D&D 5E Weak Saving Throws

[Nagol]

I've likely missed it, but while we've talked about the weakness of high-level fighters to high-level wizards, what about the reverse? Because if high-level wizards are weak to high-level fighters, then there's a balance there.

Take a fighter with the duellist or GWF styles: at 20th level, he can attack 5 times (assuming d8+2+5 or d10+5) if he uses Action Surge. That's about 60 HP damage assuming all attacks hit. A 20th level wizard has an average of 74 HP without Con bonus. That's a credible threat. Even with a +2 Con bonus, the wizard is still going down on the second round.

It's not quite save or suck, but very near.

[MENTION=5889]Stalker0[/MENTION] did an analysis here.

Also, I'd like to point out this isn't Wizards vs. Fighters: all PCs have this deficiency against magic. I suspect Wizards will actually have the worst saves in a group. Their primary stat isn't a saving stat like Clerics and Rogues, they get the fewest stat bumps, and their primary save stat offers very little other than the save improvement to the character unlike the Fighter.

 

[Essenti]

I've likely missed it, but while we've talked about the weakness of high-level fighters to high-level wizards, what about the reverse? Because if high-level wizards are weak to high-level fighters, then there's a balance there.

Take a fighter with the duellist or GWF styles: at 20th level, he can attack 5 times (assuming d8+2+5 or d10+5) if he uses Action Surge. That's about 60 HP damage assuming all attacks hit. A 20th level wizard has an average of 74 HP without Con bonus. That's a credible threat. Even with a +2 Con bonus, the wizard is still going down on the second round.

It's not quite save or suck, but very near.

I don't think the fighter's superiority is so clear cut here. At 20th level a wizard also gains spell mastery. A good combination for mastery is shield and misty step...

With shield the wizard has a reaction with no concentration requirement that gives a +5 to AC for the entire round, every round, giving the fighter a much harder time to land all those attacks. Misty Step is a "bonus action" that can teleport the caster 30 feet to a new location, also nice for avoiding dangers on the battlefield.

 

[Quartz]

[MENTION=5889]Stalker0[/MENTION] did an analysis here.

Thanks - I did miss it. Which of us is correct on the fighter's attacks? I assumed Action Surge gives 1 extra attack, Stalker assumes it gives a full set of 4 attacks.

Also, I'd like to point out this isn't Wizards vs. Fighters

I appreciate that. I just picked the fighter because I'd been working with the fighter in another thread. I deliberately didn't include any defensive spellcasting because if you do that you'd have to account for likely buffs on the attacker.

 

[Nagol]

Thanks - I did miss it. Which of us is correct on the fighter's attacks? I assumed Action Surge gives 1 extra attack, Stalker assumes it gives a full set of 4 attacks.



I appreciate that. I just picked the fighter because I'd been working with the fighter in another thread. I deliberately didn't include any defensive spellcasting because if you do that you'd have to account for likely buffs on the attacker.

Action Surge: On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action.

Extra Attack: Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.

Action Surge gives you an additional action. Fighters get multiple attacks per action.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

But isn't the best option to do both? Pick the most effective buff/debuff for the situation, maintain that, stay out of the line of fire and start blasting! The 5e spell system supports that by allowing you to blast with most of your spell slots but only having to prepare a relative few.

Absolutely! Of course, your buff might not last long, but you can enjoy it while you can.

It becomes somewhat easier to recover from it so long as you have a bunch of very violent friends near by willing to help out. Splitting the party and solo adventures become very problematic at higher levels.

Yep. If the BBEG is dumb enough to solo the party, then he will likely get his hide handed to him, regardless of what classes are involved. I like how 5e is combining both bounded accuracy and easy encounter building guidelines to make multi-opponent battles much more accessible, and likely the norm. 3e stands out as the edition that made multi-opponent battles a royal pain to attempt to balance or run, while 5e is probably going to make them easier than they've ever been.

I've likely missed it, but while we've talked about the weakness of high-level fighters to high-level wizards, what about the reverse? Because if high-level wizards are weak to high-level fighters, then there's a balance there.

The fighter could do worse than simply attacking the wizard, then using his action surge to ready an additional volley "as soon as the wizard finishes casting a spell." That wizard is going to have a heck of time keeping concentration for more than half a second for the first two rounds (while the fighter can use his (at high levels) two action surges), and by then the rest of the party is probably well on their way to finishing him off--not to mention the raw damage the fighter has done with 3-9 attacks.

Of course, in practice a DM is probably going to play a wizard smart enough to create additional opponents and challenges to make the battle more interesting...but if you get the drop on him unaware...

 

[Manbearcat]

Also, I'd like to point out this isn't Wizards vs. Fighters: all PCs have this deficiency against magic. I suspect Wizards will actually have the worst saves in a group. Their primary stat isn't a saving stat like Clerics and Rogues, they get the fewest stat bumps, and their primary save stat offers very little other than the save improvement to the character unlike the Fighter.

Yup. Its the saving throw system generally that I find problematic and Wizards, as you point out, are likely to get the short end of that stick the worst. It may end up being especially problematic as the game progresses and they have to deal with a potentially large number of direct damage, multi-attacks and collateral damage attacks from AoEs. The Wizard does indeed need to be a high finesse class and avoid a Concentration check-fest through tactically/strategically sound play, so there is some responsibility on the player there (and the group to protect the Wizard). However, imagine the scenario where you're GMing an NPC Lich BBEG in a group of 5 + players. Besides just the aspect of undead mooks/guardians, the lair mechanics better do some heavy-lifting battlefield control there. If not, any rewarding fights with the classic D&D trope of Liches and megalomaniacal spellcasters may be shut down due to the increasing number of Concentration checks the NPC caster will have to endure in large groups. I'm not committed to a position at this point, but I'm wary (or at least I would be).

The other issue I wonder at is Concentration checks on infantry/front-line PC F/MUs. They'll have plenty of access to Shield by mid-level, but they certainly won't have it at the frequency offered by Spell Mastery (unless through a feat). Those sorts of builds have historically relied upon some manner of buffs (such as Haste or Blur) to make up the rate of attack/action economy and survivability loss that they endure due to split-classing. With the current saving throw system, depending on how saving throw proficiencies work with multi-classing, something like a Dex/Int Elf F/MU may end up being slightly below average, but not horrible, on each of Con (Concentration), Dex, and Wis saves due to MAD and the ST proficiency system. If they're facing down multiple enemies or a multi-attacker, like a Marilith, they're likely to be paddling upstream pretty severely. That is, unless they can get access to an extra suite of immediate actions (beyond Shield), that lets them avoid or mitigate them.

All speculation at this point though because the implication of Concentration at the highest of levels is still only mostly in the realm of theorycraft. However, [MENTION=66111]Cybit[/MENTION] 's post just upthread does incline itself toward what I feel is the intuitive take; that it may lean toward too punitive for NPC spellcasters BBEGs and possibly certain F/MU builds.

 

[Cybit]

All speculation at this point though because the implication of Concentration at the highest of levels is still only mostly in the realm of theorycraft. However, @Cybit 's post just upthread does incline itself toward what I feel is the intuitive take; that it may lean toward too punitive for NPC spellcasters BBEGs and possibly certain F/MU builds.

I would reaaallly not worry about BBEG Spellcasters / etc. They're terrifying. As they should be. But as my players prove, definitely killable.

 

[Sadras]

I suspect that is true for most folks who have GMed a lot of different games and enjoy D&D but aren't entirely wedded to it.

Thanks for the reply. I suspect this is the case. I have GMed only two RPGs and played in 3 others. I guess the greater ones exposure to GM various RPGs the more predisposed one would be to analyse them beforehand.

3) Casters are going to DESPISE concentration; the save issue you bring up for fighters also smacks many casters in the face; that DC 10 Con save gets annoying the fourth or fifth time you have to make it in a row because of AoE damage, or repeated attacks.
4) Save or Suck spells are surprisingly weaker in play than in theory; that "one save per round" bit is very brutal, very quickly. Dominate Person, for instance, is an 5th level spell that requires the CASTER to use their own actions in order to command their target precisely. Also, should you use it to fight someone, they get a save for each time they take damage. Not each round. Each time. Otto's, for instance, requires the caster be within 30 feet to cast it.

Thank you, finally! It was obviously clear to me from reading the rules and spell descriptions that 'save or suck' spells are not an issue in 5e. The hysteria that has claimed some in this and other threads about the magic-prone fighter has been somewhat exaggerated.
So the fighter doesn't does improve on his saves, and probably gets worse - well the wizard has his own issues...so "balance" maintained.

 

[MoutonRustique]

This is tangential at best to the OP, but still...

Am I the only one freaking out about silence?

All I see on the boards are Fighter/Wizard contests; what about the cleric ­­­­>> caster? I can't understand how an enemy caster faced with a (or PCs forbid multiple) cleric has any hope of doing anything unless he has an outside and effective means of continuous harassment on the cleric...

I am sincere in my desire to be proven wrong, but I just can't see the answer by myself...

 

[Nagol]

This is tangential at best to the OP, but still...

Am I the only one freaking out about silence?

All I see on the boards are Fighter/Wizard contests; what about the cleric ­­­­>> caster? I can't understand how an enemy caster faced with a (or PCs forbid multiple) cleric has any hope of doing anything unless he has an outside and effective means of continuous harassment on the cleric...

I am sincere in my desire to be proven wrong, but I just can't see the answer by myself...

It's a small immobile area and is a Concentration spell. It looks not too bad to counter; much easier than the 3rd edition version in many ways.