Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Saving Throws and Armour Class
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 2392553" data-attributes="member: 22424"><p>The use of the "players always roll" variant can certainly help the DM, but has the problem that it's probably harder for new groups to learn (it's conceptually easier if the PCs and NPCs use the same mechanics, as was pointed out earlier). Of course, for advanced players, this doesn't really matter, but then advanced players won't really feel any great difficulty with the AC/Saves discrepancy.</p><p></p><p>The point that players find it exciting the roll dice is certainly a valid one.</p><p></p><p>However, it is my suspicion (and I have no actual evidence to back this) that the game is probably quicker if all the dice involved in a character's actions are rolled by the player of that character. The point here is that if I, as DM, know that Red Wizard is going to cast a spell on Blue Warrior, I can have the dice ready and rolled immediately, while the player of Blue Warrior needs to reach for a dice, and roll it. And that assumes that the player is paying attention. (Also, if I have set up a whiteboard with all the save values on hand, I can roll and get the results <em>very</em> quickly.)</p><p></p><p>(It is also true that if we're trying to speed up combat, it is certainly the case that fewer rolls is better. This argues against going to an opposed-rolls paradigm. It also suggests that some sort of means of combining the SR and Saving Throw rolls into one. Of course, it is not necessarily true that speeding combat should always be our overriding aim.)</p><p></p><p>One more thought: if we're using static defence values (as now with AC, as suggested with saves) it is almost certainly faster if we minimise the use of conditional modifiers to the defence. So, it is faster if Dodge just gives a +1 bonus to AC. It is faster if Dwarves have a bonus to Fort or Will saves, rather than against poisons and spell-like abilities. But, again, one can question how much you want to speed combat, especially since each change is likely to change the feel of the system, which might not be desirable.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="delericho, post: 2392553, member: 22424"] The use of the "players always roll" variant can certainly help the DM, but has the problem that it's probably harder for new groups to learn (it's conceptually easier if the PCs and NPCs use the same mechanics, as was pointed out earlier). Of course, for advanced players, this doesn't really matter, but then advanced players won't really feel any great difficulty with the AC/Saves discrepancy. The point that players find it exciting the roll dice is certainly a valid one. However, it is my suspicion (and I have no actual evidence to back this) that the game is probably quicker if all the dice involved in a character's actions are rolled by the player of that character. The point here is that if I, as DM, know that Red Wizard is going to cast a spell on Blue Warrior, I can have the dice ready and rolled immediately, while the player of Blue Warrior needs to reach for a dice, and roll it. And that assumes that the player is paying attention. (Also, if I have set up a whiteboard with all the save values on hand, I can roll and get the results [I]very[/I] quickly.) (It is also true that if we're trying to speed up combat, it is certainly the case that fewer rolls is better. This argues against going to an opposed-rolls paradigm. It also suggests that some sort of means of combining the SR and Saving Throw rolls into one. Of course, it is not necessarily true that speeding combat should always be our overriding aim.) One more thought: if we're using static defence values (as now with AC, as suggested with saves) it is almost certainly faster if we minimise the use of conditional modifiers to the defence. So, it is faster if Dodge just gives a +1 bonus to AC. It is faster if Dwarves have a bonus to Fort or Will saves, rather than against poisons and spell-like abilities. But, again, one can question how much you want to speed combat, especially since each change is likely to change the feel of the system, which might not be desirable. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Saving Throws and Armour Class
Top