I never play at high levels so I didn't know saving throws were so problematic. I was aware that the frequency of saving throw types was extremely lopsided, but now I am considering adding half proficiency to unproficient saves in my homebrew edition.
@@kubomagico8853 The system shouldn't rely on a certain class being in the party to cover a design flaw. Also, Aura of Protection has a limited range so it doesn't always fix the problem.
I am the Paladin/warlock in a high level 5e Mad Mage game, and often it feels like my aura is the only thing giving me and the party a chance at succeeding at saves.
Unironically, DnD should just go back to Fort, Will, and Reflex saving throws. If it works for Pathfinder, then it should work for DnD. Speaking of Pathfinder (I've only played second edition), I like how they handled subclasses a lot more than 5e.
Strongly agree. I've been building a homebrew to do that and restructure progression. I use only 4 classes: Expert, Mage, Priest, Warrior. Each have 4 Archetype options corresponding to the 5e classes plus Psion (3e Psion/5e UA Mystic), Shaman (4e), and Tactician (4e Warlord). Classes, Archetypes, Specializations (equivalent to 5e subclasses), Origins (equivalent to backgrounds, with some exclusive to certain races), Skills, Tools, and some Feats all are revised to operate with Ranks. A single class can increase in rank upon leveling up, possibly rewarding a rank in Archetype or a Bonus Feat; Archetypes in turn may reward a rank in a Specialization. Each may reward ranks in Saves, Skills, Tools, or grant a specific Feature. Bonus Feats can be used to advance an Origin, select a Feat, or two Half-Feats. Proficiency is split into 3 ranks: 1. Novice (half PB), 2. Trained (full PB), and 3. Advanced (double PB). Saves, Skills, Tools, and Weapon Families can be upgraded up to Rank 2 normally, with Rank 3 being available through class-rewarded Expertise (corresponding to 5e Expertise); Saves and Weapon Families never get Rank 3. AC is replaced with DR/SR and Reflex/Fortitude/Will Defenses. DR for armors is equal to the 5e AC - 10, and armors limit Dexterity bonus to Reflex; DR reduces physical damage (Acid/Bludgeoning/Force/Piercing/Slashing), while SR comes from effects such as _Mage Armor_ or from a magic item; SR reduces energy damage (Cold/Fire/Lightning/Necrotic/Radiant); some effects extend these to include Poison and Thunder, but Psychic damage is only affected by Resistance/Immunity. The three Defenses are passive, Reflex covering Dexterity (replacing AC in attacks made to hit a target), Fortitude covering Strength and Constitution, and Will covering Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. A character can use a reaction when a passive defense is overcome to roll a Saving Throw for the specified Ability. Each Defense is calculated as 8 + Save Modifier, with Reflex from Dexterity, Fortitude from Constitution, and Will from whichever is higher between Wisdom and Charisma.
Thank you so much for the clear and concise breakdown of what's wrong with the saving throws in 5e. Ive played this edition only semi regularly and I just Knew that the saves felt weird especially the higher level we got. To see it laid out with the numbers, both of the difficulty and the split of the spells/abilities that call for each save is really helpful to understanding why this bothered me for so long.
To follow up on Dragonborn being new as of 3e not 4e, the Warlock is the same. It debuted in the Complete Arcane. The Complete series introduced new classes and player options, with the Complete Arcane being focused on arcane casters. Eldritch Blast was a standard feature of the class instead of a cantrip. Sadly I think they only added new invocations in two other books (Complete Mage and Draconomicon). The Warlock was popular enough that it got added to 4e and became a mainstay.
In my game (Ishanekon: World Shapers), I reworked the saving throws (called Defense Roll or DR) to address those problems. a) All of the seven stats are common DRs. b) The difference between Level 0 and max is from 13 to 17, making high-level DRs far more achievable. c) You get enough Stat Points to keep at least three stats at max, so you have at least three decent DRs. d) Each DR has an associated Skill, which helps you raise it if you invest points in that Skill. You can use it to round up your weaknesses or make you almost untouchable in your strengths. e) There are talents and item upgrades that increase all DRs at once, making it easier to be strong in all of them if you specialize in DR defenses. DRs in my system become a far more tactical tool. Finding out which DR of the enemy is weak and avoiding his strengths is part of the game and can greatly swing combat in your favor.
1 level starting dip into Draconic Sorcerer before multiclassing into just about any other build has many advantages and few downsides. Base 7 HP before Con bonus, 13 AC unarmoured, Con saving throw proficiency, full spell caster level, 4 cantrips, innate magical ability, Shield spell twice per long rest and backstory role-play opportunities. It’s especially good for campaigns that start at levels higher than one.
It will be intresting to listen your take of the "1/4 caster" subclasses, it's one of the desing elements of classes that feel the least explored in 5e
There are plenty of features the players have at their disposal to counteract high saving throws. Core features include: Danger Sense Baridic Insp Aura of Protection Indomitable Disciplined Survivor (Diamond Soul) Evasion Flash of Genius There's a tonne of Subclass features that amp Saving throws. Spells like Bless, Foresight etc help tremendously too. There are plenty of features/spells that also grant immunity or ADV on saves against certain condition like Poison/Frightened/Charmed which also work against saving throws that inflict those. On top of that sometimes just having Resistance to the damage type is enough to have the equivalent of Evasion by halving the incoming damage even on a failed save. Which is easy to obtain and utilize effectively with a little scouting to know what you're up against. And then there's the Resilient Feat for those who really want to ensure they stand a good chance to pass. And finally Mage Slayer for a Legendary Resistance, high saves are not a problem for player characters.
Indomitable, Diamond Souls and Flash of Genius are unlocked really late, at level 9 at least (Diamond souls at level 14). Considering how unpopular high level D&D is, that's not great news. Mage Slayer only works against spells, not monster abilities. Which is a shame, actually. The rest only highlights how casters are better than martials, since they can dip to get absorb elements and have the slots to use them. Actually, it's a big plus for clerics and druids, since they do not have to pick the spells they know. Also, the scouting ahead only works if the opposition is something that you know... it's not always the case.
Honestly most of these don't really help, saving throws against damage are basically irrelevant and only condition stopping ones matter, so the only realistic ones helping are Bardic inspo (which has to be pre cast on every potential target) Aura of Protection (Which has only 10 ft reach, so unless you are coordinating well as a party and your paladin is not playing the class for it's fantasy "Big melee smite" but for it's actual tools, it is basically non existent) Indomitable (Still does not make you able to suceed saves you previously wouldn't just gives you better chances are reasonable saves) Flash of Genius (This one is actually just good but attached to the least common class) Diamond Soul (Valid 14 levels of monk means you probably already suffer on the AC front tho) Resilient is the only realistic way for your character (if they are not a paladin) to increase their vital saving throws (con and wis) and even then depending on your starting class you can't even get both since you can only take resilient a singular time. Often being the only thing making a savingthrow possible, as high level monsters are plagued by dc19+ saves. I play(ed) at these levels, it sucks. The only way to avoid the saving throw fuckery is to not have to make any to begin with, leading to even more stun focused gameplay that we oh so love about 5e.
@@SomeBody08150you listed a solid amount of options including a generic one. The idea that you should just be able to tank super high level spells is kinda stupid tho. Easiest way to deal with the saving throw issue is to treat magic like it's powerful. Use options like silence or disrupting somatic components etc. Outside of the character build, you can just stop standing around while getting pelted
Are used to love Fort, Ref and Will in Pathfinder first edition; apparently the Cypher system basically made that their entire game engine, made all your attacks and saving throws around the particular mechanic of three stats and tiers of rolls that players have to make.
Ive always wanted to try and split class levels and character levels. Character levels being physical growth and class levels giving more options, not more power. Almost like starting at negative levels. Level 1 will have 7 average abilitie score. So you have generic growth with exp. And then aquire class levels with special skills and feats through in game accomplishments.
The saving throw situation is absolutely diabolical. Adding half PB to bad saves is such an easy fix I can’t believe the designers didn’t add it to 5.5e.
20:14 You forgot one of the worst subclasses carried by the good base class, the fighter champion. I'd take berserker exhaustion over landing a crit on a 19. On saving throws, (a bit outside of the video's scope but) the Paladin is really good with saving throws to the point where having one at those higher levels is just required the aura of protection along with being able to cast bless which is good because nearly everyone loves playing as a paladin but it's also bad because it nearly forces every high level party to have a paladin to stop getting mind controlled at DC21 bonus points if they also Peace cleric dipped.
I'd push back on "champion = bad" real hard. "Champion = boring" is fair, though; spend any amount of time with 5E and champion's appeal drops off hard. It's built to be the most simple subclass it can possibly be as THE newbie class. No decisions, no resources, just improved functionality in all things Fighter. It's absolutely the weakest of the three fighter subs in the PHB, but I wouldn't call it a failed design the same way the berserker is. Berserker actively hurts the player for using its subclass feature, and not in the cool MtG "life is just another resource" way, but in a "you are just literally less capable of doing everything in the game the more often you use this subclass's core feature" way. I think the paladin point is fair, buuuut the paladin isn't a great solution to 5Es saving throw problem (although AoP is a great self-buffing feature). Most of the time that Aura of Protection is available its only a 10ft radius (you only get the 30ft radius at 18th level), so you have to be in melee nearly shoulder-to-shoulder with the paladin to benefit from it, and nice as the save bump is, grouping up like that makes you a great target for AoEs. It's an imperfect trade-off, and it generally doesn't really help the classes hit worst by 5E's save system anyways.
@@DungeonDigest agree with everything expect champ fighter being the newbie class. Started 5e with lost mines in high school with a bunch of maths nerds and everyone collectively took a look at the sub class and concluded that it was a dogs breakfast. The lost mines pre-gen characters include a wizard and cleric who were getting 2nd LV spells, and choosing the spells from a list and new players have successfully gotten through first and second level by that stage and would have a general feeling about how bad it is. Second wind and action surge are resources that they have been managing along with their hit dice. It's not too much to ask that they manage 4 superiority dice and even if they fail to do so it's nearly the same as playing a champion anyway from a spreadsheet perspective. Anyway Brilliant video and great arguments, keep it up.
I like the idea of getting 1/2 proficiency (rounded down) in any saving throw you aren't proficient in. I don't get to high levels much but I can see the issue of "oh... no point even rolling really. May as well be an auto hit on me" depending on save and target
My Saving Throw Hotfix: give players half proficiency in a save with each ASI (or upgrade a half to full) Characters start with 2 saves, and end with 4.5, Fighter with 5.5, Monk and Rogue with all 6.
That's interesting. M only objection on paper is the issue you run into with ASIs being delayed for multiclassed characters, but I do like framing it as a power-up like that, that's cool.
Time for me to slob on PF2e's nob. It uses the "reflex will fortitude" system of DnD3e, but also because of how proficiency works you can also design classes with weak saves across the board as a balancing design (like Alchemist and Wizard having god awful saves, Sorc having generally terrible saves except for very good fort, Rangers and Monks having ridiculous saves compared to other martials, and classes getting save expertise to turn successes into crit successes to make their specialization into something really special)
3:48 I would say that it is a _great_ misunderstanding to think that post-4e would've been the obvious time to break *_more_* tradition. Not because it would have been a bad call; but the mindset going at end of 4e (Essentials era) and into the creation of 5e, was them running as fast as they can *back* to Traditions. This can be seen a bit in just how much Game running info was not included in the DMG, and instead trasnfered through word of mouth; they seemed to more assume a return of veterans rather than a mass influx of new faces
That's a fair take. I think for me its really just a personal preference: I like the old layout cuz I'm used to it, but I probably wouldn't be as used to it if they'd gone with the 2024 layout in the 2014 book, since *the vast majority* of my actual play experience is in 5E.
@DungeonDigest Very True In general, I am all for DnD breaking more Traditions in order to make a better game (heck, I'm a 4e fan, it'd be hypocritical if I wasn't). It just seems like they'd probably wouldn't in 2014, but I guess now they are. One step forwards makes progress.
Great features. 5e subclass. 3e saves and scaling Classic first edition lore. Flanking needs to return as a feature. An honestly lower the power scaling. Give more options as you level. Not more power and dice rolls and modifications. Some classes end up a mess of calculations. Fun skills and lore get left behind. A power meta forms. Characters need that specialized feature and skill proficiency with some general abilities.
In fairness, we technically don’t know if the saving throws are more equal or not in 2024. The monater manual hasn't been releaesed yet. I also DO wonder if initially the designers of dnd thought that magic items were going be more involved saving throw preformance.
I genuinely don't think they had time to really playtest or deeply analyze the magic items back when 5E first launched; looking at them they feel very similar to feats in a lot of ways, esp. since they were both tagged as "optional" aspects of the game. We do at least have the 2024 PHB spells to reference... - 10 Strength saves vs 8 in 2014 PHB - 48 Dexterity saves vs 42 in 2014 PHB - 40 Constitution saves vs 35 in 2014 PHB - 6 Intelligence saves vs 4 in 2014 PHB - 49 Wisdom saves vs 42 in 2014 PHB - 12 Charisma saves vs 14 in 2014 PHB There's more spells but the difference is still about the same unfortunately...
I have few problems with the saves. In combat those make sense. The math of saves vs. dc's comes from the range being limited by a d20 and all the bonuses, as it's limited and makes classes too same-y. The other is that rolls aren't balanced much in and out of combat Honestly, you could do with a few less or a few more stats and spread abilities differently.
The thing is, you are not supposed to succeed in every save you ever make. There is almost no instant death effects left in the game so failing a save isn't unrecoverable, in most cases, failing a save just means you take more damage from something, or get some condition imposed on you, and also at those high levels where save dcs get higher, you also have abundant access to resurrection spells so even if someone dies because they fail some particularly bad save, they can just be brought back easily enough.
Great breakdown, though I draw umbrage with changing the saves of classes. Could it be that int and cha saves being super rare but super debilitating reinforce in the rules that the caters would be worse at physical resilience while being adept at "weird shit"? Like, the body builder should be better than the librarian at resisting being folded in half. In the same energy, I'd expect a librarian to do better vs a body builder in fighting the ego death of mind control.
The problem as I see it is that INT and CHA saves being as rare as they are means the casters with those proficiencies basically have a "dead pick" in their saves: the sum of their defenses is generally worse than martials because the things they ARE equipped to defend against are so rare, and it doesn't feel good as a player because you're in a position where you're going to feel like you're constantly failing saving throws...because you probably are. It's a user experience issue, ultimately. There's also the issue that saving throws are overall just less protective than they used to be because they've been split up from 3 to 6 saves and their new distribution is so lopsided. Under the Fort-Ref-Will system, yes, one of those was the most common and one was the least common, but there were at least hundreds of each of them published over the course of 3E/3.5E. Everyone had 1 good save, clerics druids & rangers had 2, monks had all 3, but even with just 1 good save you were well defended against somewhere between 30-40% of save effects in the game: if you regularly succeeded on those and succeeded on half of the other 2 then its closer to a 50-50 whether you succeed on a save or not, which feels fairer. In 5Es save system, there's like 30-40 of either INT or CHA across all the thousands of abilities and spells that have been published so far, so they're extremely niche defenses compared to the much broader defense that strong Will saves offered them in 3E. So your proficiencies effectively protect you against 25ish% of effects at the worst (for Int-Wis), or 50% at the best (Str-Con)...its much more tilted, in short. Plus the transition to the new save system actively hurt the defenses of a lot of classes: druids used to have strong Fort & Will saves, and now they're only proficient in 80% of what used to be Will and totally lost access to the protection they had against what used to be Fort effects. Sorcerers did gain protection against formerly Fort-effects with their Con proficiency but they lost most of their strong Will save protection thanks to how rare their Charisma proficiency gets used; same for bards. And it's compounded by the lack of growth 5E saves undergo: most classes are overall less protected against saving throw effects than they used to be in 3E. This might be worth revisiting in a future video but I hope this framing at least makes a little more sense? I'd agree that in principle, the librarian should be more mentally resilient than the body builder, and the body builder more physically resilient, but I don't think the actual distribution of saves across all published effects conveys that very well at all. The librarians feels way more frail than they should in practice.
@@DungeonDigest Fair enough. The arguement then becomes 1.) Should casters be resilient? And 2.) Should there be more cha and int saves to balance it out? The very fact that paladins can boost saves unilaterally is the reason why people even consider playing them past 5th lvl. Adding proficiency scaling to all saves will either devalue this, or make some parties a little too resilient. Though I will say that part of the problem is that there's no way to properly adjudicate what mental save would be appropriate for each instance, as there are very few analogs irl. I suppose that's why a general will save was likely better.
@@Cosmic_K13 I really lean towards reverting to the Fort-Ref-Will model; at the minimum I think it has better game feel in practice compared to 5Es save system. I think at the minimum the full casters should feel resistant to magical influence, whereas right now the bard and sorcerer have objectively terrible magical defenses with CHA proficiency but not WIS, and all the casters feel like they have 1 garbage saving throw in either INT or CHA, because it definitely stands out the 1 or 2 times a campaign you have to roll them. Just combine them all back into Will and that perception drops off. More INT & CHA saves would help soften the blow, but I don't think it would fix it outright. Plus adding those to the game is a lot more work than any other solution. Unbounded Proficiency or half-proficiency scaling is probably the easiest solution to implement, you basically only worry about it at character creation and any time your proficiency goes up. Its not necessarily a bad fix, but I don't disagree that it risks overcompensating.
@@DungeonDigest while 3rd only had 3 saves there where several effects where the defense was an opposed strength check, and one where the defense was an intelligence check. The difference between high and low saves is the same as proficient/not proficient, and they bounded the creature/casters attack Stat. Where before it was roughly 10+1/2hd+ stat that could be in the 30s, it's 8+proficiency+stat bonus of no more than 20.
If everyone could pick saving throws, they would really only have one choice Since one choice would be locked into dexterity unless you specifically wanted to play and be noticeably weaker Giving 6 choices doesn’t matter if one choice is far better than the others
Not really? Dexterity is like the thrid or fourth best saving throw. Wisdom and Con are much more important, since Dex is mostly just damage and damage can be dealt with easiest comparted to not playing the game which is usually on Wis or Con saves.
They weren't in the PHB though; they were in the Mirage Arcane supplement. If we want to get really pedantic they started out as a title for 8th-level Magic Users back in the 70s.
@@lancemagmer9701 However you want to interpret that statement I stand by it lol. Sorcs became a PHB class in 3E, Warlocks became a PHB class in 4E, and of all the classes they've added to the game since 3E those two are the only ones that made it into 5E. That's all.
My table's been using a version of 3e Saves that works like this: FORT = STR or CON REF = DEX or INT WILL = WIS or CHA Typically, when a character has to make a Save, they get to CHOOSE which Attribute they use to make the Save, so usually they'll be choosing the stronger one. However, monsters can occasionally boost their attacks, or put players at a Disadvantage, forcing them to make the Save with their weaker attribute. This is the exception rather than the rule, though.
I never play at high levels so I didn't know saving throws were so problematic. I was aware that the frequency of saving throw types was extremely lopsided, but now I am considering adding half proficiency to unproficient saves in my homebrew edition.
I'm at the same point; pretty sure my next campaign is gonna be a hodge-podge of brew, 2014 & 2024 rules.
@@DungeonDigest you forgot the Paladin's Aura of Protection when talking about ways to increase your saves
Thats a good idea, maybe at 10th level we can give pcs half-pb, and rearrange some stuff so more classes get Con and Dex
@@DungeonDigestgood choice, my buddy and i are working on that, we just take what we prefer from each book (with some stuff from other rpgs)
@@kubomagico8853 The system shouldn't rely on a certain class being in the party to cover a design flaw. Also, Aura of Protection has a limited range so it doesn't always fix the problem.
I am the Paladin/warlock in a high level 5e Mad Mage game, and often it feels like my aura is the only thing giving me and the party a chance at succeeding at saves.
Unironically, DnD should just go back to Fort, Will, and Reflex saving throws. If it works for Pathfinder, then it should work for DnD. Speaking of Pathfinder (I've only played second edition), I like how they handled subclasses a lot more than 5e.
the more I read Pathfinder 2e's rules, the more I wish everyone would switch to it, their design choices just make so much sense!
Strongly agree. I've been building a homebrew to do that and restructure progression. I use only 4 classes: Expert, Mage, Priest, Warrior. Each have 4 Archetype options corresponding to the 5e classes plus Psion (3e Psion/5e UA Mystic), Shaman (4e), and Tactician (4e Warlord). Classes, Archetypes, Specializations (equivalent to 5e subclasses), Origins (equivalent to backgrounds, with some exclusive to certain races), Skills, Tools, and some Feats all are revised to operate with Ranks. A single class can increase in rank upon leveling up, possibly rewarding a rank in Archetype or a Bonus Feat; Archetypes in turn may reward a rank in a Specialization. Each may reward ranks in Saves, Skills, Tools, or grant a specific Feature. Bonus Feats can be used to advance an Origin, select a Feat, or two Half-Feats. Proficiency is split into 3 ranks: 1. Novice (half PB), 2. Trained (full PB), and 3. Advanced (double PB). Saves, Skills, Tools, and Weapon Families can be upgraded up to Rank 2 normally, with Rank 3 being available through class-rewarded Expertise (corresponding to 5e Expertise); Saves and Weapon Families never get Rank 3. AC is replaced with DR/SR and Reflex/Fortitude/Will Defenses. DR for armors is equal to the 5e AC - 10, and armors limit Dexterity bonus to Reflex; DR reduces physical damage (Acid/Bludgeoning/Force/Piercing/Slashing), while SR comes from effects such as _Mage Armor_ or from a magic item; SR reduces energy damage (Cold/Fire/Lightning/Necrotic/Radiant); some effects extend these to include Poison and Thunder, but Psychic damage is only affected by Resistance/Immunity. The three Defenses are passive, Reflex covering Dexterity (replacing AC in attacks made to hit a target), Fortitude covering Strength and Constitution, and Will covering Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. A character can use a reaction when a passive defense is overcome to roll a Saving Throw for the specified Ability. Each Defense is calculated as 8 + Save Modifier, with Reflex from Dexterity, Fortitude from Constitution, and Will from whichever is higher between Wisdom and Charisma.
much simpler
Thank you so much for the clear and concise breakdown of what's wrong with the saving throws in 5e. Ive played this edition only semi regularly and I just Knew that the saves felt weird especially the higher level we got.
To see it laid out with the numbers, both of the difficulty and the split of the spells/abilities that call for each save is really helpful to understanding why this bothered me for so long.
To follow up on Dragonborn being new as of 3e not 4e, the Warlock is the same. It debuted in the Complete Arcane. The Complete series introduced new classes and player options, with the Complete Arcane being focused on arcane casters. Eldritch Blast was a standard feature of the class instead of a cantrip. Sadly I think they only added new invocations in two other books (Complete Mage and Draconomicon). The Warlock was popular enough that it got added to 4e and became a mainstay.
In my game (Ishanekon: World Shapers), I reworked the saving throws (called Defense Roll or DR) to address those problems.
a) All of the seven stats are common DRs.
b) The difference between Level 0 and max is from 13 to 17, making high-level DRs far more achievable.
c) You get enough Stat Points to keep at least three stats at max, so you have at least three decent DRs.
d) Each DR has an associated Skill, which helps you raise it if you invest points in that Skill. You can use it to round up your weaknesses or make you almost untouchable in your strengths.
e) There are talents and item upgrades that increase all DRs at once, making it easier to be strong in all of them if you specialize in DR defenses.
DRs in my system become a far more tactical tool. Finding out which DR of the enemy is weak and avoiding his strengths is part of the game and can greatly swing combat in your favor.
Audio sounds 10x better this time around. Id still EQ just a tad lower but way better than last video. Sounds great. Love the videos
I like the use of the Peanuts comic
1 level starting dip into Draconic Sorcerer before multiclassing into just about any other build has many advantages and few downsides.
Base 7 HP before Con bonus, 13 AC unarmoured, Con saving throw proficiency, full spell caster level, 4 cantrips, innate magical ability, Shield spell twice per long rest and backstory role-play opportunities.
It’s especially good for campaigns that start at levels higher than one.
Another wonderful video! You're crushin' it, dude! You'll be at 1k subs in no time!
It will be intresting to listen your take of the "1/4 caster" subclasses, it's one of the desing elements of classes that feel the least explored in 5e
There are plenty of features the players have at their disposal to counteract high saving throws.
Core features include:
Danger Sense
Baridic Insp
Aura of Protection
Indomitable
Disciplined Survivor (Diamond Soul)
Evasion
Flash of Genius
There's a tonne of Subclass features that amp Saving throws.
Spells like Bless, Foresight etc help tremendously too.
There are plenty of features/spells that also grant immunity or ADV on saves against certain condition like Poison/Frightened/Charmed which also work against saving throws that inflict those.
On top of that sometimes just having Resistance to the damage type is enough to have the equivalent of Evasion by halving the incoming damage even on a failed save. Which is easy to obtain and utilize effectively with a little scouting to know what you're up against.
And then there's the Resilient Feat for those who really want to ensure they stand a good chance to pass.
And finally Mage Slayer for a Legendary Resistance, high saves are not a problem for player characters.
Indomitable, Diamond Souls and Flash of Genius are unlocked really late, at level 9 at least (Diamond souls at level 14). Considering how unpopular high level D&D is, that's not great news.
Mage Slayer only works against spells, not monster abilities. Which is a shame, actually.
The rest only highlights how casters are better than martials, since they can dip to get absorb elements and have the slots to use them. Actually, it's a big plus for clerics and druids, since they do not have to pick the spells they know.
Also, the scouting ahead only works if the opposition is something that you know... it's not always the case.
Honestly most of these don't really help, saving throws against damage are basically irrelevant and only condition stopping ones matter, so the only realistic ones helping are
Bardic inspo (which has to be pre cast on every potential target)
Aura of Protection (Which has only 10 ft reach, so unless you are coordinating well as a party and your paladin is not playing the class for it's fantasy "Big melee smite" but for it's actual tools, it is basically non existent)
Indomitable (Still does not make you able to suceed saves you previously wouldn't just gives you better chances are reasonable saves)
Flash of Genius (This one is actually just good but attached to the least common class)
Diamond Soul (Valid 14 levels of monk means you probably already suffer on the AC front tho)
Resilient is the only realistic way for your character (if they are not a paladin) to increase their vital saving throws (con and wis) and even then depending on your starting class you can't even get both since you can only take resilient a singular time. Often being the only thing making a savingthrow possible, as high level monsters are plagued by dc19+ saves.
I play(ed) at these levels, it sucks. The only way to avoid the saving throw fuckery is to not have to make any to begin with, leading to even more stun focused gameplay that we oh so love about 5e.
@@SomeBody08150you listed a solid amount of options including a generic one. The idea that you should just be able to tank super high level spells is kinda stupid tho. Easiest way to deal with the saving throw issue is to treat magic like it's powerful. Use options like silence or disrupting somatic components etc.
Outside of the character build, you can just stop standing around while getting pelted
Bring back the OG saves: save vs death ray, save vs d.breath, save vs magic device, etc.
Are used to love Fort, Ref and Will in Pathfinder first edition; apparently the Cypher system basically made that their entire game engine, made all your attacks and saving throws around the particular mechanic of three stats and tiers of rolls that players have to make.
Awwww!! I wanted this for the 2024 Books...Still a good job.
I’ve just got my own supplement that I’ve been working on for the last 4 years. I feel this.
Ive always wanted to try and split class levels and character levels.
Character levels being physical growth and class levels giving more options, not more power.
Almost like starting at negative levels. Level 1 will have 7 average abilitie score.
So you have generic growth with exp.
And then aquire class levels with special skills and feats through in game accomplishments.
The saving throw situation is absolutely diabolical. Adding half PB to bad saves is such an easy fix I can’t believe the designers didn’t add it to 5.5e.
Someone remind me to get this guy to review our thing if we ever get done.
20:14
You forgot one of the worst subclasses carried by the good base class, the fighter champion.
I'd take berserker exhaustion over landing a crit on a 19.
On saving throws, (a bit outside of the video's scope but) the Paladin is really good with saving throws to the point where having one at those higher levels is just required the aura of protection along with being able to cast bless which is good because nearly everyone loves playing as a paladin but it's also bad because it nearly forces every high level party to have a paladin to stop getting mind controlled at DC21 bonus points if they also Peace cleric dipped.
I'd push back on "champion = bad" real hard. "Champion = boring" is fair, though; spend any amount of time with 5E and champion's appeal drops off hard. It's built to be the most simple subclass it can possibly be as THE newbie class. No decisions, no resources, just improved functionality in all things Fighter. It's absolutely the weakest of the three fighter subs in the PHB, but I wouldn't call it a failed design the same way the berserker is. Berserker actively hurts the player for using its subclass feature, and not in the cool MtG "life is just another resource" way, but in a "you are just literally less capable of doing everything in the game the more often you use this subclass's core feature" way.
I think the paladin point is fair, buuuut the paladin isn't a great solution to 5Es saving throw problem (although AoP is a great self-buffing feature). Most of the time that Aura of Protection is available its only a 10ft radius (you only get the 30ft radius at 18th level), so you have to be in melee nearly shoulder-to-shoulder with the paladin to benefit from it, and nice as the save bump is, grouping up like that makes you a great target for AoEs. It's an imperfect trade-off, and it generally doesn't really help the classes hit worst by 5E's save system anyways.
@@DungeonDigest agree with everything expect champ fighter being the newbie class.
Started 5e with lost mines in high school with a bunch of maths nerds and everyone collectively took a look at the sub class and concluded that it was a dogs breakfast.
The lost mines pre-gen characters include a wizard and cleric who were getting 2nd LV spells, and choosing the spells from a list and new players have successfully gotten through first and second level by that stage and would have a general feeling about how bad it is. Second wind and action surge are resources that they have been managing along with their hit dice.
It's not too much to ask that they manage 4 superiority dice and even if they fail to do so it's nearly the same as playing a champion anyway from a spreadsheet perspective.
Anyway
Brilliant video and great arguments, keep it up.
I like the idea of getting 1/2 proficiency (rounded down) in any saving throw you aren't proficient in. I don't get to high levels much but I can see the issue of "oh... no point even rolling really. May as well be an auto hit on me" depending on save and target
My Saving Throw Hotfix: give players half proficiency in a save with each ASI (or upgrade a half to full)
Characters start with 2 saves, and end with 4.5, Fighter with 5.5, Monk and Rogue with all 6.
That's interesting. M only objection on paper is the issue you run into with ASIs being delayed for multiclassed characters, but I do like framing it as a power-up like that, that's cool.
@@DungeonDigest yeah, rethinking on it, it should be tied to character level like PB since it’s a universal issue and not a class-specific one.
Time for me to slob on PF2e's nob. It uses the "reflex will fortitude" system of DnD3e, but also because of how proficiency works you can also design classes with weak saves across the board as a balancing design (like Alchemist and Wizard having god awful saves, Sorc having generally terrible saves except for very good fort, Rangers and Monks having ridiculous saves compared to other martials, and classes getting save expertise to turn successes into crit successes to make their specialization into something really special)
18:16 No, it was wonderful.
3:48
I would say that it is a _great_ misunderstanding to think that post-4e would've been the obvious time to break *_more_* tradition.
Not because it would have been a bad call; but the mindset going at end of 4e (Essentials era) and into the creation of 5e, was them running as fast as they can *back* to Traditions.
This can be seen a bit in just how much Game running info was not included in the DMG, and instead trasnfered through word of mouth; they seemed to more assume a return of veterans rather than a mass influx of new faces
That's a fair take. I think for me its really just a personal preference: I like the old layout cuz I'm used to it, but I probably wouldn't be as used to it if they'd gone with the 2024 layout in the 2014 book, since *the vast majority* of my actual play experience is in 5E.
@DungeonDigest
Very True
In general, I am all for DnD breaking more Traditions in order to make a better game (heck, I'm a 4e fan, it'd be hypocritical if I wasn't).
It just seems like they'd probably wouldn't in 2014, but I guess now they are. One step forwards makes progress.
Great features.
5e subclass.
3e saves and scaling
Classic first edition lore.
Flanking needs to return as a feature.
An honestly lower the power scaling. Give more options as you level. Not more power and dice rolls and modifications. Some classes end up a mess of calculations. Fun skills and lore get left behind. A power meta forms.
Characters need that specialized feature and skill proficiency with some general abilities.
In fairness, we technically don’t know if the saving throws are more equal or not in 2024. The monater manual hasn't been releaesed yet.
I also DO wonder if initially the designers of dnd thought that magic items were going be more involved saving throw preformance.
I genuinely don't think they had time to really playtest or deeply analyze the magic items back when 5E first launched; looking at them they feel very similar to feats in a lot of ways, esp. since they were both tagged as "optional" aspects of the game.
We do at least have the 2024 PHB spells to reference...
- 10 Strength saves vs 8 in 2014 PHB
- 48 Dexterity saves vs 42 in 2014 PHB
- 40 Constitution saves vs 35 in 2014 PHB
- 6 Intelligence saves vs 4 in 2014 PHB
- 49 Wisdom saves vs 42 in 2014 PHB
- 12 Charisma saves vs 14 in 2014 PHB
There's more spells but the difference is still about the same unfortunately...
I think adding half profs to saving throws might be the simplest solution.
I have few problems with the saves.
In combat those make sense.
The math of saves vs. dc's comes from the range being limited by a d20 and all the bonuses, as it's limited and makes classes too same-y.
The other is that rolls aren't balanced much in and out of combat
Honestly, you could do with a few less or a few more stats and spread abilities differently.
The thing is, you are not supposed to succeed in every save you ever make. There is almost no instant death effects left in the game so failing a save isn't unrecoverable, in most cases, failing a save just means you take more damage from something, or get some condition imposed on you, and also at those high levels where save dcs get higher, you also have abundant access to resurrection spells so even if someone dies because they fail some particularly bad save, they can just be brought back easily enough.
Great breakdown, though I draw umbrage with changing the saves of classes.
Could it be that int and cha saves being super rare but super debilitating reinforce in the rules that the caters would be worse at physical resilience while being adept at "weird shit"? Like, the body builder should be better than the librarian at resisting being folded in half. In the same energy, I'd expect a librarian to do better vs a body builder in fighting the ego death of mind control.
The problem as I see it is that INT and CHA saves being as rare as they are means the casters with those proficiencies basically have a "dead pick" in their saves: the sum of their defenses is generally worse than martials because the things they ARE equipped to defend against are so rare, and it doesn't feel good as a player because you're in a position where you're going to feel like you're constantly failing saving throws...because you probably are. It's a user experience issue, ultimately.
There's also the issue that saving throws are overall just less protective than they used to be because they've been split up from 3 to 6 saves and their new distribution is so lopsided.
Under the Fort-Ref-Will system, yes, one of those was the most common and one was the least common, but there were at least hundreds of each of them published over the course of 3E/3.5E. Everyone had 1 good save, clerics druids & rangers had 2, monks had all 3, but even with just 1 good save you were well defended against somewhere between 30-40% of save effects in the game: if you regularly succeeded on those and succeeded on half of the other 2 then its closer to a 50-50 whether you succeed on a save or not, which feels fairer.
In 5Es save system, there's like 30-40 of either INT or CHA across all the thousands of abilities and spells that have been published so far, so they're extremely niche defenses compared to the much broader defense that strong Will saves offered them in 3E. So your proficiencies effectively protect you against 25ish% of effects at the worst (for Int-Wis), or 50% at the best (Str-Con)...its much more tilted, in short.
Plus the transition to the new save system actively hurt the defenses of a lot of classes: druids used to have strong Fort & Will saves, and now they're only proficient in 80% of what used to be Will and totally lost access to the protection they had against what used to be Fort effects. Sorcerers did gain protection against formerly Fort-effects with their Con proficiency but they lost most of their strong Will save protection thanks to how rare their Charisma proficiency gets used; same for bards.
And it's compounded by the lack of growth 5E saves undergo: most classes are overall less protected against saving throw effects than they used to be in 3E.
This might be worth revisiting in a future video but I hope this framing at least makes a little more sense? I'd agree that in principle, the librarian should be more mentally resilient than the body builder, and the body builder more physically resilient, but I don't think the actual distribution of saves across all published effects conveys that very well at all. The librarians feels way more frail than they should in practice.
@@DungeonDigest Fair enough.
The arguement then becomes 1.) Should casters be resilient? And 2.) Should there be more cha and int saves to balance it out?
The very fact that paladins can boost saves unilaterally is the reason why people even consider playing them past 5th lvl. Adding proficiency scaling to all saves will either devalue this, or make some parties a little too resilient.
Though I will say that part of the problem is that there's no way to properly adjudicate what mental save would be appropriate for each instance, as there are very few analogs irl. I suppose that's why a general will save was likely better.
@@Cosmic_K13 I really lean towards reverting to the Fort-Ref-Will model; at the minimum I think it has better game feel in practice compared to 5Es save system. I think at the minimum the full casters should feel resistant to magical influence, whereas right now the bard and sorcerer have objectively terrible magical defenses with CHA proficiency but not WIS, and all the casters feel like they have 1 garbage saving throw in either INT or CHA, because it definitely stands out the 1 or 2 times a campaign you have to roll them. Just combine them all back into Will and that perception drops off.
More INT & CHA saves would help soften the blow, but I don't think it would fix it outright. Plus adding those to the game is a lot more work than any other solution.
Unbounded Proficiency or half-proficiency scaling is probably the easiest solution to implement, you basically only worry about it at character creation and any time your proficiency goes up. Its not necessarily a bad fix, but I don't disagree that it risks overcompensating.
@@DungeonDigest while 3rd only had 3 saves there where several effects where the defense was an opposed strength check, and one where the defense was an intelligence check. The difference between high and low saves is the same as proficient/not proficient, and they bounded the creature/casters attack Stat. Where before it was roughly 10+1/2hd+ stat that could be in the 30s, it's 8+proficiency+stat bonus of no more than 20.
If everyone could pick saving throws, they would really only have one choice
Since one choice would be locked into dexterity unless you specifically wanted to play and be noticeably weaker
Giving 6 choices doesn’t matter if one choice is far better than the others
Not really? Dexterity is like the thrid or fourth best saving throw.
Wisdom and Con are much more important, since Dex is mostly just damage and damage can be dealt with easiest comparted to not playing the game which is usually on Wis or Con saves.
Because the used to be only 3, and it was better that way
Warlock was in 3rd
They weren't in the PHB though; they were in the Mirage Arcane supplement.
If we want to get really pedantic they started out as a title for 8th-level Magic Users back in the 70s.
@@DungeonDigest it sounded like you meant they were new to 4th
@@lancemagmer9701
However you want to interpret that statement I stand by it lol. Sorcs became a PHB class in 3E, Warlocks became a PHB class in 4E, and of all the classes they've added to the game since 3E those two are the only ones that made it into 5E. That's all.
My table's been using a version of 3e Saves that works like this:
FORT = STR or CON
REF = DEX or INT
WILL = WIS or CHA
Typically, when a character has to make a Save, they get to CHOOSE which Attribute they use to make the Save, so usually they'll be choosing the stronger one.
However, monsters can occasionally boost their attacks, or put players at a Disadvantage, forcing them to make the Save with their weaker attribute. This is the exception rather than the rule, though.
Hey, prestige classes were so much better than subclasses.
Messy, maybe, but the flexibility was absolutely worth it.