Expertise dice to augment saving throws: lowering the effectiveness of spells & spell-casters...

     If I'm not mistaken, in a bound accuracy system, the DCs for saving throws are basically static (along with attack, AC, and save values).  In my opinion, this play-test iteration has significantly changed the power dynamic by decreasing the effectiveness of spells & spell-casters to favor fighters & rogues.  I believe this is true because of the new combat maneuvers specifically available to those classes alone (i.e. the additions of Lightning Reflexes/Great Fortitude to Fighters & Lightning Reflexes/Iron Will to Rogues).  Effectively, a fighter or rogue can greatly increase their chances of making saves against spells with use of expertise dice.  In a bound accuracy system, the class-specific wizard/cleric spell DC bonus is insignificant in comparison to having a Fighter or Rogue's  ability to add expertise die to a saving throw roll each round.

     Effectively, a significant portion of damage-dealing spells will only dole out 1/2 damage to Fighters/Rogues, and spells with a save vs. effect (i.e. charm, illusions, alterations, etc...) will be wasted when cast at those classes.  While the tradition of spell "evasion" has been a class feature of Rogues, this is a new addition to Fighters (or more precisely, this bonus to saves was available to all classes as feats in 3rd & 4th editions).

Am I wrong in feeling that these new additions to the maneuvers list changes the effectiveness of spells and can greatly decrease the ability of spell-casters???
While I do see this as a potential issue, remember 2 things.

1) Generally Fighters will not be fighting their fellow Wizard. It's not a PvP game, and shouldn't be balanced as such. You could make NPC wizards and such, but then what's the harm in giving a Fighter a way to combat them if it's an NPC like any other moster that needs saves.

2) The fighter has to choose those 3 feats at the oportunity cost of much more offensive and combat focused maneuvers. To most people, not exactly myself but a good amount of people, this actually makes them lesser choices. It them becomes a case of "If someone takes it, sure it's overpowered. But then again, who takes it?". Basically to me it seems more of a problem on paper than in actual practice. 

Some of that might be confusing, I'm sorry >.>
My two copper.
Actually, Fighters had the best saves in pre-3e editions.

Also D&D is not a pvp game. Fighters and Rogues wont be the target of many classed characters to worry about class balance in that manner.

Also Fighters and Rogues have to select each maneuer to boost their saving throws.

Also Fighters and Rogues have to save expertise dice and not use them from actions or reactions in order to boost saving throws.

Doesn't seem like much of a problem.

In fact some may say they are too weak of maneuvers to be worth choosing until late level, if at all.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Actually, Fighters had the best saves in pre-3e editions.

Also D&D is not a pvp game. Fighters and Rogues wont be the target of many classed characters to worry about class balance in that manner.

Also Fighters and Rogues have to select each maneuer to boost their saving throws.

Also Fighters and Rogues have to save expertise dice and not use them from actions or reactions in order to boost saving throws.

Doesn't seem like much of a problem.

In fact some may say they are too weak of maneuvers to be worth choosing until late level, if at all.


We must have been replying at the same time
My two copper.
My problem isn't so much that these manuevers make wizards less effective, but now fighters and rogues are the best at saving against mental attacks. I'm more than willing to give them physical and speed tests, they are stronger and faster than wizards and clerics usually, but willpower tests? Why do the classes that are built around the mental ability scores suddenly the weakest in making those saves?

Now granted, it is only if they take those feats, and the fighter probably doesn't have a terribly great wisdom or charisma modifier to begin with, but it still seems a little wierd that the wizard and cleric have no way to boost their saves even agains the types of attacks they should be the best in defeating.
@Jenks - Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not describing a PVP situation (any opponent with levels of Fighter/Rogue could theoretically have access to these feats as well), I'm trying to show a difference in balance with respect to the abilities of the various classes, also, I'm trying to highlight the fact that Fighters & Rogues are the only classes able to access these feats (clerics and wizards do not).  If fighters are suppose to be "the best at combat", does that also equate to the best at resisting/negating damage from spells, poison, etc... as well???  What about clerics/wizards?  Don't you think that they should have an equal chance (if not better) to save against will-based spells?  Why is it the sole ability of Rogues to have access to Iron Will...

@Orzel - true, fighters had the best saves pre 3rd ed., but again, I'm not talking about PVP, I'm trying to discuss class balance, and, bound accuracy with respect to the growth curve of the expertise/maneuver mechanics.

My main point in starting this thread is to note that, while save DCs are for the most part static, why create a class-specific situation that can increase a saving throw roll by as much as 10 or better (assuming d12s will be used at higher levels).

For example, my 10th level fighter is hit with a fireball (DC 17).  I roll my save (add ability mods) and get 12 (failure), then I decide to use my d10 expertise and roll a 5 (12+5=17 save!).  The end result is that, as a fighter, I can choose when to gain an average of 5-6 to any Dex save once per round.  If you think that is a "weak" maneuver, then maybe your idea of "strength" only relates to the use of your arm...  Not only does my fighter make the save and receive 1/2 damage, but he can also attack twice and probably use the other two d10s to add to his damage output... overpowered much???  I think so.
My two copper on this matter has more to do with the over simplicity of the expertise system.  I think if the maneuvers had a combination of levels and/or statistical requirements, even situational requirements such as the rogue's sneak attack, then such an issue would hardly exist.  As it stands now, the fighter/rogue can get free bonuses without effort to most everything, including damage (except the rogue on that one).  I realise in 2nd edition the fighter just got +3/+3 to hit/damage for putting more proficiencies into his weapon at the end of the day, but at least it was a choice that affected him possibly negatively (ie. he could have focused in battle axes, and a +5 warhammer drops in the dungeon, he would not benefit from it as much as if here were a battle axe fighter).

While having good, desirable numbers is key to a fun and effective class, reward with neither risk or effort is any combination of lazy, fear induced or poorly thought out.  That is not to say there is not potential, or good wrought, from the expertise system.

Deadly strike is overwhelming used in favor over the other maneuvers, because there is no need to do much else if you can kill the monster faster.  Sure, parry is nice, and might be used in certain encounters, I have yet to see the player in my group even use protection (and he wanted it), cleave is a weaker version of whirlwind attack, etc.

The problem stands now that, since monsters are both fairly easy to hit, and have fairly low hp compared to party damage output, deadly strike is the go to maneuver.  If that pardigm shifts to mind control effects preventing the party from doing anything, then Iron Will would become the defacto maneuver, so on and so forth.  As it stands, a fighter is wasting his turn if he doesn't deadly strike, so there is no harm of him using a maneuver that takes away his precious expertise die from that maneuver, and him breaking free of mind influencing magic is not likely with his around average wisdom.
Even if I had Lightning Reflexes, I'd spend them all on Deadly Strike or Save them for Parry before using LR.

And that is the flaw.

The only time you'd use the Saing Throw Maneuvers is if the fighter does not use them on anything else. Great for mindless traps.

Also, I don't mind fighters having a way to boost will. A fighter's dedication to combat training and the rogue's tricky mind should be able to imbue them with a slightly boosted willpower. I wanna be able to say "Your mind tricks won't work on me, wizard!" again.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Well, in less words, that is pretty much what I said :P


Also, I don't mind fighters having a way to boost will. A fighter's dedication to combat training and the rogue's tricky mind should be able to imbue them with a slightly boosted willpower. I wanna be able to say "Your mind tricks won't work on me, wizard!" again.



Exactly. Fighters aren't just morons who wildly swing metal around. They are trained warriors. They are, to one degree or another, hardened veterans. Shrugging off mental effects SHOULD be in their realm.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS. Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)


Also, I don't mind fighters having a way to boost will. A fighter's dedication to combat training and the rogue's tricky mind should be able to imbue them with a slightly boosted willpower. I wanna be able to say "Your mind tricks won't work on me, wizard!" again.



Exactly. Fighters aren't just morons who wildly swing metal around. They are trained warriors. They are, to one degree or another, hardened veterans. Shrugging off mental effects SHOULD be in their realm.

I agree that players should have the option to make characters like that, but should something like Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude, & Iron Will be an exclusive ability only allocated to the Fighter and Rogue classes???  I think not...
Clerics get bless, prayer, and resistance. Wizards get... Polymorph, Haste, Prot from Evil, and maybe Mind Blank.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Clerics get bless, prayer, and resistance. Wizards get... Polymorph, Haste, Prot from Evil, and maybe Mind Blank.



Yes casters do get those spells, unfortunately Bless, Prayer, and Haste are concentration spells (Polymorph???), so  as a caster, you can only use one of those at any time.  Since Mind Blank is not part of the playtest, I can only assume that it, too, would require concentration and give advantage on will saves.

In terms of character ability, I can't see how anyone would consider these spells to be comparable to the maneuvers that fighters and rogues get.  In order to gain the advantages these spells offer, they require that the caster spend a full action to gain the bonus (i.e. cast the spell), they usually require the character to maintain concentration (restricting future casting ability to maintain), and they also use up a caster's valuable daily spell slot in the process.

Whereas, fighters and rogues can, at will, gain a bonus of 1-10 (maybe even 1-12 as expertise dice increase with level) to their rolls as a reaction,  and they also get to use their full action to attack and add other expertise dice to damage rolls... now how can you say that these vastly different means are equal/balanced, especially now that wizards/clerics only get 2 spell/level in this playtest!!?

Moreover, I've read postings regarding advantage (i.e. rolling 2d20 & taking the higher of the two rolls) and how it is statically similar to previous editions' +2 to rolls, except it affords an boon that equates to being more statistically average (i.e. numerical values in the "middle").  Having advantage on saves (or the +1/+2 that might come from casting spells like Resistance in conjunction with another spell) in no way equates to gaining a bonus 1d10 to saving throws... I commend your attempt, but I just don't see how casters spending actions to gain the same advantages that fighters/rogues get at will can, in any way, be balanced.
So for the idea of class balanced-ness here are you suggesting that fighters and rogues not have these manuevers or that they become feats that anyone can get?
So for the idea of class balanced-ness here are you suggesting that fighters and rogues not have these manuevers or that they become feats that anyone can get?

Not necessarily (to both your questions), I would be more inclined to accept a maneuver system where players can spend expertise dice to gain a bonus to saves if, like Ogrenomnom said below, they were counter-weighted with some limitations (i.e. limit a character to only one maneuver of this type, require a minimum ability score, limit the maximum bonus, level requirements, etc.).  In its current form there are not such limitations.

Also, I foresee a problem with the growth of the expertise die-size in relation to a bound accuracy system (where DCs are fairly static).  As the expertise die grows in size, it becomes easier for characters with this ability to augment their rolls (not necessarily a bad thing if done properly).  This "bloat" has the potential of creating situations where the DM might need to periodically increase the DCs of saves in order to keep the game challenging for fighters/rogues, but that in turn would leave classes without the ability unable to effectively cope with the higher stakes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for allowing individual classes the opportunity to have unique abilities that give them a "leg up" in certain situations, but I also feel that this is something that should be addressed to make future iterations more balanced.
My problem isn't so much that these manuevers make wizards less effective, but now fighters and rogues are the best at saving against mental attacks. I'm more than willing to give them physical and speed tests, they are stronger and faster than wizards and clerics usually, but willpower tests?  



Classic martial heros were often of extraordinary will ever hear about fighting largely being about discipline similar things?

There is an art which by practicing it you become more subject to the laws of magic... it is why the fighter doesnt hide his true name and the wizard does. The fighter hasnt opened himself to magic or been changed by it.

Also Fae ones and Demonic types are even more subject to the laws of magic than humans. 

Plenty of support for this.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

My problem isn't so much that these manuevers make wizards less effective, but now fighters and rogues are the best at saving against mental attacks. I'm more than willing to give them physical and speed tests, they are stronger and faster than wizards and clerics usually, but willpower tests?  



Classic martial heros were often of extraordinary will ever hear about fighting largely being about discipline similar things?

There is an art which by practicing it you become more subject to the laws of magic... it is why the fighter doesnt hide his true name and the wizard does. The fighter hasnt opened himself to magic or been changed by it.

Also Fae ones and Demonic types are even more subject to the laws of magic than humans. 

Plenty of support for this.

Sorry Garthanos, but I think your rationals lack support.  Never have I heard of D&D embracing the belief that, by practicing magic, spell-casters are more prone to being effected by magic.  One might argue (with better evidence to support the position) that, in past editions, clerics and wizards have had the best defenses against will-based attacks.

Also, with respect to Faye and Demons, elves are immune to sleep and charms, while the majority of demons in the current Bestiary are resistant to magic... 
It seems to me that you're getting down on the non magic people who live in a magic world for figuring out how to deal with magic. I've noticed no one has started a thread "how come wizards get mage armour all day every day?" (IMHO a magical way of dealing with people who like to hit wizards)  Plus, I don't really see this as being a problem even with expertise dice involved, cause until  a class gets more than one expertise dice to use, I can guarantee that most of the time the fighter/rogue will use expertise dice on deadly strike/sneak attack rather than save some thing back.  Even when they get 2 dice to use, probably save one die back to maybe protect or dart in, attack and jump out.  I don't think we should rain on the fighters and rogues parades on something that some people won't even use.  I guess I still don't see this as a problem for fighters and rogues because picking these specefic manuevers would really only make them good at fighting mages or clerics when the fighter and rogue are supposed to be good at fighting everyone and there are sooo many other types of monster and what not to deal with. 
It seems to me that you're getting down on the non magic people who live in a magic world for figuring out how to deal with magic. I've noticed no one has started a thread "how come wizards get mage armour all day every day?" (IMHO a magical way of dealing with people who like to hit wizards)  Plus, I don't really see this as being a problem even with expertise dice involved, cause until  a class gets more than one expertise dice to use, I can guarantee that most of the time the fighter/rogue will use expertise dice on deadly strike/sneak attack rather than save some thing back.  Even when they get 2 dice to use, probably save one die back to maybe protect or dart in, attack and jump out.  I don't think we should rain on the fighters and rogues parades on something that some people won't even use.  I guess I still don't see this as a problem for fighters and rogues because picking these specefic manuevers would really only make them good at fighting mages or clerics when the fighter and rogue are supposed to be good at fighting everyone and there are sooo many other types of monster and what not to deal with. 

It's not my intent to "rain on the parade" of the fighters and rogues.  Again, my intent is to address the fact that, as is, maneuvers that allow fighters/rogues to alter saving throws currently have no limitations, and the use of them, in conjunction with the die-size advancement of combat expertise, is quite powerful considering a bound accuracy system where save DCs are basically static.  I have seen multiple posts reiterating the argument that most players would rather use Deadly Strike, sighting preference as a counter-point.  While that might be the case, it does not address the core issues at hand.  Frankly, I am surprised that more people don't see the defensive versatility these maneuvers allow - Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude, & Iron Will work for all saves, not just on spells, and while they do sacrifice maximum damage output, they can be used easily and with great effect as a reaction (at-will).
My problem isn't so much that these manuevers make wizards less effective, but now fighters and rogues are the best at saving against mental attacks. I'm more than willing to give them physical and speed tests, they are stronger and faster than wizards and clerics usually, but willpower tests?  



Classic martial heros were often of extraordinary will ever hear about fighting largely being about discipline similar things?

There is an art which by practicing it you become more subject to the laws of magic... it is why the fighter doesnt hide his true name and the wizard does. The fighter hasnt opened himself to magic or been changed by it.

Also Fae ones and Demonic types are even more subject to the laws of magic than humans. 

Plenty of support for this.



I understand that a fighter or a rogue with an "iron will" is reasonable, but giving the ability to boost that saving throw makes it seem like the martial classes are the quickest, the toughest both physically and mentally. This doesn't sit well with me, especially since in the largest majority of Fantasy literature "wizards" and "clerics" are shown as being more resistant to outside psychic and magical forces than the "fighters" and "rogues". This comes for a few reasons, for one the magic-users can recognize magic affecting them, while a martial character may not. The exception to this is usually if the martial character is the man character in the story. Another aspect of this is that magic-users, by nature of being trained by other magic-users, tend to have more defenses set-up against supernatural attacks than your average martial character, who is ainly trained against physical threats.

Also, true name magics affect anyone whose true name is known by the caster. That's what makes it terrifying, whether it is the true name of a worthless street rat or a high mage normally doesn't matter. In almost all fantasy literature I've read there is no "opening yourself to magic" which means no "being open to magic makes you more vulnerable to magic". I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but I would guess it would be a specific world setting.

Faerie and Demons are not more subject to magic than others in the way we are talking about. They are bound in specific ways due to being magical in nature, for example Faerie traditionally cannot speak falsehoods and both are usually bound to their word. However, you do not want to attack being like this with magic, they tend to either brush it aside or turn it back on the caster, in literature at least, and they currently are the least effected by magic in the playtest.

Someone mentioned "no one complains about mage armor". That's because mage armor isn't all that wonderful except for a mage, it takes an entire turn (once a day unless you are a battle or academic mage) to basically put on Displacer beast hide (this was my first time looking at the armor table, what the heck is with that thing? That is the wonkiest set-up I've seen in a while). To bring it to a similiar level, comparaitively, to these save it would have to offer Ac 18 + Dex Mod or maybe 19 + Dex Mod, to make it better than anything the fighter can access. It just doesn't make sense to create a disparity that large
I'll admit that yes, if one was to get a lucky roll with the expertise dice then yes, one might get out of a scrape with a save.  But neither the fighter nor rogue has access to all of the manuevers so rogues still have to worrk about str. and con. saves, fighter have to worry about wis. and cha. saves and the fact that expertise dice get bigger only makes sense because cleric and wizard spells get bigger with levels as well.  Even if a fighter blows all his or her expertise dice on a save booster it's only one die that gets added to saves.  ONE DIE. And then he/she can't do anything else except attack or wait.  Plus, why don't you want fighters and rogues to be good at saves?  Do you plan on blasting or trying to mind control your fighter or rogue?  If I have a fighter/rogue on my team I want them to kick a** and gimping their saves aint gonna do it.  
... the fact that expertise dice get bigger only makes sense because cleric and wizard spells get bigger with levels as well.  Even if a fighter blows all his or her expertise dice on a save booster it's only one die that gets added to saves.  ONE DIE. And then he/she can't do anything else except attack or wait.  Plus, why don't you want fighters and rogues to be good at saves?  Do you plan on blasting or trying to mind control your fighter or rogue?  If I have a fighter/rogue on my team I want them to kick a** and gimping their saves aint gonna do it.  



Wow... I just don't see how you can understate the ability to add up to 10 points to a d20 save.  Yes, it is only one die you can add to the roll, but that die at 10th level is 50% of the value of the original save!  And, I don't understand what you mean by the statement that expertise dice growth makes sense because "cleric and wizard spells get bigger" when the spell DCs are basically static (an aspect of using a bound accuracy system).

With respect to statistical averages (or "luck" as you put it), this ability equates to a powerful advantage considering that a fighter/rogue can choose to allocate multiple dice rolls to gain the best numerical advantage...  also, your rational that, afterward, the character "can't do anything else except attack" is exactly why this ability is so powerful - it is an at-will ability that can negate the effects of failed saves without interrupting the character's ability to attack!  It's not that I want fighters/rouges to have "bad saves", I'm trying to look at the overall defensive capabilities of the various classes... specifically, are they roughly "balanced"???
Don't get too hung up on the specifics of the numbers at this point.  These maneuvers are in a very, very early form.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
My problem isn't so much that these manuevers make wizards less effective, but now fighters and rogues are the best at saving against mental attacks. I'm more than willing to give them physical and speed tests, they are stronger and faster than wizards and clerics usually, but willpower tests?  



Classic martial heros were often of extraordinary will ever hear about fighting largely being about discipline similar things?

There is an art which by practicing it you become more subject to the laws of magic... it is why the fighter doesnt hide his true name and the wizard does. The fighter hasnt opened himself to magic or been changed by it.

Also Fae ones and Demonic types are even more subject to the laws of magic than humans. 

Plenty of support for this.

Sorry Garthanos, but I think your rationals lack support.  Never have I heard of D&D embracing the belief that, by practicing magic, spell-casters are more prone to being effected by magic.   



Didnt say the support was from D&D, D&D supported "wizards are godling and fighters are menial labor" ... I was referring more to myth and legend. 

Ever wonder why wizards might not wear armor - In myth and legend  might be because  they were becoming fae and cant do the human metal any more. (Morgan wasnt elf, she was enchantress who was becoming fae like because of her arts.)
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

What I was trying to say about the expertise dice is that it's only fair for fighters and rogues to get more dice and bigger dice to use for manuevers as the level up when clerics and wizards get access to more daily spells and more powerful spells as the level up.  And at this point I don't think it would be fair to the fighter or rogue to add some ability restriction or special circumstance to using manuevers when clerics and wizards don't have that problem.  I've been looking over the wizard class as is...really looking and I noticed that wizards don't actually need intelligence to cast spells....there's no restriction saying "a wizard must have intelligence of 10+blah blah" to cast spells..and clerics don't need wisdom to cast spells, they just have to do it.  I could make an int. 9 wizard who has str. and con. but is dumb as a rock and only prepares magic missle at every level...there' no roll to hit or Save DC for that spell, so it's good for our magic guy here...let's call him Magic Mike.  At 10 level, magic mike could cast magic missle doing 10d4+25 to anything within range.  If we assume he rolls 4's on every dice (I know it's highly unlikey that he would but just hear me out) he's done 65 points of damage with no roll to hit and no saves.  I've looked up the biggest monsters I could find in the bestiary and I think that would be the green dragon and black dragon.  Highest levels and saves and hp.  A black dragon has 126 hp and a green dragon has 184. If magic mike was fighting the black dragon, he took half his hp with one spell that he gets to cast just for being a 10 level wizard.  No ability requirement, no restriction on what spell he could cast or how he could cast it, just rules as is right now.  Does that seem fair?  If we're talking about restricting one class from their own class features, then we have to restrict all classes from their class features otherwise we're punishing one class but not the other.  And as far as wizards having great fortitude or lightning reflexes....really?  I can see iron will but c'mon, wizards don't get to have everything just because they're wizards. 


Wow... I just don't see how you can understate the ability to add up to 10 points to a d20 save.  Yes, it is only one die you can add to the roll, but that die at 10th level is 50% of the value of the original save!  And, I don't understand what you mean by the statement that expertise dice growth makes sense because "cleric and wizard spells get bigger" when the spell DCs are basically static (an aspect of using a bound accuracy system).

With respect to statistical averages (or "luck" as you put it), this ability equates to a powerful advantage considering that a fighter/rogue can choose to allocate multiple dice rolls to gain the best numerical advantage...  also, your rational that, afterward, the character "can't do anything else except attack" is exactly why this ability is so powerful - it is an at-will ability that can negate the effects of failed saves without interrupting the character's ability to attack!  It's not that I want fighters/rouges to have "bad saves", I'm trying to look at the overall defensive capabilities of the various classes... specifically, are they roughly "balanced"???



Don't overstate the d10 either.  Right now saves are ridiculously hard to make.  Lets say 18 int level 10 wizard throws a spell at you, its DC is 17.  Now lets say that fighter has iron will(he can't but given its description it feels like an error) and a 12 wisdom.  He on 1 die from the maneuver he has about a 50/50 chance of making the save.  Now yeah the defense balance is a bit screwy because the cleric/wizard have like a 20% chance to make a save that is not in their strong suit.  The maneuver seems to basically compensate for your weak stats and make you really tough in your strong stats.  I think the main thing that needs to be done is dropping that damn save DC  and by a lot.  Also this maneuver should be one maneuver not 3.  



Don't overstate the d10 either.  Right now saves are ridiculously hard to make.  Lets say 18 int level 10 wizard throws a spell at you, its DC is 17.  Now lets say that fighter has iron will(he can't but given its description it feels like an error) and a 12 wisdom.  He on 1 die from the maneuver he has about a 50/50 chance of making the save.  Now yeah the defense balance is a bit screwy because the cleric/wizard have like a 20% chance to make a save that is not in their strong suit.  The maneuver seems to basically compensate for your weak stats and make you really tough in your strong stats.  I think the main thing that needs to be done is dropping that damn save DC  and by a lot.  Also this maneuver should be one maneuver not 3.  


Good to see your math skills at work Ahglock.  Now, please humor me and look at the possibility of using all 3 expertise dice to achieve a successful save attempt (i.e. gaining the needed result on at least 1 of the 3 dice rolls, assuming (for example) that your character NEEDED to make the save or die!  

Lets break down the possible combinations when flipping a coin 3 times in succession:

H = heads (save), T = tails (failure) 

1)  T T T = failed save
2)  T T H = save
3)  T H T= save
4)  H T T = save
5)  T H H = save
6)  H T H = save
7)  H H T = save
8)  H H H = save 

So, of the 8 possible combinations achievable by flipping a coin 3 times (using your previous estimation of a 50/50 chance using a 1d10) 7 combinations result in a "save".

This equates to successfully making the saving throw 87.5% of the time...

Now that "rediculously hard" save doesn't seem so hard to make after all...


Don't overstate the d10 either.  Right now saves are ridiculously hard to make.  Lets say 18 int level 10 wizard throws a spell at you, its DC is 17.  Now lets say that fighter has iron will(he can't but given its description it feels like an error) and a 12 wisdom.  He on 1 die from the maneuver he has about a 50/50 chance of making the save.  Now yeah the defense balance is a bit screwy because the cleric/wizard have like a 20% chance to make a save that is not in their strong suit.  The maneuver seems to basically compensate for your weak stats and make you really tough in your strong stats.  I think the main thing that needs to be done is dropping that damn save DC  and by a lot.  Also this maneuver should be one maneuver not 3.  


Good to see your math skills at work Ahglock.  Now, please humor me and look at the possibility of using all 3 expertise dice to achieve a successful save attempt (i.e. gaining the needed result on at least 1 of the 3 dice rolls, assuming (for example) that your character NEEDED to make the save or die!  

Lets break down the possible combinations of achieving a save when flipping a coin 3 times in succession:

H = heads (save), T = tails (failure) 

1)  T T T = failed save
2)  T T H = save
3)  T H T= save
4)  H T T = save
5)  T H H = save
6)  H T H = save
7)  H H T = save
8)  H H H = save 

So, of the 8 possible combinations achievable by flipping a coin 3 times (using your previous estimation of a 50/50 chance using a 1d10) 7 combinations result in a "save".  This equates to successfully making the saving throw 87.5% of the time...

Now that "rediculously hard" save doesn't seem so hard to make after all...  I don't think I'm overstating.



Given that he used all 3 dice for this yeah, yeah it does.  That means he decided not to use his dice for anything else so far this round and threw everything into resisting a save.  So a fighter set to suck can make saves frequently. And this is a problem?  

And besides the odds would never go over 75%. My quick estimate is based on average roll is 10.5 on a d20 and 5.5 on a d10 or a total of 16+1 from wis mod=17.  The thing is a roll of 1-5 on the d20 mean that even a 10 on the d10 will end in failure, on a roll of a 6 you would have roughly a 30% chance to succeed.(hectically a little less but its been 20+ years since statistics and I don't feel like doing the math), as the roll on the d20 increased so would the odds till a 16+would succeed without dice, a 15 would only need one, but you don't roll afterwards.  So you have a decent chance(25%) of throwing 3 dice at it and having 0% chance of success.  Yeah, I'm not that impressed.  And if the save was against a dump stat it even gets worse. At best this maneuver gets saves to where they should be.  Because you should have a high chance of making a save vs things that instantly take you out of the fight.  

Sorry Garthanos, but I think your rationals lack support.  Never have I heard of D&D embracing the belief that, by practicing magic, spell-casters are more prone to being effected by magic.  One might argue (with better evidence to support the position) that, in past editions, clerics and wizards have had the best defenses against will-based attacks.

Also, with respect to Faye and Demons, elves are immune to sleep and charms, while the majority of demons in the current Bestiary are resistant to magic... 


Only if by "previous editions", you mean 3.X. In 2e and earlier, Fighters had the best saves.
Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!
 
Only if by "previous editions", you mean 3.X. In 2e and earlier, Fighters had the best saves.



That they did come to think of it... kind of like the S&S heros who bulled there way through magic attacks. 

In mythology the demon was controlled by its true name and wizards hid theres because it had become a handle against them, but the fighting man didnt - he didnt need to.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Also D&D is not a pvp game. Fighters and Rogues wont be the target of many classed characters to worry about class balance in that manner.



This has nothing to do with PvP. Monsters and NPCs use spells too.
Sorry Garthanos, but I think your rationals lack support.  Never have I heard of D&D embracing the belief that, by practicing magic, spell-casters are more prone to being effected by magic.  One might argue (with better evidence to support the position) that, in past editions, clerics and wizards have had the best defenses against will-based attacks.

Also, with respect to Faye and Demons, elves are immune to sleep and charms, while the majority of demons in the current Bestiary are resistant to magic... 


Only if by "previous editions", you mean 3.X. In 2e and earlier, Fighters had the best saves.

You are only partly right about the Fighter saves in AD&D (not sure about OD&D since I don't have the books on hand).  Fighters had the best average saves, but they were not the best at every type of save.

Fighters had the best saves for Petrify/Poly & Breath weapon (4s), Clerics were best at Paralyze/Poison/Death (2), and Wizards were best at Rod/Staff/Wand & Spells (3 & 4 respectively), Rouges got jack.  Unfortunately, these saves don't translate very well to the type of saves we were referring to, but if I were to split hairs, I'd say that Wizards had the upper hand when compared to the Fighters due to the fact that they had the knowledge of spells and spell-like weapons...

@Garthanos - I think there is a deeper significance to the "true name" myths of which you speak.  Knowing the "true name" of something implies that an individual, when armed with proper knowledge, gains a semblance of power over what he/she didn't understand previously, and therefore, can exert a measure of control over it (in language, the very act of naming something implies this).  The individual can then define the truth regarding the nature of what it is, so really, true name myths are not so much a discourse about the inner-workings of mystical phenomena, they are more of a metaphor for humanity's need to seek understanding a time when there was very little...
Wait?

Did I mention how Great Fortitude, Iron Will, and Lightning Defenses are jank choices until after you take Parry, Protect, Grancing Blow, Comprosed Attack, Whirlwind attack, Danger Sense, and almost eery other maneuver?

It doesn't matter how slightly overpower to a save a fighter or rogue gets by taking Great Fortitude, Iron Will, and Lightning Defenses... Taking any of them is a major nerf until you take all three.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

 

@Garthanos - I think there is a deeper significance to the "true name" myths of which you speak.  Knowing the "true name" of something implies that an individual, when armed with proper knowledge, gains a semblance of power over what he/she didn't understand previously, and therefore, can exert a measure of control over it (in language, the very act of naming something implies this).  The individual can then define the truth regarding the nature of what it is, so really, true name myths are not so much a discourse about the inner-workings of mystical phenomena, they are more of a metaphor for humanity's need to seek understanding a time when there was very little...



Metaphoric or Magical Thinking (both)
And knowledge of ones self gained one potency too as the addage "Know thyself". Magical thinking integrates with communication being control and underpines the use of magical languages and runes and every things Having control over the world around him Adam was the first "namer" was mankind gaing power over his reality. And when medical science names something correctly (discovers discrete symptoms) they are on the first step to defeating it. Ie knowledge is power in a real sense. Yes there is more to it.

Trading the immortal soul for the immortal (ageless and resilient) body and becoming more fae/daemonic  was ahem deemed a trap choice by many .
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Wait?

Did I mention how Great Fortitude, Iron Will, and Lightning Defenses are jank choices until after you take Parry, Protect, Grancing Blow, Comprosed Attack, Whirlwind attack, Danger Sense, and almost eery other maneuver?

It doesn't matter how slightly overpower to a save a fighter or rogue gets by taking Great Fortitude, Iron Will, and Lightning Defenses... Taking any of them is a major nerf until you take all three.




A bit of a trap you think.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

My first problem with most CS abilities that boost a save, hit, or defense is breaking the upper threshold of bounded accuracy. The second would be the anticipation of feats of a similar name, i.e. Great Fortitude, Iron Will, and Lightning Defenses. This would allow the fighter or rogue to really boost abilities, on top of a similar feat. However, I believe it is within the realm of a martial character to have good saves, regardless if it is reflex, fortitude, or will.

Just like two-weapon fighting, there will have to be a decision on what is available to everyone, then how does a spell, skill, or combat expertise stack on top of it. Perhaps they can use 1/3 or 1/4 the value of the CS dice to create a static modifier by rounding down. Or using the CS dice may shrug of the effect for a round, to delay the save until the next round.
Given that he used all 3 dice for this yeah, yeah it does.  That means he decided not to use his dice for anything else so far this round and threw everything into resisting a save.  So a fighter set to suck can make saves frequently. And this is a problem?

I wouldn't say "set to suck."  First, you get ED back at the end of your turn, so if your turn comes around and you haven't needed them, you can use them for Deadly Strike or whatever.  Second, even without ED, fighters are the best at-will damage dealers.  Third, the ability to make all but Int-based saving throws close to 90% of the time is worth a fairly hefty price.  This is a totally viable approach.

"Edison didn't succeed the first time he invented Benjamin Franklin, either." Albert the Alligator, Walt Kelly's Pogo Sunday Book  
The Core Coliseum: test out your 4e builds and fight to the death.

Given that he used all 3 dice for this yeah, yeah it does.  That means he decided not to use his dice for anything else so far this round and threw everything into resisting a save.  So a fighter set to suck can make saves frequently. And this is a problem?

I wouldn't say "set to suck."  First, you get ED back at the end of your turn, so if your turn comes around and you haven't needed them, you can use them for Deadly Strike or whatever.  Second, even without ED, fighters are the best at-will damage dealers.  Third, the ability to make all but Int-based saving throws close to 90% of the time is worth a fairly hefty price.  This is a totally viable approach.

With the current set of maneuvers available to Fighters, expertise dice can only be added to saves involving Str, Dex & Con because Iron Will is not currently included   Only Rogues (and now Monks) have access to the Iron Will maneuver (Wis & Chr saves).

Unfortunately, Intelligence has no bearing on a character's ability to save with respect to spells.  Even though it states in How to Play (pg. 6) that characters can use Intelligence saves "to resist spells that attempt to overcome your intellect", there is currently no spell in the spell list that requires a character to use Intelligence to make a saving throw: I looked through the whole spell list and only found that spells requiring Dex, Wis, Con, or Chr saves to resist spell effects....  Be that as it may, I still think that adding the full expertise dice to saving throws (especially when d8s or 10s are involved) has the potential to "break" the bound accuracy system.

The lack of Intelligence saves for spells (illusion and enchantment spells?) highlights a "hidden" defensive disadvantage with respect to wizards since their main ability (Int) currently has no bearing on saving throws.  Granted, Fighters also have this disadvantage, it seems that some classes are more apt to save against spells due to the overuse of Dex, Con, & Wis as the main stats used to save vs. spells.

I'd like to state again that I'm not against allowing characters to have an advantage to saving throws if they choose defensive abilities (like the LR, GF & IW maneuvers), but I would definitely prefer that they not unbalance bound accuracy.  Also, I wish the game developers would add in some limitations to curtail the overuse of these maneuvers (since they are at-will reactions after all).  For example, letting a character only choose one such maneuver, or requiring a minimum level or ability score would do much to deter the abuse of this.
Unfortunately, Intelligence has no bearing on a character's ability to save with respect to spells.  Even though it states in How to Play (pg. 6) that characters can use Intelligence saves "to resist spells that attempt to overcome your intellect", there is currently no spell in the spell list that requires a character to use Intelligence to make a saving throw: I looked through the whole spell list and only found that spells requiring Dex, Wis, Con, or Chr saves to resist spell effects...


Illithid Mind Blasts use Int saving throws. They'll probably become more common once we get more psychic powers.
Come visit Dark Side of the Moon, the new home to the Nasuverse fandom!
Unfortunately, Intelligence has no bearing on a character's ability to save with respect to spells.  Even though it states in How to Play (pg. 6) that characters can use Intelligence saves "to resist spells that attempt to overcome your intellect", there is currently no spell in the spell list that requires a character to use Intelligence to make a saving throw: I looked through the whole spell list and only found that spells requiring Dex, Wis, Con, or Chr saves to resist spell effects...


Illithid Mind Blasts use Int saving throws. They'll probably become more common once we get more psychic powers.

It makes sense that Intelligence would be used to save against psionics (same goes for Wisdom & Charisma too).  But, since psionics are fairly rare, I guess that would keep wizards defensively "weak" still.  I hope that some spells will later be rewitten to allow for the use of either Int or Wis in saves, depending on the manner in which the characters are attempt to save (kind of like how both Int & Wis are used when determined Search skill results depending on how the characters are acting).
please keep in mind the TREMENDOUS imbalance here:
spellcasters with proper spell selection are impossibly more powerful than non-casters, especialy at mid-to-higher levels.

the ammount of options a wizard has in his gametime , starting at as low as lvl 3 with invisibility, mirror image and the like, outshine any options a non-caster has. and this isnt PvP-it is in-game options.

high-lvl paladins can lead armies.
high-level wizards can lead armies MUCH better than fighters(cloudkill, anyone?)
high-lvl  monks are great at melee.
high-level wizards are MUCH better at melee, since the moment extra sourcebooks come out, the wizard players will pick out all the neat buffs.

the natural state of the game is powergaming, and spellcasting, due to it giving extra options each level rather than just a numerical bonus to what a 1st lvl character can do, thrives.

for example, every wizard will be able to turn invisible , teleport and fly, EVERYBODY.

with these things in mind, giving non-casters a way to at least delay their inevitable demise by boosting their saves is not bad. 

of course, even thats not enough. i will still be building my melee fighters as "optimized wizards", since thats way more effective. spell buffs=> ANY fighting class option. and when i GM, my groups were usualy 3 wizards (full constitution-based to have many hp, with Int as secondary) and a cleric. they are simply the most powerful options, they can do EVERYTHING  a fighting class can do, but better. (-begs WoTC to create a psychic warrior class so that he can finaly play a semi-effective fighting class-)