D&D 5E Saves in 5e: What I would change

[variant]

Can you elaborate on this? Issues everywhere is rather broad.

The proficiency bonus was already going to +6 (see previous Fighter) and higher in some cases (see previous d12 for skills). Casters were adding +5 to DCs, they add +6 now but start 2 lower for a net loss.

The problems start arising at high levels. It is isn't proficiency alone, but expertise and other bonuses. Some skill DCs end up becoming completely trivial for one class while ones that are difficult for that class become almost impossible to accomplish for another.

Opposing skill rolls become pointless in many situations. A Rogue with proficiency and expertise in Stealth is almost impossible to spot unless the person is running around with two of three options: high Wisdom, expertise, or proficiency. If a PC has expertise and proficiency in Insight, there is basically no lying to him, ever. Just as if a PC has expertise and proficiency in Perception, there is absolutely nothing he won't spot or hear.

Saving throws is another major issue where the bonus gap between classes at level 20 has created a paradigm where certain spells are really effective against certain classes and those will be the spells that will always be used against them.

It is basically the repeat of a lot of issues that cropped up in high level play in 3e and why campaigns dropped off after mid-level. It is specifically the issues that Mearls has stated previous they did not want to repeat, yet here they are in full glory.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Thank you for proving my point. You're wrong, you see; they aren't all Dexterity checks. A saving throw is not a check. Something that gives bonuses to Dexterity checks (e.g., the bard's Inspire Competence) won't help with Dexterity saves, nor vice versa.

If people on this board--who are generally quite well-informed and rules-savvy--are getting the two mixed up, casual players will be totally lost.

I am aware that they are different in that something that affects checks doesn't effect saves (though I would agree that this shouldn't be the case). But because they work identically, they are the same other than the keyword that only matters in regard to abilities that key off of it. You don't track them separately or even think of them separately. It's hardly confusing.

 

[Dausuul]

I am aware that they are different in that something that affects checks doesn't effect saves (though I would agree that this shouldn't be the case). But because they work identically, they are the same other than the keyword that only matters in regard to abilities that key off of it. You don't track them separately or even think of them separately. It's hardly confusing.

So, they're different, except that they work identically, other than the keyword that only matters sometimes, and you don't track or think of them separately except when you do. And this is not confusing.

Before I responded to your earlier post, I had to go look up the rules and confirm that saves were in fact described as a separate mechanic, rather than a special type of ability check. This is the kind of fiddly nitpicky distinction that should be avoided if at all possible. If saving throws are to be their own thing, then they should be truly their own thing, with their own names. Otherwise saves and checks should be merged into a single mechanic. Anything that calls for a Dexterity save now should be changed to call for a Dexterity check, and the term "saving throw" simply abolished.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

So, they're different, except that they work identically, other than the keyword that only matters sometimes, and you don't track or think of them separately except when you do. And this is not confusing.

It really is unclear. Before I responded to your earlier post, I had to go look up the rules and confirm that saves were in fact described as a separate mechanic, rather than a special type of ability check. This is the kind of fiddly nitpicky distinction that should be avoided if at all possible. If saving throws are to be their own thing, then they should be truly their own thing, with their own names. Otherwise saves and checks should be merged into a single mechanic.

I absolutely agree with your final point. There isn't a good reason for them to be separated at all. A save should be a type of check, and affected by everything that affects checks. The same goes for attacks.

 

[jodyjohnson]

The problems start arising at high levels. It is isn't proficiency alone, but expertise and other bonuses. Some skill DCs end up becoming completely trivial for one class while ones that are difficult for that class become almost impossible to accomplish for another.

I thought that was the point of being skilled and an expert. Looks like a feature not a bug.

Opposing skill rolls become pointless in many situations. A Rogue with proficiency and expertise in Stealth is almost impossible to spot unless the person is running around with two of three options: high Wisdom, expertise, or proficiency.

Or they are in an area where they can't hide. Moderate Wisdom and proficiency in Perception is probably sufficient. Or advantage. Disadvantage on the stealth side.

If a PC has expertise and proficiency in Insight, there is basically no lying to him, ever. Just as if a PC has expertise and proficiency in Perception, there is absolutely nothing he won't spot or hear.

Too much hyperbole.

Saving throws is another major issue where the bonus gap between classes at level 20 has created a paradigm where certain spells are really effective against certain classes and those will be the spells that will always be used against them.

I'll agree as I presented my option for this in the OP. Limiting the Prof bonus to +3 to all uses seems like very little progression on the 'attack' bonus.

It is basically the repeat of a lot of issues that cropped up in high level play in 3e and why campaigns dropped off after mid-level. It is specifically the issues that Mearls has stated previous they did not want to repeat, yet here they are in full glory.

I think there are some substantial differences between Next and 3/4e. We don't have synergies, no specific feats boosting individual rolls, we have capped stats (3e had +14 stat disparities (8 to 36), 4e had +10 stat disparities (10 to 30), 5e has +6 (8 to 20)). And most of the really powerful spells give multiple saves.

 

[Dausuul]

As regards the math, I think it's fine if a PC who dumps a lot of resources into Insight can only be deceived by someone who's dumped a lot of resources into Deception. As Jodyjohnson says, that's a feature, not a bug. Highly skilled PCs should always succeed at routine tasks--which tasks include defeating Joe Average in a contest of skill.

Saving throws, I'm less sure about. One of the things I thought 4E did well was moving away from the high-stakes, all-or-nothing, save-or-you're-done-for effects. I'm not happy to see them creeping back in 5E.