|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 3:27AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2012
|
Dear ladies and gentlemen of the comunity!
Would you please explain me why would someone prefer throwing saving rolls over attack rolls?
I mean, when a fighter attacks a magician, he throws the dice.
Now here is the surprise: when a magician attacks the fighter (with spell), the fighter still throws the dice! (don't take damage to account, that's where it's equal).
I've played D&D since 2nd ed. I know the drill. I just can't understand the thrill...
What say you?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 12:32PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 13, 2005
|
There isn't. I've been playing since... all editions. 4e finally got it right with: Offense/taking action = die rolling Defense/re-action = DC I've offered this in my feedback to WotC at every opportunity. The only reason we're back to rolling for selective defenses based on the whim of the designers, is old fuddy-duddies who can't accept change.  Seriously though... it's just a throwback that I think we can do without. It's like going back to THAC0. Sure the math's the same, but it's just plain backwards.
Stay Frosty!
- Shado
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 12:33PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2010
|
Technically attacking an AC and Reflex, Fort, or Will, is the same as attacking AC, and then making a save against spells. The benefit of making it an attack for all things is the dice roll is taken care on on the players or monsters turns. Saving throws bog down the DM, and goes against making the game easier for the DM. So I can only assume saves are there for nostalgia.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 1:05PM
#4
|
|
|
Because it puts the roll to resist mind control and other huge things like that in the hands of the player. It sucks to just have the DM say "does a 37 hit your will? Ohhhhh, too bad."
As for, "Then do you not like attack rolls that take down a player either?" If they drop you in one hit, then yea it feels a bit harsh. Although, I still think that's a better position to be in then continuously having a dragon be invisible to you and just twiddling your thumbs. Someone probably has some heals on them, not always as true for some status effects.
I'd rather have player always rolls than always an attack roll. I don't really like the idea that an action from a player is resolved differently then the same action from a monster because it gives the impression that the world revolves around the player. But I'd take that over the, "sucks to be you" feel I get from 4e a lot. I always play a character that has a couple ways to grant saving throws because it feels like the only way I can have a hand in my own fate.
Although, I DEFINITELY think it should be easy to switch to all attack rolls. I know the merits to it, even though I don't like it, and people should have that option.
What I think the Wilder Design Goals should be. Psionic Homebrew Mk2! Changed core, Focus Points, Psionic Potentials, stuff! Very basic core stuff. :P Homebrew Psionics blog posts archive: Spoiler:
Show
UPDATED Dec/18/2012: BAMN! Random update with a modest amount of hard rules for Animal Affinity, Telepathy, and Telekinesis. ADDED: Discipline Burn and more "soft" ideas.
Dec/13/2012: Small Psionics Homebrew Update, now that I'm done with Finals.
Really old.
Nov/02/2012:
I'm working on a homebrew Wilder, and so a homebrew Psionics system. Here's a 3 part post with info on where I am in the design process.
Part 1, Hard rules/example soulknife discipline: Link.
Part 2, Basic ideas/goals on basic numbers and classes: Link.
Part 3, Direction/ideas I want to take with specific disciplines: Link.:3
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 1:15PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2010
|
I can see your points, and the most frustrating thing at the moment is only the casters have effects that require saves, and the martial character attacks AC all day long. I could accept either system, if that simple change was put into place.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 1:23PM
#6
|
|
|
For immersion purposes, when a wizard summons fire that is in someone’s space, that someone needs to get out and it is in fact their action (die roll) that determines if they get burned or not. Oh, you said ‘prefer’? Then no, please, let’s use a system that works, is simple and everyone can enjoy. However, I don’t like class based defenses of any kind. I also don’t like making players remember a huge number of defensive stats. If we go back to AC, Ref, Fort, Will then we have players trying to figure out what their attacks work against, or worse, we have each ‘attack’ work against specific defenses and a return to the 4e powers system all together. I wouldn’t be opposed to a system where attacks worked against your Attribute Scores (roll your Charm Person against their Wisdom Score). However, then you have an issue with equipment, increasing and decreasing Scores and figuring when to use AC. Short answer: All attacks should be rolled. But how do we do it well?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 1:48PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 13, 2005
|
For immersion purposes, when a wizard summons fire that is in someone’s space, that someone needs to get out and it is in fact their action (die roll) that determines if they get burned or not.
This is a reaction. It's something you'd do before you even fully process how or why there's fire, or that there's even fire for that matter. Just sudden pain/discomfort. I get that some people like to roll for these sort of things too. And that's OK. It's a quick change to subtract 10 from a DC and toss in a d20 in its place, or vice versa. The problem is, you start making die rolls for offense AND defense, and the system bogs down real quick.
Stay Frosty!
- Shado
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 3:31PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
It doesn't really matter who rolls at the table if you think about it. Its just a d20 vs a target number, be it AC, Ability Score Save or DC.
There is as many people that prefer to roll their spell attacks than their is that prefer to roll their saves i am sure. :P
Rolling saves has a longer history in D&D though and is a deeply ingrained core mechanic for many people. So i am not surprised to see it return.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 4:22PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2012
|
Thanks everybody for all the replies.
plague, I don't think that any person should be asked that question "which would you prefer to roll" but only the caster players, for they are the poeple who pay the price. I know that some of my magic casters palyers feel a little out for not throwing any dice through an entire encounter, (illusionists, evocators, enchanters and the like).
I, though, never felt that when I played a Wizard.
For my players, it does matter who is in "charge" of the attack role resault. it feels the fate is in thier hands, and not mine (as the DM).
A friend told me a few times that whoever has one foot in the history and the other in the future will eventualy urinate on the present. What poeple loved once is important, but you can't live today or plan the future trough only the history of things, so that doesn't answer the question. It only points out the roots of teh issue.
Shado, I think that you are right. for every way to think of something happening you can see the other side. mabe it's a reaction to the attack. mabe not.
Vacant, I think there is the other side too: if the roll to resist mind control is in the player's hands, then the roll to resist's the enchanter player's magic is in the DM's hand, and mabe he would feel a little out of controll over his own powers.
Any one else has more oppinions?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 30, 2012 - 9:59PM
#10
|
|
|
there are two major problems with having saving throws as writen. the first is that things like advantage/disadvantage dont work with them. a caster can just not care about being disadvantaged at all, nor would he care about working to get advantage. this applies to other mechanics that dont work with both systems. it is clubsy and not well thought out.
the second reason is that it is counter-intuitive and can be confusing to new players. keep in mind new players are the bigest group they have make happy. no new players no growing fanbase.
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes.
Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
|
|
|
