Saving throws are a coin toss?

[Benimoto]

might be nice if they called it a "recovery roll" instead of a save... less confusion and all.

I think we've seen in a few of the developer discussions that they wanted to avoid making up new terms for things, and reuse as many of the old words and terms as possible, even if they ended up meaning new things. That's how we ended up with "Fox's Cunning" being a ranger reaction ability instead of a buff spell, and I think that's how the term "saving throw" got tacked onto this essentially new mechanic.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I think that's covered automatically by the fact that you add +1/2 your level to all attacks. I don't think it necessitates a separate power later on.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that as I only started looking closely at the 4E rules information with D&D XP.

 

[Festivus]

So my wizard uses his daily sleep power on a mass of kobolds. Hie misses half. Of the half that are hit, half of them make their initial saving throw. The ones that fail fall asleep, but they get saves every round to wake up. It certainly seemed pretty darn weak.

Hmm, am I interpreting it wrong. I thought that if you hit with the initial attack versus their fortitude (or whatever it was), they were put to sleep, and could not do the 10+ wake up trick until the end of their next turn. Also, those that were missed were slowed, and could shake off the slow at the end of their next turn with a 10+.

 

[Khaim]

Actually, I think the one mistake with this is making it 10+ rather than 11+ because it is harder to remember. But again, maybe there is a very good reason that I am not seeing.

Psych studies show that people have the most fun with slightly more than 50% success rates. (Wizards quoted this once. Don't ask me where.) So 55% is just this side of even because, well, we like it that way. Notice that 55% comes up in other places too. For example, someone with a +5 attack against AC 15 will hit 55% of the time, not 50%, even though their respective bonuses are the same. Same thing for a PC using their active Sneak skill vs a guard's passive Perception skill.

 

[Khaim]

I suspect (but do not know) that the saving throw target number will be determined by tier. In other words;

Heroic DC = 10
Paragon DC = 15
Epic DC = 20

Well, the Pit Fiend stats say otherwise. Unless you think that one of the most powerful Demons around can be easily taken out by an equal-level wizard with a 1st level spell?

This means that a 30th level wizard casting sleep will get about 95% of those kobolds.

It also makes 10 a better choice than 11 and matches what the designers have said about how the game changes at each tier.

That does make some sense, but I still think you're wrong.

I think we'll see things more along the lines of follow-up attacks. Notice the Bodak's ability. It's a Save-or-Die! But it's still balanced, because you have to be hit with (and not save) a status effect first. Give the Wizard such a follow-up attack (i.e. put slowed creatures to sleep, no save) and you're good. A higher-level Sleep spell might have such a follow-up built in, as a Sustain Minor-type ability. We'll see.

I would like to think that defenders would get ½ of their level as a bonus to saves (that seems intuitive and matches the unified mechanic), but I doubt that too since it, again, doesn’t match any of the higher level monsters we have seen.

Not a chance. Sorry.

 

[Khelzor]

Effect Durations

I think the sleep mechanic works fine and it will probably be similar to other spells in that the longer the duration (ie. the more rolls you fail) the worse your condition will be.

Sleep works like this, you get hit and you are slowed, but if you fail your "save" (duration check) then you fall into the next state which is asleep.

I would then see something like Flesh to Stone work similarly. If hit you are slowed, if you fail your first "save" then you are immobilized, if you fail a second "save" you are then unconcious, if you fail a third "save" you are petrified. A successful "save" anywhere along the line will remove the spell. Now you have a spell that, while not a save or die spell any longer, can still kill you.

And we still don't know all the potential modifiers to those rolls.

 

[Terramotus]

Actually, what's the bet there'll be charm/dominate/sleep spells with the Sustain Minor descriptor?

That would go a long way towards alleviating my problems with it. Also, as I've thought about it more, rituals could probably fill in the void. Even if they're not in the published material, it would be relatively easy to whip something up. A sleep or charm ritual with an hour duration that takes, say 3 minutes to cast would be effectively useless in combat, but would fill in the non-combat gap I'm looking for, I think.

Actually, this reminds me of EVERY edition except 3ed.

Go back to AD&D 2nd ed. You had your five saves, and they were based on your class level. Guess what - it didn't matter who was casting the spell on you or how powerful they were. At low levels you needed high numbers, regardless if it was Meepo's cousin or an Archmage. At high levels you needed low numbers, so you almost always made your save - again regardless if it was a 1st level caster or it was Elminster and the Council of Eight.

Saying this "flies in the face of what D&D has always been" is just rhetoric - it's been a flat number regardless of who cast it for quite a bit. This just amkes it so that 1st level folks don't get insta-killed by the first thing to cast a save-or-suck spell at them because they have a chance to save, and high level folks can't ignore everything.

2nd Edition wasn't very sophisticated in general, mechanically. But there was an increase, and I believe many higher level spells imposed negatives to saves, did they not?

I want 1st level characters to get insta-killed by a high level caster's spell. What kind of sense does it make that the caster needs to not roll a 1 to not hit Bob the Dirt Farmer, but then Bob shakes the spell off the next round because he has an automatic 55% chance of success? If the attack roll is 1d20+15 and the defense is 15, the save ought to be 1d20 + 5 vs 25. Assuming a 55% is a close enough approximation when foes are close in level, but looks silly to me when they're not.

Meh. On reflection, I'm not going to worry too much about it. There appear to be some relatively easy fixes for the system to behave the way I want.

 

[Sphyre]

Sleep works like this, you get hit and you are slowed, but if you fail your "save" (duration check) then you fall into the next state which is asleep.

And, from everything I see, you don't make your saving throw until the end of your turn. Basically, meaning you spend your first turn under it's effects as slowed. Then you have the possibility of falling asleep at the end of your first turn.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

This is one of the design decisions for 4e I find problematic. At some point, when you have removed enough simulation elements, the coin toss is almost inevitible. At some point, any game sufficiently divested of quirkiness becomes d02.

When you put it that way, it sounds like a good thing.

Let's consider the following thought experiment: At a given character level, you can have your weak & reliable abilities that work 85-100% of the time, the weirdly potent abilities that work 0-15% of the time, and your meat & potatoes abilities that work 40-60% of the time.

Shouldn't the designers concentrate on more offerings of the third variety, rather than the first two?

Offering the full spectrum, on purpose, yields the number crunching goodness that so many whine about in 3e.

There is certainly room in any fantasy game to explore the quirky fun extremes, but Sleep should be a meat & potatoes ability. Sleep as an overpowered spell against low-level threats is a sacred cow I am glad to see euthanized.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Exactly.

Plus it gives an additional dimension on which bonuses can be added - so stuff often doesn't get to 'stick' to hobgoblins (they get a "duration check" immediately upon being affected), humans are a bit tougher than other PC races (they get +1 on all "duration checks"), Eladrin don't stay charmed for long (they get +5 on "duration checks" against charms), Dragons shrug off everything quickly (Young Black dragon gets +5 on ALL "duration checks").

That wins me over, right there. I love it.

Less bookkeeping. I just roll the 'duration check' when that time comes. With most monsters I can just roll the die and only bother to check the stat block if the roll is worryingly mediumish (and in most cases assuming DC 10 is going to be close enough anyway).

Not knowing the duration increases tension, too.