OneDnD Return to the 3 saves for 1D&D?


log in or register to remove this ad

Andvari

Adventurer
The Rules Cyclopedia for BECM(I) offers optional rules for saving throws which allow all ability scores, except for Charisma, to contribute. The optional rule is applied on top of the existing saving throw system (save vs breath, save vs rods, save vs spells etc.), which improves PCs' saves automatically as they level.

Ability Scores and Saving Throws

In the standard rules, the only ability score
that can affect a saving throw is Wisdom (affects
saving throws vs. spells). The DM does, however,
have the option to apply ability score bonuses
and penalties to other saving throws:

Strength: Modifies saving throws vs. paralysis
and turn to stone.
Intelligence*: Modifies saving throws vs.
mind attacks (charm, confusion, control, fear,
feeblemind, sleep, etc.).
Wisdom*: Modifies saving throws vs. spells.
Dexterity: Modifies saving throws vs. wands
and dragon breath.
Constitution: Modifies saving throws vs. poison (but not vs. death ray).
Charisma: No bonus to saving throws.
* Combined modifier cannot exceed + / — 3.

One thing I like about Wisdom as a general save against spells in that system is that it helps clerics resist those effects a little better, enabling them to better use their support spells to aid allies who fail their saves.

I do think saves should improve as characters level. Bad and good saves can remain bad and good, but I prefer it to be relative to the DCs a PC can be reasonably expected to face as they increase in level.
 
Last edited:

Pauln6

Adventurer
EB is not nearly as good as a weapon attack unless you get the agonizing blast evocation through a feat or Warlock class and that is a high price to pay to boost it.

Without that EB does the same average damage as a dagger with a 16 in your attack ability. At no point do I think it is straight overpowered compared to weapons (compared to other cantrips yes).
Yes I was referring to agonising blast. You say it's a high price to pay and yet most Warlocks are willing to pay it. I wish Warlock improvements existed for other cantrips too. It might be more balanced, albeit far less popular, if the damage only applied once per round. In fact layering that on top of all the invocations might please me and just ditch agonising blast.
 

Horwath

Hero
Yes I was referring to agonising blast. You say it's a high price to pay and yet most Warlocks are willing to pay it. I wish Warlock improvements existed for other cantrips too. It might be more balanced, albeit far less popular, if the damage only applied once per round. In fact layering that on top of all the invocations might please me and just ditch agonising blast.
The buy in for agonizing blast for EB is cost for multiclass dip.
you need 2 levels and you need one out of two invocations that you get at 2nd level.
 

Staffan

Legend
I think it would be interesting if different spells had different DCs (or DC modifiers, same difference). The way I'd do it that low-stakes debuffs would have very high DCs, while higher-stakes one would have fairly low ones. So something like bane or faerie fire would be a near auto-hit, while something like banishment would be significantly less likely to work.
 

Horwath

Hero
I think it would be interesting if different spells had different DCs (or DC modifiers, same difference). The way I'd do it that low-stakes debuffs would have very high DCs, while higher-stakes one would have fairly low ones. So something like bane or faerie fire would be a near auto-hit, while something like banishment would be significantly less likely to work.
please no.

that would lead to all kind of mess.
certain spells, in certain circumstances could give disadvantage on save vs it's effect.

better balance would be:

1. no save
2. partial effect on save
3. no effect on save.

but I would not want any spell to have no effect on save.
It's a limited daily resource, so all spells(except cantrips) should have partial or half effect(damage) on successful save or missed attack roll.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
I think it would be interesting if different spells had different DCs (or DC modifiers, same difference). The way I'd do it that low-stakes debuffs would have very high DCs, while higher-stakes one would have fairly low ones. So something like bane or faerie fire would be a near auto-hit, while something like banishment would be significantly less likely to work.
That's a really complicated way to imiment spell resistance just to avoid giving some monsters a spell resistance value for the needed spell raft check when casting a SR:yes spell & adding a ST: yes/no tag logically set to each spell.

SR was a useful & meaningful tool that added a lot but this would just be a pointless complexity to avoid calling it or letting it look like spell resistance
 
Last edited:

Staffan

Legend
That's a really complicated way to imiment spell resistance just to avoid giving some monsters a spell resistance value for the needed spell raft check when casting a SR:yes spell & adding a ST: yes/no tag logically swt to each spell.

AR was a useful & meaningful tool that added a lot but this would just be a pointless complexity to avoid calling it or letting it look like spell resistance
The intent would be to make "setup" spells easy to succeed with, and "effect" spells hard. 3e Spell Resistance generally dealt with whether a spell had a direct or indirect effect, which is a different issue.
 




tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
I would say any spell than makes your/your allies attacks easier to land or make enemy attacks less likely to land.
That sounds like a round about description of "debuffs". There were very good reasons why some debuffs were Sr yes & others Sr no. Specifically ones like web & grease were sr no because they impacted the environment without automatically crippling the impacted targets in a save or suck/lose situation even if they put a crimp on movement options. Spells like faerie-fire bane & feeblemind were Sr yes because they were powerful save or suck/lose spells that could with a single die roll nullify even what would now by considered an "elite monster" or once (in 4e?) a "solo monster".

Since it was usually blasters who focused on things like spell penetration other casters like God wizards focused on things like buff/debuff/control spells when faced with sr possessing monsters were incentivized to lean on environment shaping spells & buffs since those did not usually involve sr. The overuse of concentration would need to be fixed in 5.5/6e to make that a meaningful option though.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
At that level, it doesn't matter how many good saves they have because a lot of those guys have 'Autocheat Three Times' as an ability.
Which is true, but not the point I was talking about.

And it's a required gamist balance point. With bounded accuracy ensuring that players don't just whiff alot, even good saves have a reasonable chance of failure. So with the action economy of a party vs. a solo and the existance of save-or-suck spells, legendary saves are basically required to stop solo fights from being short, disappointing affairs if the casters have the right spells. It's no more a "cheat" then giving monsters more HPs than PCs can ever get so they last for several rounds.
 

Staffan

Legend
What the heck is a "set up spell"?
Spells have different jobs. Some spells directly impact a foe, e.g. by doing damage, stunning them, and so on. Others are designed more to soften the target up for other spells and/or characters to have an impact on the target.

For example, faerie fire doesn't do much by itself. But it does give others advantage on attacking the target. It's a spell that sets the target up for increased damage from the party damage dealers, hence "setup spell". I think that this kind of spell should be easier to "hit" with than actual damage spells.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Spells have different jobs. Some spells directly impact a foe, e.g. by doing damage, stunning them, and so on. Others are designed more to soften the target up for other spells and/or characters to have an impact on the target.

For example, faerie fire doesn't do much by itself. But it does give others advantage on attacking the target. It's a spell that sets the target up for increased damage from the party damage dealers, hence "setup spell". I think that this kind of spell should be easier to "hit" with than actual damage spells.
Why the effort trying to invent new terms for commonly understood existing jargon that's well understood even beyond ttrpg circles? How is this distinct enough to not just be "debuff" or something? d&d once had a nuanced subsystem for what you seem to be talking about
SPELL RESISTANCE
Spell resistance is the extraordinary ability to avoid being affected by spells. (Some spells also grant spell resistance.) To affect a creature that has spell resistance, a spellcaster must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) at least equal to the creature’s spell resistance. (The defender’s spell resistance is like an Armor Class against magical attacks.) If the caster fails the check, the spell doesn’t affect the creature. The possessor does not have to do anything special to use spell resistance. The creature need not even be aware of the threat for its spell resistance to operate.

Only spells and spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance. Extraordinary and supernatural abilities (including enhancement
bonuses on magic weapons) are not. For example, the fear effect from a rod of lordly might is subject to spell resistance because it is a
spell-like effect. The rod’s combat bonuses (such as the +2 bonus from the rod’s mace form) are not. A creature can have some abilities that are subject to spell resistance and some that are not. For example, an androsphinx’s divine spells are subject to spell resistance, but its roar is not. (The roar is a supernatural ability.) A, cleric’s spells are subject to spell resistance, but his use of positive or negative energy is not. Even some spells ignore spell resistance; see When Spell Resistance Applies, below.

A creature can voluntarily lower its spell resistance. Doing so is a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Once a creature lowers its resistance, it remains down until the creature’s next turn. At the beginning of the creature’s next turn, the creature’s spell resistance automatically returns unless the creature intentionally keeps it down (also a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity).

A creature’s spell resistance never interferes with its own spells, items, or abilities. A creature with spell resistance cannot impart this power to others by touching them or standing in their midst. Only the rarest of creatures and a few magic items have the ability to bestow spell resistance upon another.

Spell resistance does not stack. It overlaps. If a cleric wearing +1 chainmail that grants him spell resistance 15 casts holy aura, which grants spell resistance 25 against evil spells and spells cast by evil creatures, he has spell resistance 25 against the aforementioned spells and spell resistance 15 against other spells and spell-like abilities.

When Spell Resistance Applies Each spell described in the Player’s Handbook includes an entry that indicates whether spell resistance applies to the spell. In general, whether spell resistance applies depends on what the spell does:
Targeted Spells: Spell resistance applies if the spell is targeted at the creature. Some individually targeted spells, such as magic missile when cast by a 3rd-level caster, can be directed at several creatures simultaneously. In such cases, a creature’s spell resistance applies only to the portion of the spell actually targeted at that creature. If several different resistant creatures are subjected to such a spell, each checks its spell resistance separately.

Area Spells: Spell resistance applies if the resistant creature is within the spell’s area. It protects the resistant creature without affecting the spell itself.

Effect Spells: Most effect spells summon or create something and are not subject to spell resistance. For instance, summon monster I summons a monster that can attack a creature with spell resistance normally. Sometimes, however, spell resistance applies to effect spells, usually to those that act upon a creature more or less directly, such as web.

Spell resistance can protect a creature from a spell that’s already been cast. Check spell resistance when the creature is first affected by the spell. For example, if an ogre mage flies within 10 feet of a wall of fire, the caster must make a caster level check against the ogre mage’s spell resistance of 18. If the caster fails, the wall does not damage the ogre mage.

Check spell resistance only once for any particular casting of a spell or use of a spell-like ability. If spell resistance fails the first time, it fails each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell. Likewise, if the spell resistance succeeds the first time, it always succeeds. For example, a succubus encounters Jozan’s blade barrier spell. If the cleric makes a successful roll to overcome the spell resistance of the succubus, the creature takes damage from the spell. If the succubus survives and enters that particular blade barrier a second time, the creature will be damaged again. No second roll is needed. If the creature has voluntarily lowered its spell resistance and is then subjected to a spell, the creature still has a single chance to resist that spell later, when its spell resistance is up.

Spell resistance has no effect unless the energy created or released by the spell actually goes to work on the resistant creature’s mind or body. If the spell acts on anything else (the air, the ground, the room’s light), and the creature is affected as a consequence, no roll is required. Creatures can be harmed by a spell without being directly affected. For example, a daylight spell harms a dark elf because drow have light blindness. Daylight, however, usually is cast on the area containing the drow, making it bright, not on the drow itself, so the effect is indirect. Spell resistance would only apply if someone tried to cast daylight on an object the drow was holding.

Spell resistance does not apply if an effect fools the creature’s senses or reveals something about the creature, such as minor illusion or detect thoughts does.

Magic actually has to be working for spell resistance to apply. Spells that have instantaneous durations but lasting results aren’t subject to spell resistance unless the resistant creature is exposed to the spell the instant it is cast. For example, a creature with spell resistance can’t undo a wall of stone that has already been cast. When in doubt about whether a spell’s effect is direct or indirect, consider the spell’s school:

Abjuration: The target creature must be harmed, changed, or restricted in some manner for spell resistance to apply. Perception changes, such as nondetection, aren’t subject to spell resistance. Abjurations that block or negate attacks are not subject to an attacker’s spell resistance—it is the protected creature that is affected by the spell (becoming immune or resistant to the attack).

Conjuration: These spells are usually not subject to spell resistance unless the spell conjures some form of energy, such as Melf ’s acid arrow or power word stun. Spells that summon creatures or produce effects that function like creatures are not subject to spell resistance.

Divination: These spells do not affect creatures directly and are not subject to spell resistance, even though what they reveal about a creature might be very damaging.

Enchantment: Since enchantment spells affect creatures’ minds, they are typically subject to spell resistance.

Evocation: If an evocation spell deals damage to the creature, it has a direct effect. If the spell damages something else, it has an
indirect effect. For example, a lightning bolt cast at a resistant creature is subject to spell resistance (which would protect only the
creature but would not affect the spell itself ). If the lightning bolt is cast at a chamber’s ceiling, bringing down a rain of debris, it is not subject to spell resistance.

Illusion: These spells are almost never subject to spell resistance. Illusions that entail a direct attack, such as phantasmal killer or shadow evocation, are exceptions.

Necromancy: Most of these spells alter the target creature’s life force and are subject to spell resistance. Unusual necromancy spells, such as spectral hand, don’t affect other creatures directly and are not subject to spell resistance.

Transmutation: These spells are subject to spell resistance if they transform the target creature. Transmutation spells are not
subject to spell resistance if they are targeted on a point in space instead of on a creature. Transmute rock to mud and entangle change
a creature’s surroundings, not the creature itself, and are not subject to spell resistance. Some transmutations make objects harmful (or
more harmful), such as magic stone. Even these spells are not generally subject to spell resistance because they affect the objects, not the creatures against which the objects are used. Spell resistance works against magic stone only if the creature with spell resistance is holding the stones when the cleric casts magic stone on them.

Successful Spell Resistance

Spell resistance prevents a spell or a spell-like ability from affecting or harming the resistant creature, but it never removes a magical effect from another creature or negates a spell’s effect on another creature. Spell resistance prevents a spell from disrupting
another spell.

Against an ongoing spell that has already been cast, a failed check against spell resistance allows the resistant creature to
ignore any effect the spell might have. The magic continues to affect others normally.
ehind the curtain: Spell Resistance & Damage Reduction
Too much spell resistance or damage reduction can' make a monster virtually unbeatable at the Challenge Rating you're aiming for. Too little, and the monster might as well not: have any at all. Since any character will havee the caster level or magic weaponry necessary to penetrate the creature's defense.
Spell Resistance: If you choose to give your monster this ability. you'll probably want to set the resistance number equal to the creature's CR+11 This means that a character of a level equal to the creature's will have a 50%”: chance to overcome the monster's spell resistance (Barring Spell Penetration Feat). For example. a 12th-levecharacter has a 50% chance to overcome spell resistance 23, so 23 is
a good spell res-stance number for a CR 12 creature. You may need to adjust a creature's spell resistance number after
you finally settle on a CR {or the creature...
If you want a highly magic-resistant creature. set the monster's spell resistance higher than CR +11 For lesser resistance set the spell resistance lower. For each point of resistance. you'll change the change the chance of successfully overcoming spell resistance by 5%. For example. a 12tlevel caster has a 45% chance to overcome spell resistance 24. and no chance to overcome spell resistance 33
Damage Reduction: Assigning a damage reduction value can be tricky. Setting the value. too high can make a creature virtually immune
to physical attacks. On the other hand. most player characters carry some magic weapons. so setting the value too low can result in an ineffective ability.
Recommended
Target CR - Recommended Damage Reduction
0~2 - None
3—5 - 5
6—13 - 10
14-20 - 15

Remember. even if player characters can hurt the monster. lesser creatures in the game world often cannot hurt the creature. nor can the
player character's cohorts or any creatures their summon.

"Set up spell" sounds like a term that falls somewhere between engrish translations or looking back at the efforts of old scifi to come up with what seemed like futuristic sounding terms for "computer"
 
Last edited:

lets do some math...

lets take the basic array 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8

you get +2 to 1 and +1 to another... I will end up with
16 15 14 12 10 8 (not bad I can totally make a character out of that)
we will give the 2 prof saves to the 12 and the 16
16 (+5) 15 (+2) 14 (+2) 12 (+3) and 8 (-1)

DMG
Use the Table. You can start with the monster's expected challenge rating and use the Monster Statistics by Challenge Rating table to determine an appropriate save DC for any effect that requires a target to make a saving throw.

Calculate the DCs. Alternatively, you can calculate a monster's save DCs as follows: 8 + the monster's proficiency bonus + the monster's relevant ability modifier. You choose the ability that best applies. For example, if the effect is a poison, the relevant ability is probably the monster's Constitution. If the effect is similar to that of a spell, the relevant ability might be the monster's Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma.

Don't worry if the save DCs aren't matching up with the expected challenge rating for the monster. Other factors can affect a monster's challenge rating, as shown in later steps, and you can always adjust the sa - DCs later on.

here is a redit post with a break down of monsters
Okay so at CR 1/4-4 (what I would expect to come across most often in the +2 prof days) you have 13 DCs
At CR 16-21 (what I expect most 13-17th level characters with a +5 prof to see) you have a 18-21 DC range...


so at the start you make your best save in an 8 your worst on a 14

level ups are hard to calculate... do you up stats or take feats (or multi class like I do alot to keep spellcasting from getting out of hand) but the prof is for sure... I think assumeing a +1 magic is not too far out there...

no stat increase
16 (+9) 15 (+3) 14 (+3) 12 (+7) and 8 (-)

up your prime stat to 20, and secondary to 18
20 (+11) 18 (+5) 14 (+3) 12 (+7) and 8 (-)

up prime to 18 and secondary to 16 and the 8 to a 10
18 (+10) 16 (+4) 14 (+3) 12 (+7) and 10 (+1)

3 arrays and we can do out what you need to make best and worst... so
DC 18 if no stat boost you need a 9 if some but not max you need an 8 and if you max it you need a 7.
Your best save on the low end of the spectrum is running on a treadmill
DC 21 if no stat boost you need a 12 if some but not max you need an 11 and if you max it you need a 10.
Your best save on the high end is WORSE for you then you started.

Worst save is either a straight roll or +1
DC 18 if no stat boost you need a 17 if some but not max you need an 16
Your save save is so bad you might as well not try... it WISHES it was ONLY on a treadmill
DC 21 if no stat boost you need a - opps nat 20 doesn't auto pass in 5e no save for you... if some but not max you need a nat 20
Your worse save might just be an auto fail, but if it's not it might as well be...

you go from (best save in an 8 your worst on a 14) 35%- 60% to (best needing 7-9 and worse 20) 60%-5%

you don't get better at avoiding threats that are level appropriate you get WORSE>
 


cbwjm

Legend
I'm a little torn because part of me likes the six saving throw system we have, but another part of me thinks it would be better to go back to fort, ref, will. I'd probably mix and match 3e and 4e so that they are still saves, but the highest of 2 scores are added to them: Fort (str or con), Ref (dex or int), Will (wis or cha).
 


Staffan

Legend
Why the effort trying to invent new terms for commonly understood existing jargon that's well understood even beyond ttrpg circles? How is this distinct enough to not just be "debuff" or something? d&d once had a nuanced subsystem for what you seem to be talking about

SPELL RESISTANCE
Spell Resistance (and formerly Magic Resistance) is/was something completely different (cue Monty Python here). Spell resistance was the ability to completely shrug off direct magic, but did not work against magic acting indirectly (it would prevent you from being dominated, but it wouldn't help if I dominate your buddy and make him attack you). It was also a fairly rare ability, mostly used for highly magical creatures like outsiders, dragons, and some aberrations.

What I'm after is something more akin to Pathfinder 2's designation of certain abilities as "Incapacitation" (although using a different method). In PF2, a debuff that can negate a combatants ability to fight entirely, or nearly so, will usually have a tag called Incapacitation. This includes things like blindness, paralyze, charm, and so on. These are things that essentially end a fight. The effect in PF2 is that if you use such an ability on a creature with level higher than double the spell's level (or higher than your level if it's a non-spell), the target improves the result of their save one step (critical failure to failure to success to critical success). This combined with PF2's rapidly escalating numerical values means that such spells are virtually useless against higher-level creatures.

I would instead go the other way and have spells and abilities that debuff without incapacitating be more or less automatic. You already have this on some spells – there's no save against hunter's mark, for example. That's because while it is technically a debuff on the target, it acts more like a buff on the caster – the caster deals more damage and has advantage on certain checks. Similarly, while bane technically gives the enemy a penalty to attacks, the net effect is similar to giving yourself/your allies an AC bonus.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top