[Fixing 5E] Saving Throws - Fortitude Reflex Will

[CapnZapp]

(I did a forum search but couldn't find any really relevant discussion, so I'm turning to y'all)

Have anyone created a variant where you revert back to how saves were organized in the previous two editions? Anyone playtested such a variant, preferably for parties of level 11 or above?

I'm talking about how the paradigm for 5E saves break down as you reach the higher levels, since most of your saves will remain at +1 or thereabouts. Making a DC 15 save might be suspenseful and exciting with a +1 bonus. After all, even if you don't make it directly, you probably will get a new try next round.

But when the DC creeps above 20, it stops being funny.

---

Instead it seems worthwhile to test out something like the following:

Make a "Fortitude" save whenever the game calls for either a Strength save or a Constitution save.
Make a "Reflex" save whenever the game calls for either a Dexterity save or a Intelligence save.
Make a "Will" save whenever the game calls for either a Wisdom save or a Charisma save.

This goes for player characters, NPCs and monsters alike.

Your Fortitude save is the better of your Strength and Constitution save bonuses.
Your Reflex save is the better of your Dexterity and Intelligence save bonuses.
Your Will save is the better of your Wisdom and Charisma save bonuses.

So that, when the DM calls for a "Charisma save", everybody makes a Will save. If somebody casts Feeblemind, the target makes a Reflex save. etc

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Reflex doesn't have much to do with the sorts of things that Intelligence saves currently cover. I would break it down as follows:

Your Fortitude save is the sum of your Strength and Constitution bonuses. If you were previously proficient in Constitution saves, then you are now proficient in Fortitude saves. Any effect previously called for a Strength or Constitution save, now calls for a Fortitude save.

Your Reflex save is the sum of your Dexterity and Intelligence bonuses. If you were previously proficient in Dexterity saves, then you are now proficient in Reflex saves. Any effect that previously called for a Dexterity save, now calls for a Reflex save.

Your Will save is the sum of your Wisdom and Charisma bonuses. If you were previously proficient in Wisdom saves, then you are now proficient in Will saves. Any effect that previously called for an Intelligence save or Wisdom save or Charisma save, now calls for a Will save.

 

[One_Shots]

There really aren't very many DC's above 19, let alone 20+. And they're on creatures who, if you don't have a ton of mitigating options through magical items, powers and abilities, then you were already outmatched anyway.

Plus with only three save options, you would have to then consider the balance issues of how many saves you give proficiency in for class choices. One save proficiency seems like it wouldn't be enough but two now seems like it's giving too much. Then you have to also rejig the Resilient feat, probably at least taking away the stat bump, which is arguably still leaving it be a must-have and therefore too powerful.

As the system stands, the vast majority of saves from spells and creature abilities are Dexterity-based. Intelligence saves are almost non-existent, Charisma being a low amount but usually against a powerful effect, and with Wisdom & Strength coming up almost equal but with wildly different effects, Wisdom saves being similar to Charisma saves. Classes usually get proficiency in one good save and one bad save. How then do you balance that choice?

I really don't see a problem with the current system as I don't mind having a disparity between saves, especially with spells being generally fairly easy to get out of. But even if there was a problem with the current system, shoehorning a concept from a previous edition into this one creates far more problems than it solves. You'd be better off coming up with a new system that suits this edition and solves the problem you think it has.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I agree with Saelorn's arrangement, although I'm not sure how I feel about summing the bonuses. It's not out of the question for a martial character to have a 20 Strength and Constitution by end-game, and a +16 is practically an auto-success against most things (especially when you factor in re-roll features like Indomitable and Lucky); it's +21 if that character is standing in a paladin's aura. It also doesn't guarantee that a character will never have a +0 to their saving throw; it's not hard to imagine a fighter with a 10 Wisdom and Charisma. Despite that they are not symmetric and I realize that sometimes irks folks, it makes sense for Reflex to just apply to Dexterity saves (which is one of the most common types of saves anyway) and for Will to apply to Int, Wis and Cha (two of which are uncommon saves).

One thing you could do to make having a +1 to save less likely at high levels is reintroduce the concept of good, average, and poor saves (from 3e). Good saves would be proficient, poor saves would be non-proficient (or you could go the route of granting 1/3 proficiency bonus for poor saves, which narrows the gap between an average and a poor save dramatically at high levels). Average saves would be half your proficiency bonus rounded down.

Don't forget that the Resilient feat and some class features need to be addressed if you implement such a change.

As an aside, but on a related note, I was wondering last night why the designers adopted evasion into 5e, but left out its Fortitude and Willpower counterparts (both of which existed in 5e although their names escape me at the moment). Those might be worthwhile additions as well, if you're already tinkering with the saving throw system anyway.

Keep in mind that IMO at high levels, 5e assumes that you will typically have class abilities to negate or remove effects from party members who fail their saves. I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it (it's probably a good idea if you're running a high level solo game) but do take into consideration that using such suggestions does effectively make characters a bit more powerful, since the party healer(s) will be able to focus more often on offense rather than having to remove negative conditions from their allies.

 

[CapnZapp]

Reflex doesn't have much to do with the sorts of things that Intelligence saves currently cover. I would break it down as follows:

Your Fortitude save is the sum of your Strength and Constitution bonuses. If you were previously proficient in Constitution saves, then you are now proficient in Fortitude saves. Any effect previously called for a Strength or Constitution save, now calls for a Fortitude save.

Your Reflex save is the sum of your Dexterity and Intelligence bonuses. If you were previously proficient in Dexterity saves, then you are now proficient in Reflex saves. Any effect that previously called for a Dexterity save, now calls for a Reflex save.

Your Will save is the sum of your Wisdom and Charisma bonuses. If you were previously proficient in Wisdom saves, then you are now proficient in Will saves. Any effect that previously called for an Intelligence save or Wisdom save or Charisma save, now calls for a Will save.

Compared to my idea, you have made two changes. To me these changes come out of the blue, and I have a hard time understanding them. Could you give a little more background as to your reasoning here?

1) you add the bonuses, not take the best. Why?

As in, what benefit do you see in allowing characters to become ouright immune to even the hardest save? (If you previously had +11 in Wis saves and +11 in Cha saves, your Will save would now be +22)

2) you put a greater weight on Con, Dex and Wis over Str, Int and Cha (since the former three govern proficiency but the latter three don't). Why do you consider something like Int proficiency worthless?

Thanks

 

[CapnZapp]

There really aren't very many DC's above 19, let alone 20+. And they're on creatures who, if you don't have a ton of mitigating options through magical items, powers and abilities, then you were already outmatched anyway.

It is exactly against these creatures the original system breaks down.

So I'm thinking this thread might just not be for you, if that is not your concern.

Plus with only three save options, you would have to then consider the balance issues of how many saves you give proficiency in for class choices. One save proficiency seems like it wouldn't be enough but two now seems like it's giving too much. Then you have to also rejig the Resilient feat, probably at least taking away the stat bump, which is arguably still leaving it be a must-have and therefore too powerful.

All reasonable points to discuss.

Not as arguments for not trying, but as issues that needs fixing.

As the system stands, the vast majority of saves from spells and creature abilities are Dexterity-based. Intelligence saves are almost non-existent, Charisma being a low amount but usually against a powerful effect, and with Wisdom & Strength coming up almost equal but with wildly different effects, Wisdom saves being similar to Charisma saves. Classes usually get proficiency in one good save and one bad save. How then do you balance that choice?

Not sure the system is balanced today.

And not sure I need to fix this.

Anyway, that seems like a secondary problem. First the system needs to work, like at all.

I really don't see a problem with the current system as I don't mind having a disparity between saves, especially with spells being generally fairly easy to get out of.

This only reinforces my suspicion this thread really isn't for you.

I don't mind a "disparity" either. We're not talking about how spells are "generally" fairly easy to get out of.

What we are talking about are the cases at high level when they're not easy to get out of. In fact, we're taking about how this edition can create situations when it is outright impossible to make your save.

But even if there was a problem with the current system, shoehorning a concept from a previous edition into this one creates far more problems than it solves. You'd be better off coming up with a new system that suits this edition and solves the problem you think it has.

If you have anything concrete to offer, I'm all ears.

But please - please don't make any further posts until you understand the problem I'm having and you agree it is a real concern. Thank you.

 

[CapnZapp]

One thing you could do to make having a +1 to save less likely at high levels is reintroduce the concept of good, average, and poor saves (from 3e). Good saves would be proficient, poor saves would be non-proficient (or you could go the route of granting 1/3 proficiency bonus for poor saves, which narrows the gap between an average and a poor save dramatically at high levels). Average saves would be half your proficiency bonus rounded down.

Don't forget that the Resilient feat and some class features need to be addressed if you implement such a change.

As an aside, but on a related note, I was wondering last night why the designers adopted evasion into 5e, but left out its Fortitude and Willpower counterparts (both of which existed in 5e although their names escape me at the moment). Those might be worthwhile additions as well, if you're already tinkering with the saving throw system anyway.

Keep in mind that IMO at high levels, 5e assumes that you will typically have class abilities to negate or remove effects from party members who fail their saves. I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it (it's probably a good idea if you're running a high level solo game) but do take into consideration that using such suggestions does effectively make characters a bit more powerful, since the party healer(s) will be able to focus more often on offense rather than having to remove negative conditions from their allies.

Thank you.

Just a few assorted bits.

The Fortitude and Will counterparts to Reflex Evasion was indeed much less visible. I don't recall their names either.

The fact you can negate or remove effects from failed saves are great; but it does not excuse having to make saving throws with essentially no chance of success in the first place.

As for good/average/poor saves, I'm not so sure. My problem is that poor saves are too poor.

If the game featured save DCs in the 10-20 range and never higher, I could accept poor saves as low as, say, +4. You would need to roll a 16 to make such a save, which would grant you a 20% chance. That's about as low as I'd make any check. Maybe have an actual negative ability bonus lower that (so if you have an 8, your bonus would only be +3).

But there are two problems with that: One, the game does not limit save DCs to 20. Two, having a save lower than +4 is not a fluke. Almost every character will have one save lower than +4. In fact, most characters will have as many as three saves lower than +4.

It just doesn't add up. Not if you want to say "the game handles epic save DCs well". It just doesn't.

Now, making the game use Fort/Ref/Will fixes a lot of these problems. No, save DCs can still be higher than 20. But the probability of a character having more than one impossible save is much lower.

And if the player truly can't stand having such a low save, fixing it is just one Resilience feat away.

Even if both your Reflex and Intelligence is 10, you would still sport a +6 Reflex save at 20th level with a Resilience feat.

And versus a DC 22 or 24 save, that's just the bare minimum of what feels reasonable.

If, on the other hand, you feel the need for better saves is overblown, and that mitigating the effects of failing a save is as easy as you say, then: congratulations, that Resilience is not a must have, it is not a feat tax. Looks like a win win scenario to me

 

[Kryx]

Hey Capp,

I created a system a while back to address the multitude of issues around saving throws. I still use it and highly recommend it. See http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/SkWNvU8TD

I think the distribution of saves and especially how they work on monsters is very important. That largely influenced the combinations I made. Under your combination system spells that target Reflex would become the best spells by far as monsters have low dex and int in general. This would be a poor result imo.

I would also not recommend using "the better of system". I'd recommend average of the ability scores, otherwise dumps have no consequences.

 

[CapnZapp]

As for the possibility Resilience becomes too powerful.

We hopefully all agree that today, it isn't really useful to shore up your weaknesses. You would probably have to take it three times to avoid any +0 saves staring back at you from your character sheet. And that's a huge cost - especially since the real reason you would want to take it, is to boost one of your already decent saves, to make it great.

So. Would Resilience really become overpowering if it plugs one third of your saves?

I'm not so sure. I mean, I understand that some characters will start out with two out of Fort/Ref/Will already covered, so they will only have to take Resilence once to get rid of bottom-barrel saves altogether.

But isn't that really more a function of how my proposal assigns save proficiencies?

I mean, if you instead get to pick ONE save proficiency when you start at level 1, would Resilience feel as much of a musthave then? You would have to take it twice to get rid of any +0 saves of yours.

That is, a Fighter obviously will only get Fortitude proficiency like before. Whereas something like a Wizard now gets to choose between Reflex (from his Int proficiency) and Will (from his Wis proficiency). He does not get both Reflex and Will just because his class proficiencies straddles two out of the three F/R/W categories.

 

[Krachek]

Maybe choose Resilient feat instead of Great weapon master.