D&D 5E Saving throws in 5e

[Cap'n Kobold]

Well, all monsters were scary in 1E and 2E because PCs all had lower ACs and HP. So getting your ass kicked was easier in those editions by even just hit point damage.

Starting in 3E they did start to make PCs heartier-- more character options to built up defenses and such-- so the fact that they used magic as a way to not make those players too cocky was their answer to the situation. Seemed like a valid reason to me.

Personally, I really don't get so many people's aversion to magic in D&D? Why getting your ass kicked by weapon-users and those that just target HP is somehow more acceptable than getting your ass kicked by powerful magic? I'm sure you all have your reasons... but I personally don't get it. To me, losing a fight is losing a fight, whether it's by magic or by steel. It sucks either way.

Unless your DM just flat-out throws an effect that one-shots you (which as you note is rarer in 5e than in early editions), losing HP in much more incremental and has options that give you at least the illusion of a fighting chance over the rounds in which you take it until you go down. You are able to interact and participate in the game, and there may be things you can do to reduce that damage. I personally would include magic that just deals HP damage in the same "less frustrating" category as weapon users.

Compare that with getting stomped by non-HP magic: you're out. You might get just a single roll, and bad odds of making it. It is entirely possible at higher levels that there was no chance of resisting it.
You're out of the fight. Maybe you get to roll a die to try to break out on your turns, maybe your party can break you out. Maybe the DC is too high and/or they cannot. Either way you don't get to still interact or try different strategies: You're just on hold until you're allowed back into the D&D game.

The outcome might have been just as inevitable. But the fight that you lost through HP damage will probably have been much more fun, and much less frustrating than the one you lost by just rolling average on a single D20 roll.

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.

Not all effects that require saving throws deal HP damage.

 

[Stalker0]

Saving throws in 5e combine saving throws of 3.5 and 4e.

5e saving throws really don't have any relation to 4e, with the possible exception of the death saving throw. They are completely different mechanics.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That's a completely bonked conclusion.

All characters are getting better at everything, and specifically they all get better in saving throws against the whole world around them.

They do not.

Only saving throws which are either (a) based on statistics the character improves via opt-in ASIs, or (b) Proficient get better.

Non-proficient saves do not change. At all. They do not get better, nor do they get worse.

The fact that they choose to go against better and better enemies, who are getting better faster than them specifically at beating their saving throws is perfectly as intended. You are gaining levels so you are supposed to go against bigger challenges. What kind of lousy game should become easier as you advance?

That's not what's being asked for. If non-proficient, non-primary saves do not advance, then when the party takes on bigger, badder threats, those areas become greater and greater weaknesses over time. This is a fact.

Whether you wish to phrase it as "non-proficient secondary/tertiary saves fall behind as players face greater threats" or "threats increase in power but non-proficient secondary/tertiary saves don't," you get the same result: an enemy that inflicts an Intelligence save at level 20 is going to be much more effective (and dangerous) against most PCs than an enemy that inflicts an intelligence save at level 1, even though the same kind of save is being called for.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

5e saving throws really don't have any relation to 4e, with the possible exception of the death saving throw. They are completely different mechanics.

Correct. Saving throws in 4e were purely a duration or intensification mechanic (how long will you be affected by X?/will effect X get worse?) In 5e, they determine whether an effect strikes at all.

 

[Stalker0]

The other factor in 5e is the notion that all spells always use the best DC. In 3.5, your 1st level spell had a much weaker DC than your 9th level ones, whereas in 5e they all have the full DC. So a caster can always get maximum DC value regardless of which spells they are using.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Compare that with getting stomped by non-HP magic: you're out. You might get just a single roll, and bad odds of making it. It is entirely possible at higher levels that there was no chance of resisting it.

yeah again even at 1st level we have a save or miss at least a turn but maybe the rest of the fight

You're out of the fight. Maybe you get to roll a die to try to break out on your turns, maybe your party can break you out. Maybe the DC is too high and/or they cannot. Either way you don't get to still interact or try different strategies: You're just on hold until you're allowed back into the D&D game.

once the DC hits 15+ if it targets a weak save you could be out of a 5+ round fight

The outcome might have been just as inevitable. But the fight that you lost through HP damage will probably have been much more fun, and much less frustrating than the one you lost by just rolling average on a single D20 roll.

as long as it wasn't one hit... a 6th level wizard or sorcerer with 6+5d6+12 hp could be 38hp a 3d6 sneak attack with a 1d4 knife with a +2 dex that crits (nat 20 or assassinate) deals 2d4+6d6+2 and that averages to 27 damage... but CAN be as high as 46 (highly unlikely) if that crit comes from a nat 20 on round 2 or 3 that can easly auto kill (-19 will kill) the target.

but you know what ALSO makes an auto crit... the 1st level tasha and 2nd level hold

Not all effects that require saving throws deal HP damage.

the worst don't

the worst effect in the game is an Int save... that a non prof target (so most) will be lucky to at level 20 be 50/50...and it comes from a CR3

• Consume Mind. The intellect devourer chooses one creature it can see within 30 feet of it that has an Intelligence of 3 or higher. The target must succeed on a DC 13 Intelligence saving throw or take 16 (3d10) psychic damage. If the target fails the saving throw by 5 or more, its Intelligence score is reduced to 0. The target is incapacitated until it regains at least 1 point of Intelligence (either from completing a long rest or from a lesser restoration spell).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

5e saving throws really don't have any relation to 4e, with the possible exception of the death saving throw. They are completely different mechanics.

TBF there are a few 'save ends' effects

 

[UngeheuerLich]

5e saving throws really don't have any relation to 4e, with the possible exception of the death saving throw. They are completely different mechanics.

This is plain wrong. As I remember there were a lot of powers that had "save ends". This was 4e's duration mechanic.
Same as in 5e.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Correct. Saving throws in 4e were purely a duration or intensification mechanic (how long will you be affected by X?/will effect X get worse?) In 5e, they determine whether an effect strikes at all.

As I said: 5e combines saving throws to resist effects with the 4e duration mechanic...

 

[EzekielRaiden]

As I said: 5e combines saving throws to resist effects with the 4e duration mechanic...

I strongly disagree with this assertion, particularly because saving throws are not a 50/50, and thus their "duration mechanic" effect is wildly different. But okay.