|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 6:52PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2006
|
One of the things I liked about 4e was that instead of rolling saving throws, Fortitude, Reflex and Will were defenses that worked like AC. This made everything in the game consistent and made it possible for magic spells to work just like physical attacks. In Next, they're going to be using every ability score for saving throws, and I like that, but I think it would be better if they were a "defense" score instead of being rolled. However, having a "Strength Defense" or "Intelligence Defense" would be... odd, not to mention confusing. But then an idea occurred to me, why not just have the ability score itself serve as the "defense"? For example, in order to hit someone with a fireball, you must roll a spell attack and "hit" their Dexterity score. If a target has a Dexterity score of 15, that would be the DC of hitting that creature with a fireball. Using the ability score as the defense is very simple, easy to understand, and also gives a benefit to having odd-numbered ability scores.
It may seem a bit unfair to spellcasters, because targets are effectively getting a +1 to their "defense" for each point of ability score above 10, instead of every 2 points (which gives you a +1 modifier). But after thinking about it, I don't think it would be unfair to spellcasters at all. Casters are also getting a bonus to their magic attacks of +2 or more, and their primary spellcasting ability is very likely to be their highest ability score. A wizard with a 20 Int and a +2 magic attack bonus is rolling +7 to "hit" with his spells. An opponent would have to have a 17 in his ability score just to be on an even footing! And nobody's going to have such a high score in every ability. Most creatures will have lower ability scores that a wizard can target with various spells. There could also, of course, be magical implements that add to spell attacks the same way magic weapons add to weapon attacks.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 7:06PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
You're right, it does seem unfair.
But one thing that doesn't seem to have been considered much at all is the prospect of tailoring attack spells to opponents' low saves (or low defenses, in this case). With the current preparation system - you prep a spell, and can use it (or other spells) as many times as you have slots (the best of both the 3.x Wizard & Sorcerer!) - it wouldn't take too long for casters to have an attack spell ready to target each stat, and, with 5e emphasis on stats 'making sense' for the monster, you could then pretty reliably hit the small ones with STR saves, the dumb ones with INT saves, the big ones with DEX saves, and so forth. A little memorizing of monster books wouldn't hurt, either.... or, rather, it would.
Inevitably, attack spells that force each of the 6 saves are going to come out - it's just too obvious and easy a way to make a new spell 'unique' and 'interesting,' some harried designer is going to resort to it eventually.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 7:30PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Sep 11, 2012
|
This is not the worst idea I've heard. What I like about it is that it validates having odd stats, a little bit at least. I'm definitely going to do more thinking about this and see if I come up with something to contribute, because I think it needs a little refining.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 8:14PM
#4
|
|
|
Why don't they stick with Reflex/Will/Fort having to always check the spells to see whther I roll or my players roll is a PITA (DC or Spell Attack)...personally I think both sides should roll (no 10 mod) to reflect both the attacker getting a lucky shot or the target getting a lucky dodge (or sloppy or somewhere in between) and learning what type of save to target add some much needed tactical element to the game.
So Burning hands takes Int Mod+ other mods+D20 vs. Target Dex mod + other mods + d20.
Sidenote: I'd feats like Insightful Reflexes and Force of Personality come back as well...one of the few feats that were powerful AND lore heavy
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 9:37PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
This is not an awful idea at all.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 10:09PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Feb 17, 2010
|
I have considered this idea myself, and even suggested it in another thread.
That said, I'm still on the fence about it. On the one hand, it's simple and straightforward, gives a good purpose to actual ability scores, and works much better than the current non-scaling saves that get so crappy as levels go up (okay maybe that's three hands)... but on the other (fourth?) hand I'm leery about the potential to have an 18 or even a 20 in one save/defense at 1st level. In the scheme of things, I guess the former does outweigh the latter.
I do prefer the consistency of "actor rolls, reactor uses a static DC." I've even considered trying to extend that to things like opportunity attacks. I play and run a lot of play-by-post, and having all your rolls occur on your own turn speeds things up immensely, because (for instance) you don't have to wait around for the DM to roll a saving throw in order to know your spell hit (we use an online spreadsheet to calculate hit success/failure).
I want "punch magic in the face" to be a maneuver
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 11:33PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2009
|
I like the idea of Saving Throws for Area of Effect spells and resistance to effects (such as poison).
A caster doesn't have to try to hit someone with a fireball; he just targets a point between enemies and hopes that any within the AoE take damage (because they fail to dodge or resist the damage, not because the caster succeeds in hitting them).
Spells that are used specifically as an attack vs. a specific target(s) should (and do) require an attack roll.
With poisons, if it is from a weapon, the attacker has already succeeded in hitting the target. The target would then have to save (as in, his body would have to find a way of resisting) against the poison's effects. This would also be the case for ingested poisons or contact/insinuative poisons that are not the result of an attack.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 23, 2013 - 12:31AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
I do like the consistent approach (i.e. saves static rather than spell DCs being static). However, I think it would be a problem mathematically to just beat something's score. In the context of PC stats it wouldn't matter much, but NPCs can have stats upwards of 25, making them nearly unhittable. At the same time, if you make NPCs follow the same limitations as PCs for what their stats are allowed to be, you can't have a dragon or a pit fiend be stronger than an excellent human, which feels... weird.
In short, I like the idea in principle, but I don't think the math works out well.
<Ioun> they're apparently making a MolIsCool pp
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 23, 2013 - 3:54AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2012
|
The concept could work with certain martial maneuvers as well. Trip is an example that should target Dex or Str rather than AC. Using an above example could you Trip a Dragon with 25 STR? Beat DC 25 and you can!
While a Contest rather than a Check may seem more appropriate the idea that someone is always contesting being Tripped, Mind Controlled, or whatever, in a fight would give using Ability as DC credence.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 23, 2013 - 5:26AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
I get the disconnect on AoE spells, and I could probably get behind a dichotomy of direct and indirect effect resolution, the latter needing a save, where the former are always against a DC (and resolved by the attacker). I'm glad most spells now target AC when they have a physical component to their effect, but I do like the idea of spells targeting ability scores as well. Perhaps designate an ability score for spells with indirect attacks based on school? This would make it much simpler than have "save vs X" for all of the same theme of spells (like illusions and charms). Martial maneuvers should also use a similar mechanic, IMO.
Magic Dual Color Test
Show
|
|
|
