Static Saving Throws, Random DCs

[AeroDm]

I was talking with a player of mine today and he was talking about his dismay with playing wizards and the lack of dice rolling. We began discussing the idea of having static saving throws (or assuming that all monsters rolled 10) and then randomizing the DC (as per the variant). This idea really intrigued me.

It has a lot of interesting flavor and would make the class a good deal more interesting. Moreover, it would cut down on the number of die rolls for the DM from area of affects and the like.

This also brought up the only problem, at least that we saw. If a wizard rolled a 20, everyone fails. If a wizard rolls a 1, everyone passes. The saving throw mechanic spreads out the potency of spells. However, it also sort of makes sense. If a wizard tosses a fireball accurately it is intuitive that people should fail. If he throws it poorly it is intuitive that they should pass. Flavor wise it seems to work.

Has anyone toyed with this and what are the other implications/horrible horrible oversights of the idea? Thanks.

 

[AeroDm]

I appologise. I forgot I was not in the House Rules forum. Please move. Thanks.

 

[Creamsteak]

Every creature struck by a spell should probably recieve a seperate DC roll, as every creature struck normally would have recieved a seperate Saving Throw.

 

[NewbyDM]

a 20 to set a DC is not a automatic failure for the targets. Same as with 1 not automatic succes.

20 & 1 rules only apply to saves & to hit.

Anyway, i play a psion with the d20 roll to set a dc. And i do see a little drawback. It's always a little shamefull when you try to charm the farmer, and roll a 1 for the DC... the shame

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

Main problem: Not all saving throw results should be known by the player. Letting the player roll can give him insight he would never get if the DM rolled. For example, some creature of the DM's design is immuned to paralysis. The wizard tries to Hold the creature, rolls the "save" and gets a "20". The DM announces that the creature is still moving. Everyone now knows that the creature is probably immune to the effects, whereas if the DM had rolled, the players would probably have assumed that the creature simply made its save.

Also, if you transform a creature's saves into DC's for the wizard, the DC in question should be 11 + Save modifier, not 10.

AR

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Every creature struck by a spell should probably recieve a seperate DC roll, as every creature struck normally would have recieved a seperate Saving Throw.

I agree. Also, the wild swings of luck you could otherwise get are hazardous to the party's health in the long run.

The comment on revealing the power/abilities are a good one. OTOH, this can be seen as a good thing. Along a similar vain, I found there are advantages to playing with a DM who usually rolled the opponents' dice in the open: more attentiveness by players, a clear understanding of "the dice will fall as they may", and the intimidation value of seeing a monster hit you with a low roll on the d20.

 

[Dingleberry]

As a player, I wouldn't like this because it means I could never beat another player's "good" save with a "bad" one of my own. Some of my favorite moments as a player have been watching my low-Wis barbarian succeed at a Will save which the high-Wis cleric blows. By your method, every time my barbarian makes his save, the cleric also will.