D&D 5E Three Saves

[Yaarel]

I'll buy Strength in Reflex.

For me, pointing out the agile athletic aspects of Strength is probably the most important.

This means there is a go-to ability to represent the agile ‘athlete’. This athlete jumps, climbs, somersaults, and tumbles. In order to be an ‘acrobat’, a person has to easily lift ones own bodyweight, to pull oneself up, push oneself up, swing from vine-to-vine, catch oneself if falling, spring up from prone, and so on. A gymnast must have high Strength. Running fast and brawling hand-to-hand, wrestling, flipping, and so on, are also part of the bodys *agility* of Strength.

While Strength is useful to the Fighter class in combat, this increased awareness of its use in agility, can hopefully make it more useful out of combat. It is the go-to ability to physically interact with the environment, like climbing walls, and doing jackass stunts.



Moreover, the suggestion to use Strength for Armor Class, means that high-Strength combatants can afford to wear Light and Medium armors. We would see more heroes in Medieval chain shirts, rather than in Renaissance plate suits. This is good for medievalesque setting protection.

The armor caps on Dex AC would also apply on Str AC, for the same reason, restricting ‘Reflex’ agility. This means, top-percentile Strength heroes would be swimming in their chain tunics. While the average-Strength heroes who get conscripted into war, bulk up inside heavier armors. This phenomenon is true to life.

It might work well in Fortitude as well though. Referencing 1e and Gygax just seems to be a handwavy way of justifying Charisma here rather than Will (portraying Charisma as force of personality, sense of self, and confidence). It's a very odd fit.

Im less sure that Strength makes sense for the Fortitude save. Strength implies physical activity, and this promotes general health. But there is no real correlation between exceptional Strength and exceptional health. Longevity, combating diseases, even persevering against exhaustion, have less to do with Strength. Moreover, Constitution is precisely responsible for these aspects of physical stamina.

At first the Constitution-Charisma seems like an odd couple. But quantifying the physical aspects and the nonphysical aspects of survival, is useful. There is an ability to represent endurance and and ability to represent fate. In addition to the magical sense, the mental sense of the raw will to live, has Charisma continue some of the 4e uses of Charisma. The Fortitude (Con-Cha) save would also versus psychic damage.

The Constitution-Charisma coupling would make sense if we see Charisma having more use in hit points. Charisma quantifies the nonphysical aspects of survival. I would like to see certain classes be able to use Charisma for their hit points.

For example, my impression of the Warlock concept is, the Warlock doesnt look tough, but is supernaturally tough, and hard to kill. Similarly, the frightful Hag, the Bogie, and so on. Their Charisma connects with the spookier supernatural influences, whether devilish or fey. In the case, of the Warlock, may allow them to substitute their Charisma instead of Constitution, when determining class hit points.

In the case of the Paladin, this knight survives by the providence of Divine fate, and persists beyond what is naturally possible. In this case, I would like to see the Paladin class use both the physical toughness of Constitution and the supernatural toughness of Charisma for exceptional survivability. For similar reasons but with different flavor, the Berserker Barbarian is a good candidate to benefit from both Constitution and Charisma.

In sum, I am beginning to see the odd couple Constitution and Charisma as a feature, not a bug.

Intelligence kinda fits...

I find it impossible to separate the ‘search’ of Intelligence and the ‘perception’ of Wisdom. I get the difference, but implementing such a difference in game, is vague at best. Combining them together is, for me, a relief.

Both are equally responsible for powers of observation, at least as far as reactive saves go, both help. When relevant for a proactive action, the difference between noticing versus interpreting, can be made clear enough when translating what a player wants the hero to do into game mechanics.

It might help to call the Intelligence-Wisdom save the ‘Perception’ save, with the understanding that it can ‘see thru charms and fears, see thru illusions, and detect hiding’. Observational skills generally. By adding Intelligence-Wisdom together, the Human gains an edge over animals that have high Wisdom but low Intelligence, which feels more accurate.

The problem with this schema, like in 4e, was that you have two physical saves for three stats and one mental save for three stats. So there always needs to be a mental stat in a physical save. Which is awkward. And there's the effort for forced synergy to have each stat in one save, and each save have two possible ability scores. Which matches, but doesn't always make sense. Symmetry might not be the best way.

Brainstorming. If each ability corresponds to two saves, then the correlations might look something like the following:

Str ≈ Reflex, Fortitude
Dex ≈ Reflex, Perception
Con ≈ Fortitude, Will
Int ≈ Reflex, Perception
Wis ≈ Perception, Will
Cha ≈ Fortitude, Will


Looking at it from the other direction, is the following:

Reflex ≈ Str, Dex, Int
Fortitude ≈ Str, Con, Cha
Will ≈ Con, Wis, Cha
Perception ≈ Dex, Int, Wis

There's also no strong reason to have three saves beyond "that's how 3e/4e did it". You could have four with a floating option in each (again, risking errors), adding another mental save (Personality? Sense of self).

In 3e, the innovation of 3e saving throws is part of a systemization of 2e with its myriad of different ways to adjudicate challenges.

In 4e, the innovation of having each save benefit from two abilities, was part of an effort to balance the values of the abilities. Because putting a high score in Intelligence has the same opportunity cost as putting a high score in Dexterity, and because the abilities are the fundament of all mechanical balance, it is problematic if subpar abilities exist.

In 5e, the main difficulty of adding abilities is the constraints of bounded accuracy. Adding the abilities is important to avoid ‘dumping’ abilities without consequence. But has to be thought-thru cautiously.



For me, the discussion of these couplings in light of earlier D&D editions, is fruitful because it helps clarify the differences between the abilities more sharply.

Reflex (Str-Dex): It is valuable to me to utilize better the agile aspects of Strength, especially for athletic gymnastic stunts that ‘aim’ bodyweight. The difference between the macro kinesthetic agility of the body (Strength) versus the micro careful precision of the body (Dexterity), mostly the hand, becomes clear and useful.

Fortitude (Con-Cha): The need to quantify nonphysical survivability, with the use of Charisma in related contexts of ‘luck’, ‘innate magic’, and the ‘will’ to survive, is useful.

Will/Perception (Int-Wis): It is difficult to separate Intelligence and Wisdom, and to combine them in contexts where both seem relevant, is satisfying.



Even if continuing with six ability saves, the discussion of these couplings is useful to better understand when to which ability. Coupling them into three saves also has system benefits of more ability balance and gameplay conveniences of simplifying adjudication into three general kinds of threats.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I for one like the 6 saves. I know guys who have PCs with ACs of 25+, Str/Con saves of +9 or better and buckets of HP that also rock cloaks of magic resistance. These guys are hard enough to take down without shrinking their weakness to Wisdom, Charisma and Intelligence saves. There should never be a non-deity in the game that doesn't have a significant vulnerability to something, IMHO.

 

[Yaarel]

The problem with this, apart from unpicking 5e into an older iteration of some sort, is that logically Dex becomes irrelevant for everything other than manual tasks that require skilful fingers, which makes it somewhat useless unless you're a bard (for playing an instrument), a thief (for thiefy things), or possibly a wizard (for somatic components).

Dexterity remains relevant - and powerful. It is the go-to ability for ranged combat. Ranged combat is powerful for its own reasons, including ‘kiting’ with attacks from an unattackable position, combating flying threats, covering a battlefield, and so on. Shooting an arrow has nothing to do with athletic agility, and everything to do with micro precision.

A Fighter who wants to be good at archery, must improve Dexterity.

Moreover, even in melee combat, Dexterity weapons like the rapier are highly effective. The rapier fencer actually plants the unused hand out of the way, and maintains a stiff upright posture while hopping back-and-forth, in order to actually prevent agility. The focus is mainly the small precise flicks of the wrist. The rapier blade is a remarkable innovation, with steal that is strong enough to be very long and very light, allowing manual Dexterity to exercise effective reach.

Dexterity is also useful for certain kinds of stunts, such as the focused, sensitive, precise movements, while frozenly walking a tightrope.

Meanwhile Dexterity in the sense of small effective movements, remains relevant for Reflex saves.

Besides, Dexterity is the go-to ability for any kind of manual Dexterity in item creation and musical performance.

I agree, Dexterity can have more prominence in magical rituals that rely on precise movements and measurements, such as Alchemy.

For a Rogue, lockpicking, pocketpicking, and so on, are Dexterity stunts of precision.

The Dexterity ability as small sensitive movements is powerful in gaming applications.

You'd need a whole new stat - Agility - to accurately respresent the difference between what the word dexterity actually means and what D&D use it for.

Use the Strength ability for agility, including the body coordination of a gymnast who can jump, handspring bodyweight easily, tumble, and so on.


But a gymnast is not necessarily a sharpshooter.

 

[Yaarel]

I actually felt that intelligence being used for reflexes was a good fit in 4e while Charisma worked well as the second stat for will defence. I'm sure I've read other games where intelligence was related to reaction time.

My main difficulty with how 4e links Intelligence to Reflex, is if so, Wisdom should link to Reflex equally well. How could ‘sensory perception’ be disconnected from rapid response?

Alternatively, Reflex is a coordinated physical response, and Intelligence-Wisdom are both separate and responsible for conscious observation (noticing stimuli and understanding them correctly), and the DM decides which makes more sense when.

The main difference between Reflex and Perception is, with Reflex, one is doing actions even before one knows what one is doing. For example, when falling of a mountain, one is ‘running’ down rocks and catching passing branches. Only afterward is there even a recognition of what just happened.

For Reflex, both Strength and Dexterity, represent ‘muscle memory’, macro and micro, respectively.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Yaarel]

But then there are those who are very strong without being agile at all.

Those who are strong are also agile, with regard to their whole body. A person makes Strength role to aim a sword, to jump a specific distance, and so on.

These body movements enjoy hand-eye coordination, and there is no penalty to Strength attacks and checks.

Fine motor skills for small, focused, sensitive precision, is a different kind of coordination.

And there are those who are agile (dextrous) without being strong.

As far as I can tell, there is no such thing as a person who is ‘agile’ without being strong.

Such a person, cannot jump, cannot lift their own bodyweight, cannot ‘spring’, and are relatively immobile.

As far as mobility goes, what can a weak but dexterous person do? Maybe squeeze themselves into box as a contortionist? Let themselves fall onto cart full of hay? Walk slowly and immobily across a tightrope or building ledge?

I wouldnt describe the above stunts as ‘agile’.

But leaping up a building by bounding from wall to wall, is more ‘agile’, and is a Strength check.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Yaarel]

While I have no particular objection to your system for your table, I wouldn't use it. I have two small points to make.

The first is in reference to the quoted material. One could argue that dexterity (manual dexterity) should be decoupled from agility, but that doesn't mean that agility and strength are the same. A gymnast is both agile (dextrous) and strong (albeit more agile than strong). But then there are those who are very strong without being agile at all. And there are those who are agile (dextrous) without being strong. I don't see your system as being an improvement.

Next is your reference to 1e as a base. The 1e saves varied by class and level- certain classes were "better" at some saves than others, and became better as they became more powerful. Other than, for example, the wisdom save v. spells of a will power nature (charm, etc.), there was no tie-in to abilities. When D&D went to an ability-score check for saving throws, it went to a different system. Not to mention the difference in being able to improve your ability scores (again, saves improved with level, now you improve abilities - previously, it was very difficult to improve abilities, and was done primarily through magic items that conferred bonuses while using the items, such as girdles of giant strength or ioun stones).

1e uses Wisdom as a kind of Will save: On the Wisdom table, ‘the adjustment [to a saving throw] applies only to mental attack forms involving will force, i.e. beguiling, charming, fear, hypnosis, illusion, magic jarring, mass charming, phantasmal forces, possession, rulership, suggestion, telepathic attack, etc.’

Here, coupling Intelligence-Wisdom for the Will save, applies to the same effects in 5e as they did in 1e.

In 1e, Constitution applied to a kind of Fortitude save, versus ‘system shock’ and so on. With regard to survivability, nonphysical aspects of luck, magic, and will, were explicit in 1e, and later by 3e and 4e, Charisma came to represent these aspects.

The 1e ‘saving throw’ versus ‘Poison, Paralysis, and Death Magic’ is also a kind of Fortitude save.

The 1e Dexterity defense adjustment could also apply ‘dodging’ spells, when making saving throws versus Lightning, Fireball, and so on.

When 3e systematized and simplified the ad-hoc complexity of 1e and 2e, the reduction of saves to three (Reflex, Fortitude, and Will) was a reasonable way to represent much of the material in the earlier editions.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Yaarel]

There are many agile people who are not "strong."

Give an example, of nonmuscular agility.

Even agility in the sense of running fast, requires strong muscles.

This is before getting into the slightly contentious issue of gender differences (why is "lifting [your] own bodyweight" the necessary precursor?). Asserting that gymnasts and acrobats are the only agile people is a category error.*

With regard to Human gender, reallife males have an edge in body agility, including gymnastic and tumbling. This corresponds to D&D Strength.

Oppositely, females have an edge in fine motor skills. This corresponds to D&D Dexterity.

I wouldnt implement this gender tendency in D&D mechanics, because the heroes themselves are statistical outliers.

Moreover, you haven't teased out the obvious issue of the incredibly strong people who are not agile, of which the evidence is quite ample.

A person can be very strong and not good at typing. This is the difference between Strength and Dexterity.

Something like dancing skills, depend on Strength, Dexterity, and Charisma, depending on the nature of the dance. In general, athletes tend to do better at dancing.

If you are talking examples where people are physically challenged, by neurological conditions that affect cognition or the nervous system, then in D&D, these kinds of penalties to ability checks would be represented by a Disease, or perhaps a flaw.



Really, weightlifting has less to with the Strength ability, and more to do with the Athletic skill. The same person with the same aptitude for Strength, may or may not be able to lift a certain amount of weight depending on whether they have been working out recently or not. An athlete may or may not be bodybuilder. As long as they are at least strong enough to locomote their own bodyweight, they can do so proficiently.

To be bodily agile or manually precise, are unrelated skills.