D&D 5E Spell DC vs Magic User Attack Roll

[ren1999]

As the Dungeon Master, I already have a lot of work to do rolling attacks and saves for monsters as well as babysitting people and keeping the story interesting.
As a result, I have had to create a tracker with automatic rolls just to keep the pace fast in my game.

With spell DCs, I have to do a ton of rolling and the caster players just sit there doing nothing. This creates a real attention deficit problem in my game.

The philosophy behind spell DCs is that the caster automatically succeeds and it is just up to the targets to dodge. I don't agree with that. Perhaps magic is based on belief. If the targets disbelieve enough, they can reduce the damage and effects of a spell.

Sure a fireball can engulf an area, but perhaps a shield will block all the damage from it as the fire passes over.

I will probably modify spell DCs to just a regular attack roll for the caster.

For example, Shocking Grasp will be the caster's 1d20 roll + his intelligence modifier(his hand is being guided by his magic) + his magic modifier versus 10 + the dexterity modifier + proficiency modifier of the target he is trying to touch.

I will then leave DC rolls to skill checks and other rolls.

 

[machineelf]

I guess you could have the players roll for the creature's saving throws that they are targeting. It would be like rolling to hit, but they are hoping to roll low. It would be weird, but it might reduce the work for you.

So far I don't mind rolling creature's saving throws. It's just their defense, and I can find their needed ability modifier pretty quickly and make the roll. Plus when your creatures attack the players with magic, then they have to roll a saving throw and you don't have to roll anything. So it should all equal out I think. But I just started a group at level 1 and they don't have a lot of spells to make yet. Maybe my opinion will change once they get to higher levels.

 

[Warskull]

It is currently:
8+Ability Bonus+Proficiency=DC
1d20+Ability Bonus+Proficiency=Saving Throw
Saving throw much match or exceed DC

If you changed it to:
1d20+Ability Bonus+Proficiency=Attack Roll
14+Ability Bonus+Proficiency(save)=Defense
Attack roll must match or exceed defense

It would be mathematically equivalent. You would have a default 35% chance to success vs the enemy have a 65% chance to save in the saving throw system.

So a character with +2 charisma bonus and +3 proficiency in charisma save would have a 19 Defense against charisma targeting spells.

There is one huge downside to attack rolls vs defense rolls. With attacks the player usually rolls once, while with defense rolls every creature affected rolls. So to keep the systems equivalent for AoE spells your player needs to roll for each target separately. If they roll once and then apply it to all the targets it makes AoE spells all or nothing which is undesirable.

Also when the player rolls multiple dice for an AoE attack there are arguments as to which die applies to which creature. It also gives the player more information. A player over time can figure out the defense of a creature. If they hit with 18 and miss with a 13 they now have a range for that enemies save. When the DM rolls that information is hidden and it is much more difficult to discern the probabilities.

Just some things to think about on saves vs attack rolls.

 

[ren1999]

I did not know that the base of the DC changed from 10 to 8 in the latest closed play-test. Thanks for that info.

In summary, you're saying that because the target of the spell has to roll, the players don't know what their ability stats and their additional bonuses are. It adds mystery to the game.

Your post was very informative. I'm still thinking of just converting all rolls to attack style.

 

[Jester David]

I prefer saving throws for area effects, regardless of origin. Attack spells, mostly ones that target single opponents should be attack rolls.
I like the narrative better. The wizard isn't aiming the fireball at each goblin, she's aiming at the empty square in the middle. The active party in the action is the goblins, which are dodging out of the way of the blast.

Mechanically the effect is similar. It never seems that much work as a DM as I need to be paying attention either way, either comparing the rolled results or rolling saves.
However, I find saving throws to be slightly faster. While the player is rolling and counting dice for the effect, I can be rolling the saves. I'm less static as the DM.
And with attack rolls, the player needs to roll, add bonuses, and then communicate that across the table. The DM can just roll and only has to add if the modifier would make the difference. If they roll a "17, it doesn't matter what their bonus is.

And let's be honest about dishonesty. Rolling saves allows DMs to fudge rolls. Because sometimes you need to.

 

[Sadrik]

I think if they can make the rolls go either way as an attack or a save and clearly write them that way they will do a great service to the community. There are those that really want saves to be like saves of yore (1e thru 3e) and then there are those who felt 4e got it right with attack rolls for saves. If the math can work out either way everyone wins.

As Save
8 + Ability (-1 to +5) + Proficiency (+2 to +5) = DC (9 to 18)
d20 + Ability (-1 to +5) + Proficiency (+2 to +5) = Save (+1 to +10)
Save must be equal or greater to DC (all things equal save success is 65%)

As Attack
d20 + Ability (-1 to +5) + Proficiency (+2 to +5) = Attack (+1 to +10)
14 + Ability (-1 to +5) + Proficiency (+2 to +5) = Defense (15 to 24)
Attack must be equal or greater to Defense (all things equal attack success is 35%)

So if the caster is maxed out in casting stat and targeting a stat of 10 then that adds another +20% attack success or -20% save success. So meaning that 45% save success or 55% attack success. Are these numbers right? They do not really improve too much based on level. So a high level caster going against a high level monster is going to have the same odds of attacking/monster saving as if both the monster and the caster were low level.

I am not sure I like these percentages of success/failure though... Some scaling is good, but if both sides scale the same then there is no point.

Question for you all, do you think casters should get better at affecting or do you think the save should become easier as the defender gets better? Right now it is both. But should it be one or the other?

 

[ren1999]

More good Spell DC sells.

 

[GX.Sigma]

However, I find saving throws to be slightly faster. While the player is rolling and counting dice for the effect, I can be rolling the saves. I'm less static as the DM.
And with attack rolls, the player needs to roll, add bonuses, and then communicate that across the table. The DM can just roll and only has to add if the modifier would make the difference. If they roll a "17, it doesn't matter what their bonus is.

This is my experience too. There's also the tendency I've noticed that players tend to roll every die separately ("this one... 16... that one... 12?... that one... 20....") whereas the DM can just roll 3d20 at once and go "okay, two of them die."

 

[pemerton]

8 + Ability (-1 to +5) + Proficiency (+2 to +5) = DC (9 to 19)

Should that 19 be an 18?

Some scaling is good, but if both sides scale the same then there is no point.

Question for you all, do you think casters should get better at affecting or do you think the save should become easier as the defender gets better?

The spells in D&Dnext seem closer to the AD&D style, of getting noticeably stronger effects with higher level spells (compared to 4e, which has much tighter damage and effect scaling). Given that, my feeling is that, as in AD&D, higher level enemies should probably have better overall chances of saving.

But I haven't done a systematic analysis to confirm this impression.

 

[Warskull]

I did not know that the base of the DC changed from 10 to 8 in the latest closed play-test. Thanks for that info.

In summary, you're saying that because the target of the spell has to roll, the players don't know what their ability stats and their additional bonuses are. It adds mystery to the game.

Your post was very informative. I'm still thinking of just converting all rolls to attack style.

Pretty much, give a player a few attacks rolls and they can pin down the AC of a target fairly well. You get a little bit of info with each roll. You know if the AC is greater or lesser/equal to your roll. Saves on the other hand only give you "he saved" or "he takes full damage." It makes things a little trickier for a player to know how vulnerable a particular creature is to a spell.

Then as a mentioned, for AoEs you need to make sure the player rolls an attack for each target. Otherwise you get a situation where a fireball hits everything or does half damage to everything. That is bad.

These are things that can be corrected for or lost, but they are just things to think about a little.