D&D 5E Saving throws in 5e

OB1

Jedi Master
on offense that is a strategic game only casters can play... fighters target AC and AC alone...

in fact I have to laugh the fighter class (the one I would think should be about strategic play) briskly can't do it offensive and the best defense he can get is to acquire magic items...
I was referring to team strategy. It's a team game with different classes having various strengths and weaknesses when facing various challenges resulting on the spotlight falling on different players in different encounters.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

You have a flaw in your reasoning.
in my reasoning or my example? becuse I showed that as DCs went up the saves you are not prof in get worse and worse... unless you find a mistake in my math?
5E is not designed for PCs to fight NPCs that are of equal class level to them.
so you want me to go to the MM and get save DCs will that help?
Therefore NPC DCs do not scale the same as PC DCs.
this example was 2 PCs but still would you feel better if I showed DC 11s at low CRs and DC 16s at high CRs (same change 5pts)
 

dave2008

Legend
Yeah, back in AD&D (both 1e and 2e since the tables are the same), classes did get better at saving throws. But that too had some issues. For one thing, save or die/suck/sit spells were increasingly likely to do nothing but waste the caster's turn. That may be fine for some people's idea of game balance since the spells capable of simply ending the encounter had a high chance of outright failure, it was also extremely frustrating to play.
3e came as a bit of a sea change since it allowed casters to intentionally improve their save DCs. This, by itself, wasn't a bad thing, but it did so with an open end to how far it could go and still had encounter-ending save or die/suck/sit spells. 5e reels both of those back by capping the max casting stat, keeping proficiency relatively low, and weakening a lot of the save or die/suck/sit effects through repeated attempts to save or concentration. And while it may not be perfect (too many saves still concentrate on the same stats), I much prefer it to the AD&D days or the 3e days.
It also created the situation where particularly tough creatures had to inflict a penalty on a saving throw against their attacks.
 

I can kinda understand it I guess... but then again, if you are bored with magic users, I don't know how playing a martial character with the same options as magic-users is actually giving out variance?
variance of concept...
in 4e I saw SOOO many fighters, and warlords and rangers and rogues... we had multi campaigns were adding togather we had 1 or 2 of what we would call a spell caster now (so druid, wizads, swordmage, bard ect) but now it's all I see. Infact in the last 4 campaings Between me as a player and me as a DM we had 1 rogue (multi classed with ranger and sorcerer) and 2 fighter dips 1 took 2 levels for action surge 1 took 3 for action surge and +1 caster level) of those 4 campaigns we did up to 9th level, then well up into epic+, then 14th level and the last one that ended was at 10th... so in 53 levels of play less then 1/5th of them were fighter or rogue and even then 1 of the fighters was an eldritch knight caster.

in that time I have seen 4 hexblades 2 blade singers, 1 college of swords 1 college of valor bards and 2 clerics that got a 2nd attack... those were are melee characters (TBF 1 of those blade singers is also the eldritch knight we got to 14th level he was a 11/3 wizard/fighter)

in the current game I play in we are all artificers in 1 and we have 1 non caster in the other (straight rogue thief and he keeps complaining 'why can't I get some of those cool toys' and he is new to D&D but not rpgs)
in the 2 current ones I run I have 1 party of hexblade druid cleric warlock/bard and 1 party of hexblade warlock cleric

both games the hexblades are refluffed as fighters in story but useing the hexblade mechanic so they can get spells to refluff as trained maneuvers
The variance seems to me to be all different character classes doing all different things. If they all can do the same things, that's less variance, not more in my opinion.
I don't want my fighter to cast the exact same spell a wizard does (or eldritch knight would be the fix) I want my fighter to get options every level that are on par with but diffrent then spells
 

I was referring to team strategy. It's a team game with different classes having various strengths and weaknesses when facing various challenges resulting on the spotlight falling on different players in different encounters.
and the team with the most spells have the most options for stategies
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
I noticed this trend with saving throws awhile ago, when I was playing in Storm King's Thunder, and we had a few fights against enemies much higher level than the party. Needing to roll a 19 to save, even with advantage, is a pretty tough thing to ask for, and realizing that it was perfectly possible to encounter a monster ability or spellcaster who asked for impossible save DC's at higher tier play was a shock to the system.

And, like with so many problems in D&D, the solution is basically magic. IF Feats are allowed, you can take one to get a single saving throw proficiency.

Other than that, the main ways to get more saving throw bonuses are magical. Inspiration, spells, Paladins, Transmutation Wizards- your only real non-spellcasting option is to be a Monk and eventually get all saving throws proficient.

I know the instant our Cleric said he had Heroes' Feast, I was paying for gourmet dinners every adventure!
 


DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
variance of concept...
in 4e I saw SOOO many fighters, and warlords and rangers and rogues... we had multi campaigns were adding togather we had 1 or 2 of what we would call a spell caster now (so druid, wizads, swordmage, bard ect) but now it's all I see. Infact in the last 4 campaings Between me as a player and me as a DM we had 1 rogue (multi classed with ranger and sorcerer) and 2 fighter dips 1 took 2 levels for action surge 1 took 3 for action surge and +1 caster level) of those 4 campaigns we did up to 9th level, then well up into epic+, then 14th level and the last one that ended was at 10th... so in 53 levels of play less then 1/5th of them were fighter or rogue and even then 1 of the fighters was an eldritch knight caster.

in that time I have seen 4 hexblades 2 blade singers, 1 college of swords 1 college of valor bards and 2 clerics that got a 2nd attack... those were are melee characters (TBF 1 of those blade singers is also the eldritch knight we got to 14th level he was a 11/3 wizard/fighter)

in the current game I play in we are all artificers in 1 and we have 1 non caster in the other (straight rogue thief and he keeps complaining 'why can't I get some of those cool toys' and he is new to D&D but not rpgs)
in the 2 current ones I run I have 1 party of hexblade druid cleric warlock/bard and 1 party of hexblade warlock cleric

both games the hexblades are refluffed as fighters in story but useing the hexblade mechanic so they can get spells to refluff as trained maneuvers

I don't want my fighter to cast the exact same spell a wizard does (or eldritch knight would be the fix) I want my fighter to get options every level that are on par with but diffrent then spells
If this is what is happening at your tables, then the desire to see things change is understandable. Unfortunately, I just don't know likely any of this will change via actions WotC could or would take?

If all of the players at your table are playing spellcasters of various sorts... is that because they just enjoy what they can do? And if that's the case, then why should your boredom of seeing them be at all your business? Why should your boredom impact them? If they like casting spells... your desire to see Fighters and Rogues should not matter.

If all the players at your table are playing spellcasters because they feel spellcasters are more powerful in 5E than martial weapon-users, then I would imagine a lot of those issues are as a result of how your particular DMs are running their games. There are ways to run 5E to certainly help and assist in overpowering spellcasters, so isn't that up to the DMs to change how they run things if they don't the spellcasters to be overpowered? How often do dispel magics, counterspells, antimagic fields, or monsters going straight after the casters appear in the game? These are all things that can help lower the power of spellcasters if that is a necessity. And since WotC knows this too... it doesn't seem to me to be an issue that WotC would feel like they need to do something to "fix" it.

That's not to say they couldn't or won't change things down the line to help get your tables into more of a martial/caster balance... but at least in the short-term from my perspective it's really the table's actions that could "fix" things faster and more effectively than waiting on WotC. Best of luck!
 

If this is what is happening at your tables, then the desire to see things change is understandable. Unfortunately, I just don't know likely any of this will change via actions WotC could or would take?
I mean we could get a new martial class that could do it
If all of the players at your table are playing spellcasters of various sorts... is that because they just enjoy what they can do? And if that's the case, then why should your boredom of seeing them be at all your business? Why should your boredom impact them? If they like casting spells... your desire to see Fighters and Rogues should not matter.
I mean I don't know how to break this to you, but when the same players are complain like I am I don't know how else to explain it... we end up refluffing spell casters when we can to try to jury rig the system... it just isn't working as well as it once did.

we left 3.5 for other systems and 4e brought us back. We were slow to adopt 5e but we were based on no new 4e products... but as 5e has gone we have felt less and less satisfied... this ins't a "Only me" this is my whole group (well 1 exception who loves that as he puts it 'wizards rule and fighter drool')
If all the players at your table are playing spellcasters because they feel spellcasters are more powerful in 5E than martial weapon-users, then I would imagine a lot of those issues are as a result of how your particular DMs are running their games.
okay... so we are running the game were we are about half combat and depending on the DM more exploration or more social rare is it for it to be 1/4 1/4 and I don't think we ever got a 1/3 1/3 1/3 game... some times our combats (although rare) in some campaigns get up to 3/4 the game.
We use mostly huminoid threats (so orcs humans) with the dragon or eldritch horror spread out through out the levels...

we try to minimize player skill and maximize character skill (we don't always pull it off)

not on enworld we call ourselves a narrative focused group... but i have been told what we do by gaming terminology is more gamiest. I also had my first player quite a game in years saying we focused too much on 'problem solving' and I never got a good idea what that meant.

Depending on the night (I game twice a week) there are 3-5 players and we alternate who is the DM... although it looks like we may have a new player coming in soon.
right now I am running every tuesday and we have 2 on 2 off game that I am 1 of the 2 alternating games on saterday and techniqly we have a 1/month game but it has only met 6 or 7 times in the last year so we have some issues getting it togather
There are ways to run 5E to certainly help and assist in overpowering spellcasters, so isn't that up to the DMs to change how they run things if they don't the spellcasters to be overpowered? How often do dispel magics, counterspells, antimagic fields, or monsters going straight after the casters appear in the game?
with the exception of counterspell that is not something we use much, the rest come on a case by case basis... the amount of antimagic zones has lead to more then a few people wanting to have some weapon skill hence why war clerics sword bards and hexblades get the most play but bladesingers are right behind them.
These are all things that can help lower the power of spellcasters if that is a necessity. And since WotC knows this too... it doesn't seem to me to be an issue that WotC would feel like they need to do something to "fix" it.
great... silly me trying to talk about a game on a game fourm... thank you for letting me know not ONLY am I DMing and Playing wrong BUT there is no need to talk about it cause WotC
doesn't seem to me to be an issue that WotC would feel like they need to do something to "fix" it.
That's not to say they couldn't or won't change things down the line to help get your tables into more of a martial/caster balance... but at least in the short-term from my perspective it's really the table's actions that could "fix" things faster and more effectively than waiting on WotC. Best of luck!
this is also why I am hopeing for a 6e... I seem to prefer even numbered editions
 

OB1

Jedi Master
red dragon saves for breath weapon CR 4 at 13 and cr 17 has a 21... over 13 levels the DC goes up by 8

from 4th to 17th level how hard is it to get your save in all stats to increase by 8?
The more difficult save is mitigated by the increase in HP for the PCs, which provides a different layer of protection against the breath weapon and favors fighters, barbarians and the like.

I DM'd a 1-20 5e campaign with a Fighter (Battlemaster), Rogue (Assassin), and Ranger (Hunter), and it worked out just fine. The fighter and ranger had enough HP to soak damage from failed saves, the Rogue had 4 proficient saves plus the amazing evasion ability to make up for lower HP. If the Fighter got dominated or the like, the rest of the party focused on forcing concentration saves or taking out the caster. It was certainly different than the way a party with more than a single 1/2 caster would approach Tier IV, but they found plenty of ways to make it work as a team.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top