Single or Multiple Saves?

[KarinsDad]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

An increased save would optimally give the same probability of making the save or not, though give a greater variance. It's a rather easy process to calculate this. Basically you calculate the chance of making all the saves, and thereafter increase the DC accordingly. If you have a calculator at hand, this would be easy to do.

Yes, but let's say we have 3 characters:

one with a 40% chance of saving (+2),
a second with a 55% chance of saving (+5), and
a third with a 80% chance of saving (+10)

So, you have to do separate calculations for each. In this case:

.4^10 = 1 chance in 10,000
.55^10 = 6%
.8^10 = 11%

So, you bump the second guy up from DC 15 to DC 25 (55% to 6%).

You bump the third buy up from DC 15 to DC 29.

Yeah, that will sit well with that player after what you did for the second guy.

"Why again is his DC 25 and mine 29?"

What do you do with the first guy? He will have a 5% chance to save with one roll, regardless of how many enemies unless you throw in a new rule.

And, it's just as fast and easy to tell your players to roll 10 D20s (usually multiples at a time), letting the DM know if you roll 12 or less for the first guy, 9 or less for the second, and 4 or less for the third.

By rolling the dice (which my players would probably roll 5 at a time), you are:

a) more accurate (in all 3 case) and

b) you do not have to figure out that dropping 80% to 11% is about the same as increasing the DC by 14 and that dropping 55% to 6% is about the same as increasing the DC by 10 and

c) you do not have to figure out what to do about the 40% chance save character if he rolls a 20. If you allow it to save, that gives him about the same save chance as a 55% chance save character. How is this fair to the 55% save chance character? and

d) you do not have to repeatedly explain to players 2 and 3 why one has a DC of 25 and the other a DC of 29.

Dice rolls will be faster and easier.

To me it makes more sense,

Probably because you haven't actually done it or thought through the ramifications.

and it would NOT lower the CR because the chance of success is equal.

The chances would be similar in some cases, different in others. But, they would rarely be the same.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

And...two fireballs CAN hit simultaneously

Care to demonstrate? I'm not picking on you, I'm just trying to follow your logic here, that's all.

 

[Uller]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

Care to demonstrate? I'm not picking on you, I'm just trying to follow your logic here, that's all.

Because he's the DM and he says they can...

Seriously...If two characters say something like "On three do X...1...2...3!" Then they do whatever X is at the same time (or close enough) as long as it is some simple task (jumping off of something, swinging a sword, opening a door, etc.) If it is a more complex task that may have a variable time to do (tieing a knot, casting a spell, drinking a potion) then I may require a dex check or the like for them to time it. If it is a very complex task, then I just flat out wouldn't allow it without practice (syncronized body surfing or something ).

The rules are only there to resolve common actions and events. It is very rare that any characters try to time things to happen exactly at the same moment. So there are no rules for it...it doesn't mean that it can't be done.

 

[HEL Pit Fiend]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

And...two fireballs CAN hit simultaneously


Originally posted by kreynolds
Care to demonstrate? I'm not picking on you, I'm just trying to follow your logic here, that's all.

Let me, let me!!!

Time Stop
Fireball
Fireball

BOOM!

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

So there are no rules for it...

Exactly.

...it doesn't mean that it can't be done.

According to the rules, it can't. If it is done, it's a house rule, and that's fine, but he didn't state he was speaking about a house rule.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

Let me, let me!!!

Time Stop
Fireball
Fireball

BOOM!

Very good!!! The one guy that actually managed to pull this off! Consider my hat tipped!

Now, let's see how the other arguments stand up against this...oh...they don't.

This is perfectly legitimate, but the fireballs are still coming from two different sources, and for fairness purposes, and to avoid mucking with the rules, thus maintaining consistency in my games and not confusing my players, it'll be two saves.

 

[-Eä-]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

Very good!!! The one guy that actually managed to pull this off! Consider my hat tipped!

Now, let's see how the other arguments stand up against this...oh...they don't.

This is perfectly legitimate, but the fireballs are still coming from two different sources, and for fairness purposes, and to avoid mucking with the rules, thus maintaining consistency in my games and not confusing my players, it'll be two saves.

You are of course free to do whatever you want (-:

Two wizards with the same initiative independently (or planned) decide to throw a fireball.
Both wizards decide on readying an action to throw whenever that fighter rises his sword etc... If that's not simultaneously, I don't know why? Maybe it's not supported by the rules, as written, I do not know, but I have always done it that way. As long as we are not talking about seconds, I would consider them to be cast simultaneously. x<0,5 second is so in my game.

Uller perfectly demonstrated the situation I was thinking about, and by the way, why do you consider it more fair to throw trwo dice instead of one when the probability of making the adjusted same makes the expected damage exactly the same?

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Single or Multiple Saves?

If that's not simultaneously, I don't know why?

Because initiative doesn't allow it.

Maybe it's not supported by the rules

It's not.

as written

Well, in a rules discussion, the written rules are what matter, not "Here's what I think you should be able to do." rules. Those are called house rules, and there's a thread for them.

I do not know

See previous answers.

but I have always done it that way.

It's cool. But you're using a house rule.

As long as we are not talking about seconds, I would consider them to be cast simultaneously. x<0,5 second is so in my game.

See previous answer.

Uller perfectly demonstrated the situation I was thinking about

Not within the rules, he didn't.

why do you consider it more fair to throw trwo dice instead of one when the probability of making the adjusted same makes the expected damage exactly the same?

I'm going to leave this little part up to KarinsDad. He seems to be handling it well. But, simply put, because it's less problematic. The fewer house rules I have to justify to my players, the better.

 

[KarinsDad]

Actually, there is a rule covering this.

DMG page 9 on adjudicating.

If two casters Ready to cast a spell on the same trigger, then I rule the spells go off simultaneously. As a DM, the DMG encourages me to adjudicate this in a reasonable manner.

I then turn around and have the two casters do an initiative roll off so that I know who goes first in future rounds.


There are house rules because you do not like some aspect of the game and you change it.

And, there are adjudications because the rules do not cover a given situation.

I distinguish between the two because the buy in is different, at least for my games. House rules get published ahead of time and the players agree to play by those rules, just like they agree to play by the rules in the PHB, DMG, etc. We have nixed DM house rules due to dissent from players.

But, adjudications are totally different. They are on the fly decisions that the DM attempts to make in a reasonable manner. The players sometimes discuss these in game, but eventually the DM rules one way or the other and we move on.

Sometimes, adjudications move into the realm of house rules and are published (as per the definition of house rule on page 9 of the DMG), but I consider them to be two unique concepts.

So, my take on the simultaneous discussion is that in some circumstances, it can happen, but as a general rule, it is a turn based system and it will not happen. Hence, the exception when it can occur (such as the Ready Action or the Time Stop) is a DM adjudication and falls under that big umbrella of DM Adjudication Rules.


On a side note, I think the concept of house rule gets pulled out and waved about as a:

"You cannot do that according to the rules"

"Yes I can"

"No you cannot. You're talking about a house rule"

In reality, there are rules that disallow certain things in the rules and in those cases, unless you change the rules with a house rule, you are not allowed to do something.

But, there are rules of omission which are not covered by the normal (non-adjudicating) rules. For example, nowhere in the rules does it state that without magic, that you can walk on water. On the other hand, it doesn't state that you cannot walk on water.

The reason I picked such a ludicrous example is that common sense has to prevail when adjudicating. Otherwise, you get anarchy and the game is not fun (at least for most players).

Hence, saying that you cannot walk on water is NOT a house rule. Rather, it is a reasonable adjudication.

There is a distinct difference, even if two DMs make two different adjudications on the same thing.

 

[kreynolds]

There is a distinct difference, even if two DMs make two different adjudications on the same thing.

Yes, there is a difference. However, when someone says "I can do this, even if the rules say I can't" and you ask "How?" and they say "Simple. I do what I want.", that's not an adjudication. That's a house rule. Adjudications are fine if you can actually back them up.