D&D 5E Weak Saving Throws

[Bluenose]

I like it that way. The rock-paper-scissors style appeals to me, and it's nice to see 5e going a bit further that direction that D&D traditionally has. That said, I can understand it might not be for everyone.

Rock-Paper-Scissors where some people are only given a Rock might not be an great game.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think there are a few things to keep in mind when considering the saving throw issue.

- There aren't really any "save or die" or "save or lose" effects anymore, so the consequences of failing a saving throw at higher levels are nowhere near as harsh as they were in past editions. Most things like finger of death that would cause instant death in the past now just deal damage (and often less damage than the fighter at that level can do). Things like hold person offer a save each turn to break free of the effect, petrification requires 1 minute of concentration, etc. There really aren't any spells in this edition where a single failed saving throw means that you lose.

It'll be interesting to see, later today, if this is true of monsters as well as PC/NPC spells.

- Spellcasters get very few spells per day now compared to older editions, and only one each of 6th-9th level. That means that locking down monsters with powerful spells will be something that players can do far less often now.

Which isn't, I think, the concern. The concern, I believe, if more for player than NPCs, who could have arbitrarily good saves, as they don't have to follow the rules PCs do.

- Many debilitating effects, such as hold person, require casters to concentrate, limiting them to one such effect at a time. This prevents a single caster from locking down an entire group with repeated castings.

This is absolutely true. Of spells. Again, monster abilities remain to be seen.

- The largest difference in saving throws between someone who doesn't have proficiency and someone who does (assuming the same ability score) is 6 points - the same difference there was between good and poor saving throws at 20th level in 3rd edition.

3E (I would argue) had a bad problem here, though, which is, I think, the concern. Further, in 3E, there were less saves to cover.

- Saving throws are not the only way to protect yourself from harmful effects. You can have a poor saving throw and still protect yourself from fireballs with things like resistances, or protect yourself from things like hold person with freedom of movement, for example.

That's always been true, but those things appear to be rarer and harder to access in 5E. As you pointed out, casters have less access to spells than 1/2/3E, and those spells are typically less powerful, often requiring Concentration, which means they cannot be used in the same way.

To be clear, I don't think it's PANIC STATIONS or anything, but I anticipate failing saves is going to be a thing that happens an awful lot in 5E. That said, one thing a lot of classes had in the October playtest was some kind of save-helping ability at higher levels. Fighters got Advantage on all saves forever at level 13 (IIRC), Rogues get Evasion as usual, Barbarians got Advantage on some/all saves whilst Raging. Hopefully most of that stuff has stuck around.

My one bet is:

The "One save per attribute!" thing is going to be really badly handled at release, with INT, CHA, DEX and WIS saves being virtually all "serious" saves, even where STR or CON could obviously apply, and that probably two of that first four will account for over 50% of likely saves, between them.

Hoping I'm wrong on that, of course!

I also think that, if they do mess it up on release, they will have largely corrected it by some point in year two, either by errata, or simply by realigning the saves in new content so that they are less grouped up.

Personally I wish 5E had gone back to D&D/1/2E's way of doing saves, where they were more abstract concepts, not closely aligned with particular stats, as per 3/4E, but that's a pipe dream.

 

[Obryn]

Rock-Paper-Scissors where some people are only given a Rock might not be an great game.

Yep. Even more, it's a game where you know what your opponent has thrown before you need to pick, yourself.

It's like the easiest RPS of all time.

 

[The Hitcher]

Storm, meet Teacup.

Here's my Devil advocate position:

PCs being weak on certain saves is GREAT. It gives them more opportunities to get BEATEN DOWN, and PROTAGONIST FAILURE is where DRAMA comes from. It's only a problem if you're obsessed with the PCs winning all the time, and stuck in the belief that D&D is some sort of competitive challenge. It's not - or at the very least this edition isn't. The DM always gets to decide who fights you at any given time. He or she also gets to decide who your opponents will target, and with which abilities. If they want to go easy on you, they can. If they want to MESS YOU UP, they also can. Either way, the fact that you have some low saves is pretty immaterial. They're just a tool for the DM to play off when it's time for your character to SUCK, which they're going to have to at various points to prevent the story from being LAME. And hey - maybe when you're hanging by your fingertips off of that cliff you'll manage to pull off that one FLUKE lucky roll, and that's when you get to be totally justified in doing awesome and feeling AWESOME.

 

[Obryn]

Huge strawman. Characters need strengths and weaknesses. Nobody is arguing otherwise.

The main issue, as I see it, is that they don't need their weaknesses to get proportionally weaker as they get stronger.

 

[Boarstorm]

Rock-Paper-Scissors where some people are only given a Rock might not be an great game.

It can be entertaining if you're only fighting scissors.

 

[The Hitcher]

Huge strawman. Characters need strengths and weaknesses. Nobody is arguing otherwise.

The main issue, as I see it, is that they don't need their weaknesses to get proportionally weaker as they get stronger.

Well, to me that's a nonsense in the context of an RPG. YMMV.

 

[Obryn]

Well, to me that's a nonsense in the context of an RPG. YMMV.

Yeah, it does, because failing to consider this is nonsense to me.

I mean, this is an area where RC D&D and AD&D got it right. But the designers are repeating the mistakes from 3rd edition.

 

[BryonD]

To me this is on the list of one of the very best things about 5E.

However, as with other issues, they have stated the goal of replicating the feel of every prior edition. This is another place where the options we need to show a strong effort in order to live up to that promise.

 

[evileeyore]

Rock-Paper-Scissors where some people are only given a Rock might not be an great game.

Oh I love that game. I will bludgeon the crap out of my enemies with my rock.

It can be entertaining if you're only fighting scissors.

I don't man... scissors are dangerous. I'd rather face paper, one hit with my rock and paper crumples...