• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Saving Throws: What Should Become of Them?

That sound like a power problem, not a save problem.

No disagreement here. A menu of hundreds of powers (and magic items---essentially powers in themselves) to choose from tends to foster a char-op mindset that makes saves simple to overcome.

Let's just say I would be pleasantly surprised if 5e wasn't yet another 'pick the best power/level' arms race.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't know... maybe a simple Saving Throw statistic. Or maybe have the character roll a 6 sided dice and if they get a 1-3 they save, 4-6 they fail.

foolish_mortals
 


No disagreement here. A menu of hundreds of powers (and magic items---essentially powers in themselves) to choose from tends to foster a char-op mindset that makes saves simple to overcome.

Let's just say I would be pleasantly surprised if 5e wasn't yet another 'pick the best power/level' arms race.

I think that's a given.
 

This and using the mutants and masterminds defenses/saves paradigmin, like DEX 18 = ref defense 14 and +4 ref saves...

I just think that the AC shouldn't be a defense like this, maybe armor = damage resistence?

I posted this in another thread, but I'll repost it hear (it feels more appropriate).

One of the things that always comes up when i introduce new players is there understanding of saves. What ability goes into what save is always a question of contention. I felt 4e started on a great path with this.

I like the idea of save defences. So what if, every ability had a related defense. I doodled this in the meeting
STR = Physical Defense/Armor Class
DEX = Reflex Defense
CON = Fortitude Defense
INT = Awareness Defense
WIS = Will Defense
CHA = Magic/Soul Defense

Whenever you make a magic attack and you beat the defense the spell indicates and Magic/Soul Defense, another effect takes place (or the full effect of the spell). Else its half the spell or another effect.

With this, you could eliminate spell inconsitency and having some spells save for half and others not.
 

My thoughts on saves. I like the (save ends) mechanic, but feel it's too simplistic.
  • Tie saves to ability scores. This makes you better at some types of saves than others. So a dominate spell might have you make WIS saves, a immobilize might be STR saves, and so on.
  • Have three levels of save: acute, regular, minor. An acute requires three successful saves, a regular two, and a minor one.
  • A high level spell is likely to cause an acute effect, a low level spell a minor effect. But not always.
 

I hate saving throws in all varieties. What they basically say is "something horrible is happening, but you can roll a die to stop it maybe". Use the 4e defences system or something similar to keep the "fort/reflex/will" aspect that is ingrained in D&D, but let's kill all the "skip your turn" mechanics. Just do away with all that nonsense. Stun, Paralysis, Immobilized, Stone Form - I loathe them all, for monsters or PCs. End the tyranny of "skip your turn"!

If we have to have those effects, I would vote for either making sure combat (and rounds) are fast so that skipping your turn isn't as much boredom, or else have sort of limited reserve to shake those effects off - burn part of your hp to resist the paralysis, if you don't have enough hp to resist, you're dead/unconscious. Dead/unconscious is the only "skip your turn" scenario that doesn't make me want to bang my head into the wall repeatedly.
 

I prefer Fort/Reflex/Will as saves because it highlights the character's strengths and weaknesses. I also prefer the difficulty of saves to depend on the attacker, in symmetry with attacks. Basically the 3.5 system, except that the DCs usually depend on the attacker's bonus, not the spell/effect level per se. It must be admitted that the 4e system is simpler, though, and I can see why some people would prefer that.

I wouldn't mind having a save for every ability score, as long as there weren't huge disparities in what is targeted. That can be an issue even with 3 saves, and it is harder to fix with 6. That said, ability scores that don't matter should die its death in 5e.

I think a dial that might work for save or die effects is as follows. Define such effects in a method similar to 4e. The template I would use it that such effects take a certain number of rounds to complete. In most cases there would be at least two conditions: a lesser one which keeps the character in the action, and the terminal one which removes the character from the combat entirely, whether it kills them or not. A progression from start to end is also fine. The effect is ended if the character succeeds on a single save vs. that effect before the terminal condition. (More than one save required is also compatible with this idea, I just think it gets a little out-of-hand.) Note that since the progression is determined by rounds, and not the result of individual saves, we don't have any wonkiness where a player might actually die faster by being granted extra saves which he fails. To turn the save-or-die dial, you merely start the effect at a particular round.

The Medusa (following 4e) might look like:
Round 1 - Slowed
Round 2 - Immobilized
Round 3 - Petrified

With the save-or-die dial at 1 you start with slowed, and as long as you make a single save before you're petrified all is well.

With the dial at 2 you start immobilized and pretty much have 1 round to save yourself.

With the dial at 3, you have classic save-or-die, except the attacker rolled rather than the player. (This is a big reason why I prefer symmetry between saves and attacks, especially if using this complexity dial.)

This also works if you want to screw the player up front, but not necessarily permanently. An alternate version of the medusa could very well be
1 - Petrified (or mental actions only?)
2 - as above
3 - Petrified (permanent)

The player may or may not be able to make saves on his own, but perhaps his essence is sufficiently present for others to help him do so. Or give the wizard time to dispel the effect and so on. The point is, it is very flexible for these kinds of attacks.

In addition, for effects that are bad but not quite to save-or-die levels, one might make 2 rounds versions. As long as all monsters adhere to some standards (like "instant-death" effects take no fewer than 3 rounds), the game runs smoothly on all these settings. Another mechanical restriction is that the effects of later rounds can only depend on state, not choices or consequences specific to an earlier round of effects, as these may not have actually occurred for some settings of the dial.

I could also see "half-dials" for those who mostly want one thing but don't mind the occasional exception. Basically, if the attack crits the effect is harsher than normal. Either skipping a round or increasing the save DC come to mind. This could also be built into individual attacks, of course, or the DM could adjust the dial for a single boss. The important thing is the DM will always know what he or she is getting.

As an aside, if effects typically progress on the defender's initiative (4e) rather than the attacker's initiative (3e) you might need to twiddle with the precise timings, but the basic idea is unchanged.

If I were to run a game I'd probably be pretty comfortable with complexity dial 2.5, with harder saves on a crit. And since medusas are scary, maybe they crit on 18-20. :)

Here is an example of how an iconic spell might work:

Power Word Kill
No initial attack roll. Bloodied creatures (or whatever) take -5 on saves.
1 - Moderate psychic damage
2 - Quite a bit of psychic damage
3 - Death (if bloodied), otherwise none.
(In general I think you ignore round 1 entirely if you start on round 2 or 3, so that early damage never occurs. This is cleaner as a rule, easier to perform in play, and avoids the balance issues of piling on multiple rounds worth of stuff while actually giving the target fewer rounds to deal with it. They're already dealing with an even more imminent death, there's no need to rub it in.)

This spell looks pretty scary to me at all dial settings with respect to the amount of swinginess one presumably wants in the game. And with the dial at 3, very evocative of the classic.
 
Last edited:

How about "two Saves end"? I mean, you have to make two saves to end effect.
One round of effect is guaranteed, and simpler(IMO) than "one Save per two rounds".
Can be "three Saves end" or whatever, if you want.
 

I prefer static defenses. It's simple, streamlined, and it also makes "saves" largely independent of class. This last point is incredibly useful in regards to 3e-style multiclassing, which required sometimes elaborate rules due to the saves. I probably would break down "saves" into the six abilities, as it makes all six of your abilities useful and not just three.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top