D&D 5E Saving throws in 5e

[FitzTheRuke]

Is the issue that there are six saves or is it that only half are used? If all six were used roughly equally would that be okay?

Maybe. But I think the reason that they are NOT used is that it is harder to understand what the difference is (story-wise) between, say, a WIS save, and a CHA save. (And I can only guess why they made things like Illusions into INT (Investigation) checks instead of INT saves)

The three physical abilities' saves are all used, because it's easy to see what they're for (even if STR saves are often interchangeable with STR (athletics) checks).

Of course, they could ALL be ditched for skill checks, with a better skill system, if they wanted to go that way.

 

[tetrasodium]

Is the issue that there are six saves or is it that only half are used? If all six were used roughly equally would that be okay?

IMO both. In the past there was a real level of strategy involved with guessing the weak save for a monster even though targeting it might involve using a less optimal spell or a spell that might even have a lower DC. Without opening the spoiler take a guess what thelowest dump stat save of a troll to target is & name some similar spells that a single caster class has targeting it vrs the next lowest save.

Spoiler: Take the troll as an example

without cracking open the old 3.5MM the troll appears to have had this statblock
23/14/23/6/9/6 for attribs with16/8/8 fort/reflex/will saves
The 5e troll has:
18/13/20/7/9/7 attribs with saves of +4/+1/+5/-2/-1/-2

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/troll.htm

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/troll.htm
Targeting a save with a +16 vrs a +8 is huge even if it means using a less optimal spell. You can probably guess the +4 & +5 or at least narrow down the two stats involved. Targeting a +4/+5 vrs a +1 to -2 not so much & there's no real way to telegraph or guess which save is +1/-1/-2/-1. Even if you could guess or were sure what was what there isn't much you can do to target one save vrs another so instead of a huge 8 point difference it's more like a one or two or maybe three point difference even if you have more than one spell for those saves.

 

[Charlaquin]

One thing I would like to point out which I don't recall seeing is that much of this assumes the most powerful save DCs which keep pace with the PCs. IME many times save DCs fall well below this benchmark, allowing even non-proficient saves to have a decent, if not good, chance to succeed.

For example, in tier 3 your PC might face DC 18 saves, but have a +9 or +10, but their chances jump dramatically when they face a DC 13 or 14, which is still very possible in tier 3.

Now, because PCs only have two save proficiencies normally, the reverse is also an issue. A PC without proficiency might be just +1 or +2 to their save, so against those DC 13 or 14 is not great odds, but against the DC 18 it is much worse!

Yeah, I think having only 2 out of 6 save proficiencies is the main issue. If I recall correctly, in 3.X classes generally had two saves with the good progression and one with the bad progression, and in 4e your NADs always keyed off the better of two scores, and classes usually had one of each pair be at least of secondary importance. So we went from being “good” at 2/3s of the saves to being “bad” at 2/3s of them.

 

[Charlaquin]

Maybe. But I think the reason that they are NOT used is that it is harder to understand what the difference is (story-wise) between, say, a WIS save, and a CHA save. (And I can only guess why they made things like Illusions into INT (Investigation) checks instead of INT saves)

Illusion spells are usually saved against with Wis because it represents your alacrity. After failing the initial save against an illusion, seeing through it is generally an Int (Investigation) check because that represents your deductive reasoning ability. Basically, you can avoid falling for the illusion in the first place by being keen enough to notice something about it that gives away that it’s not real. If you miss that, you have to use your reasoning skills to figure out that it can’t be real.

There is a logic behind what scores are used for what saves, but following that logic requires ignoring the names of the abilities and focusing on how the Using Abilities section describes what they actually do.

The odd one out is Charisma being used to save against forced teleportation/planar transportation. The only reason I can figure out for that is that it didn’t obviously fit under any of the abilities, and Charisma saves were the least-used type of save.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Then don't discuss it rather than telling others they can't discuss it.

Changed my intial post that it is clear that only I won't discuss it. Seems that I used a bad translation. You can do as you please.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Illusion spells are usually saved against with Wis because it represents your alacrity. After failing the initial save against an illusion, seeing through it is generally an Int (Investigation) check because that represents your deductive reasoning ability. Basically, you can avoid falling for the illusion in the first place by being keen enough to notice something about it that gives away that it’s not real. If you miss that, you have to use your reasoning skills to figure out that it can’t be real.

There is a logic behind what scores are used for what saves, but following that logic requires ignoring the names of the abilities and focusing on how the Using Abilities section describes what they actually do.

The odd one out is Charisma being used to save against forced teleportation/planar transportation. The only reason I can figure out for that is that it didn’t obviously fit under any of the abilities, and Charisma saves were the least-used type of save.

Oh, I agree, the way the 5e saves are done is not without any thought or logic. I also understand that symmetry for symmetry's sake is something that seems like a good idea, but often quickly fails in practice (in a "be careful what you wish for" kind of way). Us OCD-types will often force symmetry to our own detriment.

But STILL, I think the way saves and skills interact could (and should) be designed more cleanly, especially now with the gift of hindsight.

 

[Charlaquin]

Oh, I agree, the way the 5e saves are done is not without any thought or logic. I also understand that symmetry for symmetry's sake is something that seems like a good idea, but often quickly fails in practice (in a "be careful what you wish for" kind of way). Us OCD-types will often force symmetry to our own detriment.

But STILL, I think the way saves and skills interact could (and should) be designed more cleanly, especially now with the gift of hindsight.

Indeed. I’ll repeat my preference for NADs to resist the initial effect and saves as a duration mechanic (but with 5e style variable bonuses and DCs). Honestly, you could even eliminate saves and just always use checks for that purpose.

 

[Stalker0]

IMO both. In the past there was a real level of strategy involved with guessing the weak save for a monster even though targeting it might involve using a less optimal spell or a spell that might even have a lower DC.

Eh not really. I think the vast majority of monsters in 3.5 it is pretty easy to guess what their weakest save is, or at least not picking their strongest save. The troll was frankly an easy guess. I think in general the same holds true in 5e, its is relatively easy to guess the weak saves (or at least pretty weak save) on most monsters.

I appreciated 5e's attempt to make all of the stats more relevant through saving throws, but at the end of the day they really didn't put enough effort to make it work. If all 6 saves were relatively balanced, than that's fine, but without that support, its probably better to go back to the 3. You might do what 4e did and average certain stats together to get saves (strength and con for fort as an example).

 

[tetrasodium]

Eh not really. I think the vast majority of monsters in 3.5 it is pretty easy to guess what their weakest save is, or at least not picking their strongest save. The troll was frankly an easy guess. I think in general the same holds true in 5e, its is relatively easy to guess the weak saves (or at least pretty weak save) on most monsters.

I appreciated 5e's attempt to make all of the stats more relevant through saving throws, but at the end of the day they really didn't put enough effort to make it work. If all 6 saves were relatively balanced, than that's fine, but without that support, its probably better to go back to the 3. You might do what 4e did and average certain stats together to get saves (strength and con for fort as an example).

Yea, the fact that a player could guess with confidence in the vast majority of cases for a big payoff is what made it work. In 5e the guess is often little more than horseshoes & rarely meaningful even if you guess right.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

Save each round to end the effect is not wildly different from 50/50 each round to end the effect. Different yes, wildly different no.