Saves vs defenses

[Flipguarder]

I understand its not gamebreaking or even unbalanced. I would just hate to be the player walking up a staircase and have the dm tell me randomly that I just took 20 damage and are on fire. Just seems less fun.

 

[MarkB]

I guess my main beef is traps.

Say I put a flame jet series on staircase. They make no perception check, it beats thier passive, the first thing they hear sometimes is "Flames shoot out of the wall and sear you, doing 20 fire damage and 5 ongoing damage."

At least with the save system they were able to do SOMETHING before taking damage. Thats the thing I have the most problem with i spose.

But even in 3rd edition, there were plenty of traps that used attack rolls rather than save effects when activated - dart traps, spear traps, more-or-less anything that fired projectiles. In fact, a quick scan of the sample traps in the SRD has the "+n Atk" ones outnumbering the "Save DC n" ones, at least at low levels.

This isn't an edition issue, it's been around for years.

 

[eriktheguy]

If an attack targets your players defenses...

4E system:
Trap rolls: D20 + Attack bonus VS (10 + characters def bonus)

Suggested 3E style variant:
Player rolls: D20 + characters def bonus VS (11 + traps attack bonus)

Have the player roll D20, and add their defense bonus (to fort, ref, will etc). They need to hit a target DC of 11 plus the trap/poison/spells attack bonus. The reason I use 11 instead of 10 is that the traps normally hit on a tie, so the PC would have to fail their 'save' on a tie if the number remained 10.

Having your players roll their defense against traps is a neat idea, because it makes them feel like THEY dodged the trap! Also, this system is equivalent to you rolling the traps attack, only the player rolls instead, and the numbers are reversed. You can choose which traps/spells seem more appropriate as an attack, or more appropriate as a defensive check by the player.

You could even use this system to have players roll their AC against standard attacks, but I don't suggest it...

 

[CubeKnight]

If an attack targets your players defenses...

4E system:
Trap rolls: D20 + Attack bonus VS (10 + characters def bonus)

Suggested 3E style variant:
Player rolls: D20 + characters def bonus VS (11 + traps attack bonus)

Have the player roll D20, and add their defense bonus (to fort, ref, will etc). They need to hit a target DC of 11 plus the trap/poison/spells attack bonus. The reason I use 11 instead of 10 is that the traps normally hit on a tie, so the PC would have to fail their 'save' on a tie if the number remained 10.

Having your players roll their defense against traps is a neat idea, because it makes them feel like THEY dodged the trap! Also, this system is equivalent to you rolling the traps attack, only the player rolls instead, and the numbers are reversed. You can choose which traps/spells seem more appropriate as an attack, or more appropriate as a defensive check by the player.

You could even use this system to have players roll their AC against standard attacks, but I don't suggest it...

So, if I have a Fort of 20, and the Trap has an Attack Bonus of +10, I roll 1d20+20 vs DC 21? I think your math is slightly off
Edit: Nevermind, I missed the defense bonus part, I thought it was the full score. It'd be 1d20+10 vs DC 21.

 

[eriktheguy]

I guess my main beef is traps.

Say I put a flame jet series on staircase. They make no perception check, it beats thier passive, the first thing they hear sometimes is "Flames shoot out of the wall and sear you, doing 20 fire damage and 5 ongoing damage."

At least with the save system they were able to do SOMETHING before taking damage. Thats the thing I have the most problem with i spose.

This is why I suggest that if you use the variant suggested by me (Actually, Firelancer mentioned it first) you only use it for traps. Having the characters roll for that makes sense to me.

Which is not really different than a lurking monster getting a surprise round to attack first.....4E really encourages traps to be more like monsters with more longevity and an element in an encounter....than a one off effect.

A trap is not different than a monster mechanically, only in flavor. When players get hit by a lurker, even without rolling, they can still do something about it by attacking back. Usually when they get hit by a trap they will just avoid it in the future. Usually players make the rolls when dealing with inanimate objects (they roll to search for or disarm traps, why not roll to dodge them ). It's really a question of flavor. You don't roll defensively in combat because it's tedious, but rolling defensively against traps makes some sense.

I understand its not gamebreaking or even unbalanced. I would just hate to be the player walking up a staircase and have the dm tell me randomly that I just took 20 damage and are on fire. Just seems less fun.

Agreed.

 

[FrozenChrono]

I understand its not gamebreaking or even unbalanced. I would just hate to be the player walking up a staircase and have the dm tell me randomly that I just took 20 damage and are on fire. Just seems less fun.

Most passive perceptions won't be high enough to notice the traps outright, but many traps have a degree of notice. For instance while a character may not be able to tell that there are swinging scythes that are going to pop out of the walls and chop you up, that same character may notice worn groves in the floor or odd gaps in the ceiling.

A great way to do this is by giving your party multiple pieces of information about an area, some of which aren't relevant. For example:

"You enter the room and see the walls lined with paintings. Most of them are of landscapes but one is of a small dragon (DC 12) that looks strikingly familiar (DC 17) (DC 22 to recognize it as the wizards familiar Puffy). Some paint is peeled and cracked around the edges of the walls, possibly from water damage, and their are grooves in the floor running from left to right (DC 12). (DC 17 to notice the grooves are all strait and even) (DC 22 to notice corresponding notches along the ceiling) (DC 27 to outright notice the trap)"

This example gives enough detail to not "give the trap away" to any casual observer but at the same time let's the party know there could be something in the room and gives them an opportunity to search for it. In the example a detect magic (DC 25) will reveal something coming from the dragon painting, and the dragons full name (something the party learned early in the campaign, but could be a history check) would disable the trap.

Mixing it up is key to making this strategy work. Sometimes there's a trap, sometimes a secret door, and sometimes nothing but a minor plot tidbit. Could also be a spy, something happening in the distance, or enemies behind the door.

For your example maybe it's an easy DC to notice notches or circles in the wall where the fire jets come from so once a character has seen the trap go off once it's easier to catch, or it could vary as they continue through the dungeon.

 

[N0Man]

Personally, I like the change. It makes the game system more internally consistent, and the difference between the two is just psychological. However, I do know players that really dislike this change.

I suppose for those players, you could easily work in a system to roll saves as well, however it goes against the "core mechanic" outlined in 4E, which includes higher rolls are better.

If your players are super-old school and nostalgic, you could also re-implement THAC0.