D&D 5E Spell DC vs Magic User Attack Roll

[Starfox]

My thinking is that, if you want to touch someone and they don't want you to touch them, you have to roll to resolve that conflict. If the conflict is resolved such that you touch them, then they take the shock. I don't want to have too many rolls so I don't want to have a save here.

I agree, in 90% of all cases, one roll should suffice to resolve a situation. If that is a Int vs Fort (4E) or melee touch attack (3E) doesn't matter so much. But in any one particular game, it is good if similar situations are resolved similarly - if Shocking Grasp is one way, Acid Touch and Fire Slap ought to be similar.

Th 3E/Pathfinder there are a few attacks that are so dire that they require bot a touch attack and allow a save - but this mechanism should be rare, generally with "save or suck" type effects. The whole line of Cause Wounds spells having this in 3E is excessive.

The opposite approach is also possible, that is having something of a "save" on every attack, from fireball to a dagger thrust. In Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (ed 1 and 2), you have a Strength vs. Toughness roll on every attack. Because it is uniform for all attacks, the system doesn't bog down in complexity, even if the extra roll take some time to execute. This also has the advantage of making big opponents easy to hit, but hard to damage - a situation 3E dooesn't really handle well - look at higher-level monsters and their absurd natural armor levels.

Whatever you choose, it is good if it is consistent across the rules - similar situations should be resolved in similar ways.