +1 to Intelligence, it took ages for me to roll high enough to break free, so I spent a good chunk of the combat unable to do anything on my turns - which wasn't as much fun as actually being able to participate would have been. (And in a previous campaign, my barbarian got hit with feeblemind and literally could not make the save, so he was out of the game until someone else was able to dispel the effect.)

 

[DND_Reborn]

FWIW, here's how we do things with our MOD/ house-rules:

If a spell requires concentration and allows repeated saves (e.g. hold person) each round, choose one or the other:

1. You choose concentration. Saves are not repeated (or auto failed).
2. You choose NOT to concentrate or lose concentration. Saves now repeat.

So, with hold person, the cleric could cast it and choose NOT to concentrate, but then the target gets to save each round to shrug off the effect. If the cleric chooses to concentrate, then the target (after failing the initial save, which is always allowed!) would NOT get to make saves unless the cleric drops concentration.

For something like flesh to stone, if you concentrate, the target WILL become stone after three rounds. However, if you lose concentration, the target begins making saves normally, but with each concentrated round being an auto failure...

 

[James Gasik]

Honestly, I want to see more mechanics like Sleep or Color Spray, where you need to get someone low on hit points to actually slap them with serious negative status effects- it makes for nice synergy between weapon users who only deal hit point damage, and casters who want to use SoS or SoD effects.

I've liked this design ever since I first saw the Power Word spells.

 

[MarkB]

Honestly, I want to see more mechanics like Sleep or Color Spray, where you need to get someone low on hit points to actually slap them with serious negative status effects- it makes for nice synergy between weapon users who only deal hit point damage, and casters who want to use SoS or SoD effects.

I've liked this design ever since I first saw the Power Word spells.

You could balance it across levels by reintroducing the Bloodied status - creatures need to be at half hit points or lower to become susceptible.

 

[ad_hoc]

Honestly, I want to see more mechanics like Sleep or Color Spray, where you need to get someone low on hit points to actually slap them with serious negative status effects- it makes for nice synergy between weapon users who only deal hit point damage, and casters who want to use SoS or SoD effects.

I've liked this design ever since I first saw the Power Word spells.

I'd like it if there was a narrative & mechanical way to guess at how many hit points a creature has.

As it is, hit points are all over the place. We can figure out when tougher creatures don't go down that they're tough but how tough?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think some spells are in need of some balance, like your example flesh to stone.

However I really like the save to end effect, which replaced older edition
"x rounds / caster level" or worse "1d4 rounds".
It makes tracking combat so much easier, because you don't have to remember how long an effect was in place and it alsonscales nicely with caster level, and good saves help you breal free earlier.

I think 3 saves before 3 losses could be salvaged by starting with a useful effect and then going up or down a step on a spell specific condition track (or in a few cases a general).

It could be:
??? -> slowed -> stunned -> paralyzed -> petrified.

And for flesh to stone, it could start at stunned.

 

[jgsugden]

These are not the only two options. You can have other options that preserve the fun, but work between 3 saves and 1 save by itself.

See a medusa. Get a save. If you fail that one save, you're turning to stone, but it takes 3 rounds. However, a medicine check can allow someone to make a salve out of the medusa that will restore you if applied in the first hour.

See a medusa. Get a save. If you fail, roll a d6. On a 1 your right arm turns to stone. On a 2 your right leg. On a 3 your left arm. Ona 4 your left leg. On a 5 or a 6 your entire body turns. Repeat the save until your entire body turns, or you make a save - at which time you stop turning to stone, but that which is stone stays stone.

See a medusa. Get a save. If you fail, you gain a level of exhaustion. You gain an additional level of exhaustion at the start of the medusa's turn, and at the start of your turn. 6 levels of exhaustion turns you to stone 'rather than' killing you. You may use an action to roll a new save. If you make the save, you stop gaining levels of exhaustion - but keep the ones you have.