Saving Throw Suggestion: List Two Save Options!

I was just taking the new survey when this idea came to me.  I've been concerned about saving throws in D&D Next since they came out.  For one thing, I much prefer the always-roll-attack method of 4e, and think that many of the spells should be shifted to that method, even if some saves remain.

But if and when saving throws remain, there is an issue.  With saves against all 6 stats, that's a whole lot of ways to attack and no way to prevent vulnerability.  I understand wanting to jetison Fortitude, Reflex, and Will as they add an extra layer of complexity without much benefit.  I mean, each really just represents the better of two stats.

So here's the solution: whenever a save is called for, list TWO saves that the target can attempt to avoid the effect.  To me, this makes intuitive sense and is a happy medium between old-school and new school.  An attack on the mind can be staved off by EITHER the calmness and orderliness of one's mind (Wisdom) or the raw force of personality and confidence (Charisma).

What say you?
Why should you have a way to prevent all vulnerability?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Why should you have a way to prevent all vulnerability?


That was my immediate question as well.
My two copper.
So, would each individual spell list the two attributes that can be used to save against it? It sound a lot like 4E, but with more options. Fort = Str or Con, Ref = Int or Dex, Will = Wis or Cha. Now you're adding stuff like Str or Wis, Dex or Cha, and Wis or Con.

My main issue might be the justification for why these saves would exist, and what kind of effects would require those types of saves. I can see a few, for example, Str or Dex might be a great save versus Black Tentacles; Int or Wis might a great save versus a Sepia Snake Sigil; Cha or Con might make a great save versus Phantasmal Killer.

I agree that the existing system allows for too many vulnerabilities - it forces players to build balanced characters so they don't get hosed by effects that target their dump stats. With your mechanic, characters could safely have one dump stat without needing it for saves, and characters with two dump stats (I often play characters with 8-11 Str and Dex) would only be in serious trouble about 1/36th of the time, on average if all saves are equally represented.
When did we get in the business of making characters with no weaknesses the norm? Pretty much every hero has a tragic flaw :P
My two copper.
it forces players to build balanced characters so they don't get hosed by effects that target their dump stats. With your mechanic, characters could safely have one dump stat without needing it for saves, and characters with two dump stats (I often play characters with 8-11 Str and Dex) would only be in serious trouble about 1/36th of the time, on average if all saves are equally represented.


Why is encouraging dump stats a good thing?

The idea of a dump stat is awful, and all six stats as defenses is the single biggest thing that I've seen that could help prevent dump stats from happening in the first place.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Eh, this is more about the spell, trap, etc... than making it a normal design concept. 

Maybe something like Phantansomal Killer can use this concept, but not fireball.  
Oh, sure!  Individual spells can absolutely have more than one potential kind of save.  That's fine.  That's both a balancing feature and something identifying to the spell itself.  Adds flavor.  Some spells have only one, some spells have more than one.  Different spells is good.

It's making it a system-wide thing that I object to, the "whenever a save is called for" part in the OP.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition

The idea of a dump stat is awful, and all six stats as defenses is the single biggest thing that I've seen that could help prevent dump stats from happening in the first place.



No it won't.  Not while stats are added to attack rolls.

The idea of a dump stat is awful, and all six stats as defenses is the single biggest thing that I've seen that could help prevent dump stats from happening in the first place.



No it won't.  Not while stats are added to attack rolls.


He's talking about the idea of a dump stat, not top stat. Top stats will always exist as long as stats add to attack rolls, yes. But that has nothing to do with someone saying "I don't need charisma. It doesn't add to anything I care about anyway". Well now it does. They all do, and making that choice became much more meaningful.
My two copper.

The idea of a dump stat is awful, and all six stats as defenses is the single biggest thing that I've seen that could help prevent dump stats from happening in the first place.



No it won't.  Not while stats are added to attack rolls.


"No dump stats" is not the same thing as "all stats are equal"
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I was just taking the new survey





Where does one find these surveys? I thought they came through email, but I've yet to get one.

As for ability scores, I truly feel that classes that have high stat dependency - say, a strength fighter will need strength, dex, and con to be effective truly suffer when it comes to saving throws, compared to a wizard, whose spell DC only comes from int, but has a plethora of options to target pretty much any stat of their choosing.

My fighter won't likely make saves against wis, int, or cha, seeing as spell DCs improve over class levels, but I have no room to invest in those stats, and that saving throws do not improve over character levels.

I guess what I'm really trying to say that is strength and constitution are largely worthless.
Oh, I just caught the survey. I'm slow.
When did we get in the business of making characters with no weaknesses the norm? Pretty much every hero has a tragic flaw :P


When they playtest packet came out with monsters that can't hit and AC 18's and +7 to hit at first level for the PC characters. You have to get the saves in there to finish the job of making invinsible PCs
When did we get in the business of making characters with no weaknesses the norm? Pretty much every hero has a tragic flaw :P


 
Most tragic flaws seem explicit not due to lack of versatility you need special knowledge to exploit it. They seem all around awesome....but they missed a spot just over that heal.

Winners play to there own strengths.. ie if they have great discipline and mess with there head thats what you run in to.. if they have awesome spirit and mess with there head you run in to that. .. if they have a intricate and labyrithed mind you find yourself trying to get past its complexity. IE save based on WIS/CHA/INT...  
  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."

 

All six stats as defenses is only a very weak measure against dump stats. I think there's sort of this perception that having an 8 in something somehow makes you heinously weak in that area, but it's just a -1 vs. not dumping that stat. It matters, but not that much. If dumping a stat is letting you boost another one, then it's not even like you're weakening your defenses overall. A character with 12 Con and 8 Cha is not straddled with a glaring weakness compared to a character with 10 Con and 10 Cha. He'll have +1 on some saves and -1 on others.

There's kind of a mental tendency (I have it too) to think of the difference between 10 and 8 as represented a scary and potentially dangerous shortcoming while thinking of the difference betwen 10 and 12 as not really much of a big deal... but they're (pretty close to) the same thing. To the extent that a character can live with a 10 instead of a 12, they can live with an 8 instead of a 10.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
I think the main problem with saves is how high they can get especially from spells.  If Mr Big the enemy wizard tries to dominate you, well chances are you are dominated.  DC 17ish saves are pretty damn hard to hit even in your prime stat.  6 saves works fine for me, but the save DCs should be much, much lower.  Especially when talking save or else effects.  Like have the base DC be 0+attribute mod+class mod and have damaging spells work on the to hit model.  
If anything, I'd push things in the opposite direction: keep every stat as a save, but make them real ability checks: d20 + ability score.

That would both discourage dump stats and encourage variety in spells or maneuvers, because sorry Mr. Mage, but you're not going to make that Ogre fail a Con save.
The metagame is not the game.
If anything, I'd push things in the opposite direction: keep every stat as a save, but make them real ability checks: d20 + ability score.

That would both discourage dump stats and encourage variety in spells or maneuvers, because sorry Mr. Mage, but you're not going to make that Ogre fail a Con save.



Not bad.  I like that idea.  d20+12 has a good chance to hit those dc 17 spells, and yeah the 20 strength ogre will just auto break free of spells like web.  Which is here I think spells that can just shut you down should be.  Big risk, big reward.  Right now it is low risk, big reward.  

The idea of a dump stat is awful, and all six stats as defenses is the single biggest thing that I've seen that could help prevent dump stats from happening in the first place.



No it won't.  Not while stats are added to attack rolls.



Yeah, the more defense stats you have, the less valuable each of them becomes.

A bonus to an attack stat helps on 100% of your attack rolls, but a bonus to your defenses helps on only 1/6th of your defense rolls.

The more defensive stats you have in the game, the less valuable each defense becomes.

Why should you have a way to prevent all vulnerability?



This is a very good question, and there is a very good answer to it.


The idea of a dump stat is awful, and all six stats as defenses is the single biggest thing that I've seen that could help prevent dump stats from happening in the first place.



No it won't.  Not while stats are added to attack rolls.



Yeah, the more defense stats you have, the less valuable each of them becomes.

A bonus to an attack stat helps on 100% of your attack rolls, but a bonus to your defenses helps on only 1/6th of your defense rolls.

The more defensive stats you have in the game, the less valuable each defense becomes.




This is indeed the reason that the current 6 defenses worries me.  Games are more fun when there are interesting choices.  Creating a balanced character and creating a more extreme character should both be viable and interesting choices.

The way stats work, the only way to try to protect yourself saving-throw-wise, is to spread the points very thing.  And as someone pointed out, this will only net you a miniscule +1 or +2 bonus, not really worth sacrificing the all-inportant prime stat.  So the end result will be that there just isn't a way to protect yourself from saving throws.  You'll just ignore that facet of the game; if someone attacks your high stats its gravy, if they attack the low stats, oh well.

It is viable to consider bumping up a secondary or tertiary stat and be partially motivated by wanting to have soem resistance to the threats of the world.  Does every character need to do this?  No, you can still create a wizard with both a terrible Wis and Cha who is easily dominated but is brilliant, and that is a viable choice.

But if some mental attacks target Wis and some target Cha, I'm that much less likely to bother even considering defending my character's mind.  And that's a shame.
I have taken to liking the rationale that winners play to there own strength.

One of the optional rules I had considered for 4e was normally an attack will be defended by the subjects strongest relavent stats.

Except when the subject is at a disadvantage (in 4e the attacker had CA) then they use the lowest of the relavent stats 
  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."

 

I don't see it as a shame and I think your idea promotes min/maxing if it is applied to everything, ever, that requires a save. With the flatter math in this edition, a +1 is much more valuable than in 4e or 3e. 

If you want to use your idea it could be some module you can use in your own game. I'm not a fan of this being in the core. Write something up as optional for yourself and others who like the idea and publish it.
I think Goken's idea has merit. It's a matter of style.  Some groups want the rules to encourage well-rounded characters, so ignoring any Ability has negative consequences, thus encouraging people to ensure a moderate range of abilities.  Other people like the characters to have pronounced strengths and weaknesses so Min-Maxing and dump stats are features, not bugs.  Both are valid play styles.

Right now, the game seems more focused on the well-rounded character.  Which is fine.  Goken's style can be accmmodated just fine with a very simple module, which I described in an earlier thread...

ABILITY PILLARS: The six Abilities are grouped into three pillars: Strength/Constitution, Dexterity/Intelligence, and Wisdom/Charisma.  Whenever an attack triggers an Ability Check from a target, the character's check uses the Ability Modifier of the highest Ability in the Pillar containing the specified Ability.  I.e., if a spell calls for a Charisma check, the character will use the higher of his Wisdom or Charisma modifiers.

To bring back 4e-style NADs, simply add the following optional rule...

NON-AC DEFENSES: Whenever an attack triggers an Ability Check from a target against a DC that is derived using an Ability modifier of the attacker, instead, the attacker makes an Ability check against a DC equal to 11 plus the attacker's Ability modifer.  Any modifiers to the original DC now become modifiers to the attacker's check, and any modifiers to the defender's original Ability check now become modifiers to the DC.  Moreover, if the defender would have had advantage or disadvantage on the original Ability Check, treat it as if the attacker has disadvantage or advantage on their Ability Check, respectively.
At the moment 0 spells target INT, 2 spells target CHA, and 1 spell targets STR and only indirectly (Web). Just FYI.
I think Goken's idea has merit. It's a matter of style.  Some groups want the rules to encourage well-rounded characters, so ignoring any Ability has negative consequences, thus encouraging people to ensure a moderate range of abilities.  Other people like the characters to have pronounced strengths and weaknesses so Min-Maxing and dump stats are features, not bugs.  Both are valid play styles.

Right now, the game seems more focused on the well-rounded character.  Which is fine.  Goken's style can be accmmodated just fine with a very simple module, which I described in an earlier thread...

ABILITY PILLARS: The six Abilities are grouped into three pillars: Strength/Constitution, Dexterity/Intelligence, and Wisdom/Charisma.  Whenever an attack triggers an Ability Check from a target, the character's check uses the Ability Modifier of the highest Ability in the Pillar containing the specified Ability.  I.e., if a spell calls for a Charisma check, the character will use the higher of his Wisdom or Charisma modifiers.



Add my idea as alternative adaption for disadvantage.. when your defense has disadvantage instead of rolling two dice ..  you use the lower of the two this does encourage breadth a little and still hearkens to winners playing to there own strengths. Its also less intense than normal disadvantage which for heros on defense? I rather like.





  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."

 

At the moment 0 spells target INT, 2 spells target CHA, and 1 spell targets STR and only indirectly (Web). Just FYI.



In effect making those stats less significant by proxy instead of being adaptable to more things.
This might be fixed eventually but somehow I doubt it.
  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."

 

when your defense has disadvantage instead of rolling two dice ..  you use the lower of the two


That would be an infrequently invoked rule, I think.  I don't think it would really affect character generation.  I thin people generally assume if they have disadvantage, they are screwed.  As long as your secondary bonus is within 5 of the primary bonus, you're going to be better off than straight disadvantage.  (Disadvantage is roughly equal to a -5 penalty.)  Which means, if your Str is 20, as long as your Con is 12, you're still ahead of the game.  For most purposes, therefore, all this rule does is make disadvantage less onerous.
I do think more thought needs to be given to which Ability defends against which effects.

STRENGTH: Any spell that creates physical terrain (web, evard's tentacles, acid mire, etc.), with the check representing your ability to move out of the area.
DEXTERITY: Any spell with a physical effect that targets you individually
CONSTITUTION: Any area spell with a physical effect
INTELLIGENCE: Any spell with a mental effect that targets you individually
WISDOM: Any spell that creates metaphysical terrain (illusions, mostly, or zones of fear) with the check representing your ability to pierce the illusion or move out of the area.
CHARISMA: Any area spell with a mental effect
when your defense has disadvantage instead of rolling two dice ..  you use the lower of the two


That would be an infrequently invoked rule, I think.  I don't think it would really affect character generation.  I thin people generally assume if they have disadvantage, they are screwed.  As long as your secondary bonus is within 5 of the primary bonus, you're going to be better off than straight disadvantage.  (Disadvantage is roughly equal to a -5 penalty.)  Which means, if your Str is 20, as long as your Con is 12, you're still ahead of the game.  For most purposes, therefore, all this rule does is make disadvantage less onerous.


In this case yes I kind of like that.. disadvantage on an attack type action can go ahead and make whiffs .. I think maybe disadvantage on defense is better off being a milder form.
 
How often the rule is invoked would be however often one was defending from disadvantage...if that is rare I suppose you are right.

Hmmm wonder if one could do similar with attacking all attack styles have a primary and secondary stat... if you are forced to use it in a disadvantaged way you will exploit its less primary techniques.... nyeh.

  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."

 

I think Goken's idea has merit. It's a matter of style.  Some groups want the rules to encourage well-rounded characters, so ignoring any Ability has negative consequences, thus encouraging people to ensure a moderate range of abilities.  Other people like the characters to have pronounced strengths and weaknesses so Min-Maxing and dump stats are features, not bugs.  Both are valid play styles.

Right now, the game seems more focused on the well-rounded character.  Which is fine.  Goken's style can be accmmodated just fine with a very simple module, which I described in an earlier thread...

ABILITY PILLARS: The six Abilities are grouped into three pillars: Strength/Constitution, Dexterity/Intelligence, and Wisdom/Charisma.  Whenever an attack triggers an Ability Check from a target, the character's check uses the Ability Modifier of the highest Ability in the Pillar containing the specified Ability.  I.e., if a spell calls for a Charisma check, the character will use the higher of his Wisdom or Charisma modifiers.

To bring back 4e-style NADs, simply add the following optional rule...

NON-AC DEFENSES: Whenever an attack triggers an Ability Check from a target against a DC that is derived using an Ability modifier of the attacker, instead, the attacker makes an Ability check against a DC equal to 11 plus the attacker's Ability modifer.  Any modifiers to the original DC now become modifiers to the attacker's check, and any modifiers to the defender's original Ability check now become modifiers to the DC.  Moreover, if the defender would have had advantage or disadvantage on the original Ability Check, treat it as if the attacker has disadvantage or advantage on their Ability Check, respectively.


Holy cow that's a great idea!  This is why wrecan is my hero.

From a conceptual point of view, I'd be in favor of any solution that addresses the issue of Wis and Cha saving throws overlapping in a narrative sense.  The other stats are pretty clear and largely make sense for avoiding specific threats (in that it makes sense that Intelligence isn't really the go-to stat for any threat other than avoiding dire rubix cubes).

From a game-fun point of view, I like the three pillars, as they create interesting choices and bring a nice balance as discussed above.  Hopefully there can be some kind of module like wrecan's in the official rules.

From a conceptual point of view, I'd be in favor of any solution that addresses the issue of Wis and Cha saving throws overlapping in a narrative sense.  The other stats are pretty clear and largely make sense for avoiding specific threats (in that it makes sense that Intelligence isn't really the go-to stat for any threat other than avoiding dire rubix cubes).


Hey I call that a Mind Maize a major but exculsionary country in my game world has a magic that blocks its ports with a huge one that diverts people out of it... unless they are highly trained in it.
  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."

 

I think Goken's idea has merit. It's a matter of style.


No, it's not a matter of style.  There are direct balance implications, and you can't balance spells properly when you don't know how many defenses they're going to target.

This isn't something that you can just patch on and call a different style.  It would require rebalancing the entire spell system, and that puts it to the point where it can't be simply a module change.

This, unfortunately, is core.

And I really don't think that you can make the case that automatically tying all spells' save abilities together at the system level is a good idea.  It diminishes spell variability and makes them less interesting, makes character design less interesting because you can paper over weaknesses, and forces specific narrative rationalizations due purely to the mechanical ties and not any actual story-based motive.

Whether you use saves or NADs is a matter of style.  Whether you use specific ability pillars or not is not a matter of style.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
With the flatter math in this edition, a +1 is much more valuable than in 4e or 3e. 



This is not true to any meaningful degree with comparison to 4e. The non-treadmill +1s were just as valuable in 4e, as they mean that 5% of rolls will come out in your favor when they otherwise would not. The fact you are comparing 10+d20 v 20 at high levels instead of 30+d20 v 40 doesn't really matter.
The big difference with the lack of treadmill comes in when comparing higher v lower level characters' performance in the same party, and when using higher or lower level monsters. 

Comparing to 3e is a little trickier, because high level 3e had higher divergeance. For example, a high level fighter is considering whether to wield a two handed weapon (or dual wield) or wear a +5 shield for +7-9 AC. He also might have some contention for the ring of protection +5, amulet of natural armor +5, etc. Chosing to do something else with a slot that could be AC might be a 1-2 AC shift at low levels or 5-9 AC shift at high levels. While each +1 generally means the same thing in the sweet spot, 3e was more prone to having attacks run "off the die" where there is either a 5% or 95% chance of success and +/-1 has literally no effect.
(And if the DM is tightly controlling treasure, the high AC options might just not show up, leaving you way outside the expected AC range, while in 4e it is only expected that you get the typical enhancement bonus progression, and that can be fudged on the PC side (inherent bonuses) or DM side (shift the monster numbers predictably) if the DM wants a low/no magic item campaign where the bonus treadmill doesn't show up.) 
This isn't something that you can just patch on and call a different style.  It would require rebalancing the entire spell system


Or living with the imbalance which is also a matter of style, no matter how much that idea seems to offend you.

that puts it to the point where it can't be simply a module change.


I disagree.  I don't have nearly as hyperrestrictive definition of "module change" as you do.

And I really don't think that you can make the case that automatically tying all spells' save abilities together at the system level is a good idea.  It diminishes spell variability and makes them less interesting, makes character design less interesting because you can paper over weaknesses, and forces specific narrative rationalizations due purely to the mechanical ties and not any actual story-based motive.


And while these are fine reasons for why the pillar-system is unlikely to be the default option, and the pillar system would be optional at most, there appear to be a group of people who are more than willing to sacrifice spell variability so as to allow a bit more min-maxing.  Whether that group ios sufficiently large to warrant having a pillar rule included as an option is something only Wizards can determine through polls and customer sampling.  i don't know if there is enough such players and neither do you.

But I have no problem with modules that allow people to knowingly accept an increased level of imbalance.  I do believe that is part of the budle of attributes that makes up a specific gaming group's playstyle.
Wrecan +1
+1 to multi-stat targeting.  For some spells.  Phantasmal killer targeting Int or Wis for example.

But i still want to know how high dexterity means less damage from fire.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

+1 to multi-stat targeting.  For some spells.  Phantasmal killer targeting Int or Wis for example.

But i still want to know how high dexterity means less damage from fire.



Walking balanced through coals maintains a seal of vapor which prevents damage.. its damage restistance I say.
  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."

 

I thought dex saves were vs explosions, not "fire."

You try to jump away from the blast and thereby take less of the damage. You're not dodging fire, just getting the most protection you can from the blast.

No?
But i still want to know how high dexterity means less damage from fire.


I never liked that.  It should be Str or Con. 
But i still want to know how high dexterity means less damage from fire.

Since Dexterity also covers reflexes and reaction time, it allows you to see the fire coming and turn so that it hits you in a less sensitve area (e.g. the back, rather than the face).

I dunno, that's just what I got out of it.  I don't generally allow a save against fire unless there's a really good reason.

The metagame is not the game.