Why is SR necessary to the game?

[Li Shenron]

(I thought this was more relevant in Rules, but could be moved to General...)

What do you think are the fundamental reasons (mechanically or otherwise) for Spell Resistance to exist in the game?

Since all it does is lower the chance that a certain creature is affected by a spell, why couldn't we just have Saving Throws?

What does SR achieve that the Saving Throws cannot, even with a minor tweak?

 

[Thanee]

It allows certain creatures to save vs certain magics, while other creatures cannot save against those.

It models a creature's resistance to magic in general, not the ability to resist the magic in particular, which all creatures possess, as long as it can be resisted (i.e. has a save).

Now you could just grant those creatures a save where others do not get one, but then you only have the difference for the magics without a save, not for those with a save.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

(I thought this was more relevant in Rules, but could be moved to General...)

What do you think are the fundamental reasons (mechanically or otherwise) for Spell Resistance to exist in the game?

Since all it does is lower the chance that a certain creature is affected by a spell, why couldn't we just have Saving Throws?

What does SR achieve that the Saving Throws cannot, even with a minor tweak?

It seems partly a holdover from earlier editions (but that doesn't explain why the mechanics were created then).

Personally, I think with a better saving throw "policy" (like all spells allow a save), the mechanics could probably be removed.
A creature with a general resistance to spells would just add a certain bonus to its saves (or maybe it would treat all its saving throws as good - meaning 2+1/2 level as modifier - for the purposes of spells)

Still, even with such a mechanic, SR achieves something saving throw modifiers do not: It marks a creature as particular resistant to magic regardless of the type (saving throw required) of the spell. Once this resistance is broken, creature specifics apply (saving throw, energy resistance/immunity and so on)

 

[styker]

Since we have spell that doesnt require a saving throw doesn´t make sense "SR" give bonus in the saving throws...

 

[Darklone]

I do agree that SR does not seem to be necessary, but from a game mechanical point of view it is. Imagine a highly magical race of ... lets say fey creatures with low con (soooo lean), low wis (sooo erratic) and low dex ... ok, let's give them a high dex.

The saving throw game mechanic would only allow you to raise their magical resistance with a +4 or so to all saving throws or to raise their HD.

A bonus to all saving throws wouldn't help with low con... simply blast them with fireballs, it'll kill them pretty fast. You'd have to add Evasion and similar abilities to make them REALLY magical resistant.

Summed up: The SR mechanism is the simplest way to add more possibilities to building monsters.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

I've always felt that it was to allow fighters to shine on some of the tougher monsters. The idea being that these critters give the fighters a chance to pull their weight after wizards get Fireball and the like.

Of course Acid Spells (and other no-SR spells) start to widdle away at this purpose (and let's not go into orb spells).

 

[Li Shenron]

It allows certain creatures to save vs certain magics, while other creatures cannot save against those.

It models a creature's resistance to magic in general, not the ability to resist the magic in particular, which all creatures possess, as long as it can be resisted (i.e. has a save).

Now you could just grant those creatures a save where others do not get one, but then you only have the difference for the magics without a save, not for those with a save.

But this happens only because there ARE spells with no ST. Then I could ask, why do you necessarily need spells without a ST?

The situation sounds like asking:
Q: why do you have to smoke?
A: because I'm addicted
Q: why becoming addicted in the first place?
A: ...



My question is rather general. Why couldn't have D&D be designed with Saving Throws only and without SR?
The specific Saving Throws rules of 3.x might require SR for some case, but actually those rules are not that far from a form which would allow to get rid of SR.

 

[Li Shenron]

I do agree that SR does not seem to be necessary, but from a game mechanical point of view it is. Imagine a highly magical race of ... lets say fey creatures with low con (soooo lean), low wis (sooo erratic) and low dex ... ok, let's give them a high dex.

The saving throw game mechanic would only allow you to raise their magical resistance with a +4 or so to all saving throws or to raise their HD.

A bonus to all saving throws wouldn't help with low con... simply blast them with fireballs, it'll kill them pretty fast. You'd have to add Evasion and similar abilities to make them REALLY magical resistant.

Summed up: The SR mechanism is the simplest way to add more possibilities to building monsters.

You've already found the solution in giving them ST bonuses and Evasion

I see that you're addressing spells with one effect that cannot be avoided, but you still want some creatures to be able to avoid it. That's a good point! Eventually I think there are other solutions besides Evasion, for example giving these creatures energy resistance. Of course if you consider specific spells which are already designed for 3ed, it's impossible to preserve exactly the same effect, but what makes you say that they couldn't have been designed slightly different in the first place?

In this thread, I'm not trying to take SR away and expect that any creature in the game remains the same. I'm trying to think if a (slightly) better ST design could have avoided the need of SR rules since the start.

 

[Artoomis]

Here's the logic, maybe:

As is, SR allows the game to have some spells more effective than other to certain creatures. This is done by having spells with no save where SR applies.

This way you have another variable to manipulate how creatures are affected by magic.

 

[Infiniti2000]

SR creates a simply, separate mechanic for modeling a different kind of resistance. Using just saving throws, you cannot model SR. Evasion or better saves doesn't do it. It's similar, but not that same, and trying to hack it into being the same will just make the saving throw mechanic much more complex with lots of special rules. Consider a couple of examples.

1. Slay living and fireball. These cannot both be modeled with evasion because evasion only works on reflex saves. Yet, someone with SR can ignore slay living entirely while somewhat without SR cannot. More importantly, evasion doesn't work in all cases, but SR does.

2. Cure spells. Trying to cure your buddy who has SR is a big deal and without SR, it almost becomes intractable. Inflict spells creates a similar problem where you use a Will save, so evasion doesn't work again. Of course, some people house rule that SR doesn't apply to harmless spells, but that's irrelevant to a discussion on how the rules work.

3. Impassable barrier spells. A blade barrier blocks a hallway. A creature without SR will take damage trying to get through. A creature with evasion may take damage or may not. A creature with SR may take damage or may not, and still has a chance to take only half damage. A creature with SR and evasion has two chances to ignore the damage (but without SR, his evasion or perhaps even improved evasion has issues depending on how you otherwise emulate SR). There are other barrier spells like wall of fire where no save is allowed so how do you work out the SR? Wall of sand might be another (from Sandstorm).