Something Awful leak.

[Janaxstrus]

Eh, not really. 4e refined the core d20 mechanics some, but 3e had 'defenses', and in general they worked OK. It had some issues, mainly the math was so variable overall that you could easily end up with a non-viable save. 4e STILL hasn't really fixed that. 5e could help fix that by sticking with the existing design and using its flatter curve that doesn't include attack and defense progression as a built-in. That would actually pretty much give you a solid setup. Your wizard's FORT would still be below par and your fighters REF or WILL might be bad, but with 10+(best of two) ability mod the variation is pretty much in the range of 9 to 16 for NADs. If stat bumps don't exist and you don't have more than a total +1 you can possibly get from race or class then it really would work very well.

What is frustrating is that there's a perfectly good solution, and one that AFAIK 99% of traditionalists don't seem to have a problem with, that already exists. But no no! We can't have anything recognizably carried over from 4e, that's ANATHEMA!

I know you are trying to be sarcastic, but I agree with what you said, in a non-sarcastic manner.

 

[hamstertamer]

So far, the Saving throws sound good to me.

d20 + Ability bonus vs. Special Attack's DC (Very easy)

So Imagine it will be like this for an Elf to resist a Charm.

d20 + Ability bonus (Cha or Wis) + 2 (Enchantment Resistance) vs. 10 + 1 (1st level Charm spell) + Caster's Ability bonus.

 

[Greg K]

Your wizard's FORT would still be below par and your fighters REF or WILL might be bad, but with 10+(best of two) ability mod the variation is pretty much in the range of 9 to 16 for NADs. If stat bumps don't exist and you don't have more than a total +1 you can possibly get from race or class then it really would work very well.

What is frustrating is that there's a perfectly good solution, and one that AFAIK 99% of traditionalists don't seem to have a problem with, that already exists. But no no! We can't have anything recognizably carried over from 4e, that's ANATHEMA!

There are several things that I would not mind being carried over from 4e including:
Removing level drain
Removing 3e XP costs
Balancing casters and non casters across levels
Disease track
Removing the non-biological (ok, 4e didn't do this completely, but close) and making them feats
Giving martial characters cool things to do (but I would prefer going with a Book of Iron Might approach)
Rangers as non-casters
At wills for spellcasters
Magic Missile requiring a hit roll
Backgrounds and themes
Feywild.

Choose between two ability mods for a save bonus without requiring a feat or via a spell, however, is something that I hope is not on my list. It just encourages dump stats, in my opinion.

 

[GreyICE]

Dump stats are much fairer than expecting a player to keep 6 stats high, and punishing them if they don't, especially when the system makes it mechanically impossible to keep 6 stats high.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Dump stats are much fairer than expecting a player to keep 6 stats high, and punishing them if they don't, especially when the system makes it mechanically impossible to keep 6 stats high.

"Punishing the rogue by attacking with undead is unfair if he can't sneak attack them"
"Attacking the monk with things with DR is unfair if he can't bypass it"
"Attacking the wizard with golems isn't fair if he can't bypass SR"

Checks and balances. It's a party after all. Just because the wizard will fail his checks semi-regularly against things that target a strength type save isn't unfair. It's the nature of the wizard.

No different than through out the history of D&D when certain classes were weak vs certain enemies or saves. It's not a punishment, it's a reality of playing a certain class, they have always had a weakness to certain things.

 

[GreyICE]

Uh, no.

The rogue can't sneak attack, well there goes all his damage.
The monk can't bypass DR, well there goes all his anything. Again (monks were useless)
The Wizard can't bypass SR, well he can wall of force the thing, buff whoever he wants to make it easy, create blades of force he can use to attack it, he did take his feats to make it easier to bypass SR, right? If not, well, there's quite a few spells that don't care about SR (hello Force damage). Hell if he really wants he can just summon a whole ton of monsters to beat the golem to pieces with physical attacks, because hell, he's a wizard, why should he care about SR?

The history of D&D is a bunch of challenges for non-spellcasters that spellcasters don't care about. 4E was the first edition that said 'a challenge should be challenging for every class' and did it.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Uh, no.

The rogue can't sneak attack, well there goes all his damage.
The monk can't bypass DR, well there goes all his anything. Again (monks were useless)
The Wizard can't bypass SR, well he can wall of force the thing, buff whoever he wants to make it easy, create blades of force he can use to attack it, he did take his feats to make it easier to bypass SR, right? If not, well, there's quite a few spells that don't care about SR (hello Force damage). Hell if he really wants he can just summon a whole ton of monsters to beat the golem to pieces with physical attacks, because hell, he's a wizard, why should he care about SR?

The history of D&D is a bunch of challenges for non-spellcasters that spellcasters don't care about. 4E was the first edition that said 'a challenge should be challenging for every class' and did it.

What 4e, the system going away after not even 4 years of being in print, did to balance spell casters and non-spellcasters has nothing to do with "punishing" classes for having certain stats being low.

Just because some people took the time to min-max their wizard to the gills doesn't change the fact that for a majority of players who didn't scour the optimatization boards, a golem with SR-ALL was a big challenge.

Either way, having a low stats should be a detriment. Just like having a high stat is a advantage.

 

[Saagael]

Either way, having a low stats should be a detriment. Just like having a high stat is a advantage.

Except that a save or die effect that targets a character's dump stat means that character is pretty much hosed. A high ability score, even a maximized one, for a character will most likely not equate to an equally hosed opponent. So you end up with a moderate advantage in one area for a completely detrimental flaw in another.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Except that a save or die effect that targets a character's dump stat means that character is pretty much hosed. A high ability score, even a maximized one, for a character will most likely not equate to an equally hosed opponent. More like a moderate advantage in one area for a completely detrimental flaw in another.

And? Targetting a monster with a vulnerability to fire with a scorching ray is going to hose them. Why should PCs not have to work around their flaws?

Considering they have made mention of 2 step save-or-die effects also involving hit point threshholds, it won't likely end up being the apocalypse you seem to think.

 

[Greg K]

Dump stats are much fairer than expecting a player to keep 6 stats high, and punishing them if they don't, especially when the system makes it mechanically impossible to keep 6 stats high.

Disagree, but then I never agreed with those complaining about MAD.