D&D 5E Weak Saving Throws

[I'm A Banana]

The second point is the reason the fighter analogy doesn't really work. The fighter does hit more often as levels get higher...but the consequences of those hits change very little. In fact, damage as compared to a percentage of the characters health goes down. The fighter has to hit with more attacks in order to do the same amount of damage.

Which is why the fighter gets more attacks, right?

The problem at high levels is its a double whammy....the spellcaster hits you more easily AND there effects are even stronger. If the spell effects didn't increase in severity there wouldn't really be a problem. But because they do, that is the concern.

What spell effect is so severe that it is not permissible for a wizard at the height of their power to almost always succeed at casting it against a target who is literally as weak to it as the game will allow?

Should Meteor Swarm miss that guy with an 8 DEX? Does it deal too much damage for them to not hit that guy pretty much every time? Is Imprisonment something you want that 8 WIS doofus to be able to resist more often than pure luck will allow? What happens if you let those spells take effect against the most susceptible of characters? What problem does it actually cause in play if those hit?

That said, we are concerned about the poor fighter but the effect doesn't end there. For example, many high level wizards will take a power word Stun at full hp and still be affected with no save.

If that wizard has an 8 CON and doesn't make friends with anyone who can buff that, then that wizard is asking to be stunned for an encounter. Much like the 8 WIS Fighter is asking to be imprisoned.

I think it's OK to have weaknesses and be susceptible to things. It's fine to have to pay attention to areas where you're likely to be hosed. It's acceptable to ask players who are afraid of having their weaknesses exploited to put resources into shoring up those weaknesses when they go up against high-level threats if they do not want to get slapped around by the Lich (or whatever). I don't think that all characters need a strict 40-60% chance to resist every effect in the game. It's fine to have a little binary swing in the high levels.

I mean, the party with that 8 WIS fighter also has a 9th-level dispel magic that can end that imprisonment in a round. The party with that 8 CON wizard also has a Holy Aura. the party with that 8 DEX meteor-bait also has a Mass Heal and a True Resurrection. When you're theorycrafting in a a void where one-on-one combats are all you're looking at, it's easy to forget that falling prey to a spell isn't the worst thing in the world, and, in fact, it's fairly easily fixable.

 

[Stalker0]

Most of the damage is done by level 9. By 9th level, proficiency bonus goes to +4 so the effect is already growing noticeably -- it's just not as bad as it will get by 17th level.

Let's assume you your playing a Fighter (because they get the most attribute bumps), that only 3 stats matter for saving throws despite (going by what the rules do as opposed to what the text says), and you start with 16, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10 (better than the base point buy + Human ).

STR 16, DEX 14, CON 14, WIS 14, INT 10, CHA 10.

At level 1 Saving throw DCs are typically 13 and your saves are Con +4 (60%), Dex +2 (50%), Wis +2 (50%) (total 160%)

At level 4 you bump Con to 16. Now your typical saving throw DCs rise to 14 (opponents bump offense) and your saves are Con + 5 (60%), Dex + 2 (45%), Wis + 2 (45%) (total 150%)

How did the spellcaster bump his offense so frequently?

For example, between levels 1-9, a wizard gets 2 ability bumps...so could raise his DC +2. Your text suggests that he is getting more ability bumps than this.

 

[Essenti]

Honestly, I love the flatter math for saving throws. Spellcasting DC appears to be where the 5e system looks a bit awkward. Spell DC shouldn't use the proficiency bonus at all. Spellcasting already has a nifty built in feature that determines the potency of a spell--the level of the spell slot.

---

Spell DC Houserule: Spell DC = 10 + Ability mod + (Spell Slot / 2)

---

This works out to the exact same spell DC minimums and maximums, but you can only achieve the maximum by using an 8th or 9th-level slot. Save or suck spells should only be truly nasty when cast from high level slots, and those nasty high level spell slots are a limited resource.

 

[pemerton]

What spell effect is so severe that it is not permissible for a wizard at the height of their power to almost always succeed at casting it against a target who is literally as weak to it as the game will allow?

Should Meteor Swarm miss that guy with an 8 DEX?

Two comments.

First, I haven't seen anyone in this thread express concerns about damage spells. Furthermore, they are very easy to balance against expected save chances: just adjust the damage dice so that expected damage per slot of a given level remains the same as save chances go up or down.

The issue, is rather, with save or suck. Dominate and Hold are the two stand outs, although Otto's also deserves an honourable mention.

Second, why should the fighter be "literally as weak to it as the game will allow"? It is that narrative for the fighter that I, at least, am critical of. I don't think it's consistent with the tradition of the game, I don't think it fits with the genre literature, and I don't think it adds anything to the game.

 

[Sadrik]

Honestly, I love the flatter math for saving throws. Spellcasting DC appears to be where the 5e system looks a bit awkward. Spell DC shouldn't use the proficiency bonus at all. Spellcasting already has a nifty built in feature that determines the potency of a spell--the level of the spell slot.

---

Spell DC Houserule: Spell DC = 10 + Ability mod + (Spell Slot / 2)

---

This works out to the exact same spell DC minimums and maximums, but you can only achieve the maximum by using an 8th or 9th-level slot. Save or suck spells should only be truly nasty when cast from high level slots, and those nasty high level spell slots are a limited resource.

I never understood this idea that the higher level spell should be more powerful in effect and more powerful in its ability to penetrate defenses.

As I suggested early in this thread there are two ways it can be handled. I am uncertain which is better.
1. Everyone has proficiency in every save.
2. Get rid of the implement bonus and just go with 10+STAT for DC, and everyone loses save proficiencies.

I see both as being valid options. I don't really like implements making spells more mathematically difficult to resist. So I will likely go with option 2.

Edit another possible solution came to me. Though this does not fix the math flaw. It may however be easier to pick up a new skill than a new save proficiency.

Skills as saves:
STR Athletics
DEX Acrobatics
CON Endurance*
INT Investigation
WIS Will*
CHA Insight**

*New Skill
**Moved from Wis

Edit2: Came up with another simple solution. Casters do not add their stat to their DC. DC calculation becomes 10 + Proficiency (Range of 12 to 16). This would harken back to 1e/2e. It is the simplest and perhaps best solution. If you wanted to penalize for not having an implement then you could add a -2 without the implement.

 

[Essenti]

I never understood this idea that the higher level spell should be more powerful in effect and more powerful in its ability to penetrate defenses.

I really can't wrap my head around this statement... How is a 3rd level spell not more powerful than a 1st level spell? Why have spell levels at all then?

 

[Obryn]

I really can't wrap my head around this statement... How is a 3rd level spell not more powerful than a 1st level spell? Why have spell levels at all then?

It's already more powerful in effect.

Should it also be harder to resist as well? Or is it enough that it's simply worse when you fail that save?

 

[Thaumaturge]

When you're theorycrafting in a void where one-on-one combats are all you're looking at, it's easy to forget that falling prey to a spell isn't the worst thing in the world, and, in fact, it's fairly easily fixable.

I very much agree. Weak saves need to be seen in play.

[High level spells are] already more powerful in effect.

Should [they] also be harder to resist as well? Or is it enough that [high level spells are] simply worse when you fail that save?

After many pages, I think Obryn found the core of the discussion, and why there's so much disagreement here.

Two reasonable people who want to pretend to be elves can answer these questions differently. Different answers have cascading effects on the system for elf-pretending.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Nagol]

How did the spellcaster bump his offense so frequently?

For example, between levels 1-9, a wizard gets 2 ability bumps...so could raise his DC +2. Your text suggests that he is getting more ability bumps than this.

Because I made a mistake. The sixth level bump actually at 8th. I assume the caster starts ~16 and spends their first 2bumps to move to 20. In the end it simply shifts when the DC changes.

 

[TwoSix]

After many pages, I think Obryn found the core of the discussion, and why there's so much disagreement here.

Two reasonable people who want to pretend to be elves can answer these questions differently. Different answers have cascading effects on the system for elf-pretending.

Hopefully this is one of the places where modularity is addressed in the DMG.