TheRPGSite

Pen & Paper Roleplaying Central => Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion => Topic started by: Vic99 on September 20, 2021, 05:42:24 PM

Title: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Vic99 on September 20, 2021, 05:42:24 PM
If there is always a roll to hit for weapons, dragon breath, spells, etc., do you think a saving throw is necessary?  I'm wrestling with this idea in my homebrew system.  I'm trying for a more simplified system.  I feel like I'm missing something here because my gut says to hit rolls cover it.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Chris24601 on September 20, 2021, 06:04:53 PM
If there is always a roll to hit for weapons, dragon breath, spells, etc., do you think a saving throw is necessary?  I'm wrestling with this idea in my homebrew system.  I'm trying for a more simplified system.  I feel like I'm missing something here because my gut says to hit rolls cover it.  Thanks.
Based on 4E, hit rolls should cover it. Just consider adding some additional defenses beyond AC to cover things that armor realistically wouldn't affect.

4E also has pretty good categories with Reflex for things you need to avoid but which armor is unlikely to help with (ex. lightning bolts), Fortitude for things you can't even avoid and must just physically endure (ex. poison gas, an AoE sonic effect) and Will for things that target your mind (ex. enchantments).
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: hedgehobbit on September 20, 2021, 06:15:41 PM
If there is always a roll to hit for weapons, dragon breath, spells, etc., do you think a saving throw is necessary?  I'm wrestling with this idea in my homebrew system.  I'm trying for a more simplified system.  I feel like I'm missing something here because my gut says to hit rolls cover it.  Thanks.

Saving throws were originally for things which either didn't have an attack roll (medusa's gaze or dragon's breath) or things where an attack did damage with the possibility of extra effect (spider's poison or ghoul's paralysis). If you are making a home brew, there's no need to have saving throws if there is already some method for character to avoid the specific damage effect. If you are clever with your math, you could even create a system where, for example, a PC wizard make a Spell Roll to affect monsters (who don't, then, get a save) whereas attacks against a PC grant the PC a save against that attack. So, players would roll in both situations.

In the end, though, it wouldn't be simpler as your just moving a roll from one part of the game to another.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Mishihari on September 20, 2021, 08:48:07 PM
Saving throws different than the attack/defense system aren't necessary.  There are a lot of ways to handle it.  In my game, every attack, whether physical, magical, and whatever else works on the same opposed roll system
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: David Johansen on September 20, 2021, 10:36:38 PM
In D&D 5e you either roll to hit or they get a saving throw.  Area effect stuff is more likely to use the savingthrow.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Steven Mitchell on September 21, 2021, 12:55:53 AM
The saving throw made less and less sense as WotC changed how it was used.  This pertains to the mechanics of how it works, how it scales, and the severity of the effects.  To make it meaningful and useful, the game would need to hearken back at least partially to the original.

Consider the scaling in earlier D&D versus the WotC versions.  In my opinion, one of the huge mistakes that WotC made was to have the target of the save move systematically with the attacker.  At first, this looks like a clever elaboration of the normal attacks and things like some of the opposed dispel magic ideas.  However, what it leads to is an arms race, but the saves can't keep up.  With attacks, you've got multiple types of attacks and 1 defense (AC).  The variety of the attacks gives options, but they don't change the math all that much.  Whereas, escalating save targets means that there are multiple defenses (different types of saves) and multiple attacks.  However, since most of the attacks are magical, they are easier to vary than the saves.  Saves fall behind.

If you get a +1 at the same time all your difficulties go up by 1, those are phantom improvements in regular play.  Note that the usual thing with WotC is semi-phantom improvements, where the bonuses increase a little more than the difficulties.  In 3E, they really messed up the math, such that what looked like semi-phantom was actually falling steadily behind. 

In the earlier versions, the saves are largely set.  Sure, there are occasional, situational exceptions, such as the standard Hold Person thing where if the caster only targets one individual, that target takes a -2 to their saves.  That's tactically interesting.  However, as the character levels, their saves get slowly better while Hold Person stays the same.  It doesn't get better based on the Int of the caster or the level of the caster.

So yeah, if someone changes saves to work exactly like all other attack/defense, and keeps multiple saves, there is no point in having them.  In fact, they are just causing math problems at that point.  Or you can make them just another defense and build into the system cleanly. 

Me, I specifically wanted a mechanic where the character really does get better as they level against certain effects--i.e. not phantom better but really better exactly as it says on the bonus.  So saves work for me.  Coupled with a different set of attack/defense math, where defense start out generally better but attacks increase faster, this creates a changing dynamic as characters increase in power.  Not coincidentally, it also happens to give casters a little extra oomph when their effects are low-powered and warriors/rogues a little extra oomph when the casters get the impressive spells.

All of the above is completely orthogonal to the question of "Save or Die" or how much you want to dilute effects to avoid "Save or Die", if any.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Eric Diaz on September 21, 2021, 11:18:42 AM
They are not necessary, no. 4e even inverted them in some cases (i.e., the attacker rolled to hit your Dexterity save. or something).

It is a matter of preference. Knave and Shadow of the Demon Lord are good examples on different ways to use that. In my own Dark Fantasy Basic, there are saving throws, but they are basically opposed rolls.

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2017/05/of-opposed-rolls-and-fixing-5e-saving.html
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 21, 2021, 11:29:07 AM
Sort of. IIRC, 4E inverted the saves and turned them into armor class DCs. You had physical AC, and then Reflex, Will, and Fortitude, based on 10 + the better of two attribute modifiers related to it (this cut down on the MAD) plus bonuses.

An enemy would use a power, let's say 'confusion', and he'd roll to hit your Will AC, rather than having you make a saving throw.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Persimmon on September 21, 2021, 09:20:57 PM
Personally I like the Swords & Wizardry option of a single saving throw for everything.  Much simpler than ability checks, conditions, etc. 

Say your save is a 10.  You know what you need in every scenario.

Player: "Do I fall into the lava?"
DM: Roll a save.

Player: "Do I dodge the trap?"
DM: Roll a save.

Player: "Do I resist the poison?"
DM: Roll a save.

Maybe less granular,  but quicker at the table for sure.

The C&C Siege Engine is also pretty simple, but it takes awhile to get used to which ability scores go with which saves.  Plus, you need to account for levels, ability score adjustments etc.  So it can be more steps.

How does "Shadow of the Demon Lord" do it?  I've heard that's pretty rules light, but I've never played it.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Eric Diaz on September 22, 2021, 10:01:10 AM
How does "Shadow of the Demon Lord" do it?  I've heard that's pretty rules light, but I've never played it.

There are so "saves" per se; when needed, you add your modifier to 1d20 and must roll 10 or more. (If you have 15 Strength, your bonus is +5).

So, if you're poisoned, make a Strength check (roll 1d20+5, the DC is 10).

Attacking is the same, basically, but you must meet the target's defense (similar to AC).

OTOH, if two sides are fighting, both would roll 1d20+ bonus.

(If you know "Target 20", this seems somewhat similar)

"Shadow of the Demon Lord" is not exactly rules light, but lighter than D&D. It is a great game; I'm currently running a campaign.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Zalman on September 22, 2021, 10:20:50 AM
If you get a +1 at the same time all your difficulties go up by 1, those are phantom improvements in regular play.

Hm, except that "all your difficulties" don't go up by one in regular play, unless every creature in the world also levels up with you, since the "difficulty" of affecting an enemy with a spell, etc., is largely level-based. Keeping offensive and defensive bonuses closely aligned as characters level up doesn't negate either -- it just make level a core power metric.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Persimmon on September 22, 2021, 10:26:05 AM
Thanks! 

I really like the tone & feel of SotDL from what I've seen on youtube videos and I'm also intrigued by the bounded campaign of 10-11 adventures since we don't play that often anyhow.  My main concern is learning and teaching a new game system to my current group, family members who are much more casual gamers only familiar with B/X in OSE form.  No one wants to spend lots of time learning new mechanics.  And while I like the idea of the expert paths and the like, not sure if they'll be into that.  I may grab the core book at least and read through it, create some PCs, and see what I think. 
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Steven Mitchell on September 22, 2021, 11:41:30 AM
If you get a +1 at the same time all your difficulties go up by 1, those are phantom improvements in regular play.

Hm, except that "all your difficulties" don't go up by one in regular play, unless every creature in the world also levels up with you, since the "difficulty" of affecting an enemy with a spell, etc., is largely level-based. Keeping offensive and defensive bonuses closely aligned as characters level up doesn't negate either -- it just make level a core power metric.

Yes, I agree.  In that quote, I was thinking more along the lines of how the 3E/4E stuff is based on the assumption that your opponents are scaling with you.  That is, it's true that a 10th level fighter can mow through standard goblins easily, since he has scaled and they have not.  If in practice, however, when the fighter meets goblins, they are scaled up special goblins, then it is a phantom improvement. 

Naturally, how the GM runs it is going to affect things immensely.  Even if the system is rigid, phantom scaling, the GM can still have the party go against weaker creatures sometimes.  I was mainly using the +1 for +1 example for illustration of the extreme.  It would be a pretty poor GM, a glorified video game scaling bot, that followed that exactly in a real game.

It's easier to visualize in attacks and defenses than it is in saves.  If I get +1 to hit, then my chances of hitting a guy in chain mail (and a given set of bonus for other AC, such as Dex, magic, etc.) are better now than they were prior.  If every time I get the +1 to hit, the opponents also get special chain mail that is harder to hit, then phantom improvement in practice. Even though if I got a chance to fight the original guy in chain mail, I'd have a real improvement.

If I were to criticize 5E in this regard, I would say that when they ran the math and designed the system, they were aware of the about 50% to 75% of the scope of the problem.  Bounded accuracy addresses a lot to getting them back to what worked in earlier D&D.  Where they missed out, IMO, is that they tried to hang onto some of the 3E/4E scaling quirks, which compressed the bounded accuracy so tight that it led to new problems.  One example would be the very small increase in attacks through the levels, because there isn't any room left for more improvements without breaking their model.  It's less obvious, but this is the root cause of why 5E saves are better than 3E, different than 4E, but still "off".
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Chris24601 on September 22, 2021, 06:36:54 PM
If you get a +1 at the same time all your difficulties go up by 1, those are phantom improvements in regular play.

Hm, except that "all your difficulties" don't go up by one in regular play, unless every creature in the world also levels up with you, since the "difficulty" of affecting an enemy with a spell, etc., is largely level-based. Keeping offensive and defensive bonuses closely aligned as characters level up doesn't negate either -- it just make level a core power metric.

Yes, I agree.  In that quote, I was thinking more along the lines of how the 3E/4E stuff is based on the assumption that your opponents are scaling with you.  That is, it's true that a 10th level fighter can mow through standard goblins easily, since he has scaled and they have not.  If in practice, however, when the fighter meets goblins, they are scaled up special goblins, then it is a phantom improvement. 

Naturally, how the GM runs it is going to affect things immensely.  Even if the system is rigid, phantom scaling, the GM can still have the party go against weaker creatures sometimes.  I was mainly using the +1 for +1 example for illustration of the extreme.  It would be a pretty poor GM, a glorified video game scaling bot, that followed that exactly in a real game.

It's easier to visualize in attacks and defenses than it is in saves.  If I get +1 to hit, then my chances of hitting a guy in chain mail (and a given set of bonus for other AC, such as Dex, magic, etc.) are better now than they were prior.  If every time I get the +1 to hit, the opponents also get special chain mail that is harder to hit, then phantom improvement in practice. Even though if I got a chance to fight the original guy in chain mail, I'd have a real improvement.

If I were to criticize 5E in this regard, I would say that when they ran the math and designed the system, they were aware of the about 50% to 75% of the scope of the problem.  Bounded accuracy addresses a lot to getting them back to what worked in earlier D&D.  Where they missed out, IMO, is that they tried to hang onto some of the 3E/4E scaling quirks, which compressed the bounded accuracy so tight that it led to new problems.  One example would be the very small increase in attacks through the levels, because there isn't any room left for more improvements without breaking their model.  It's less obvious, but this is the root cause of why 5E saves are better than 3E, different than 4E, but still "off".
This is why I ended up completely flattening the Attack/Defense axis in my own system (flatter than even bounded accuracy) with only effect/resistance scaling linearly (rather than through iterative attacks that tend to cause spikes).

The big thing that does is ensure that mooks can be threats in sufficient numbers regardless of level, but since it takes ever more of them to be a challenge, the PCs feel like they’re advancing in competence and GMs aren’t required to use ever stronger opponents to keep a treadmill running for PCs to feel threatened (i.e. 5 goblins are a threat at first level, but 25 goblins will still be a threat at 15th level… though 5 groups of 5 one group at a time will be cake to them).

The main advantages of things like dragons are they tend to have large AoE’s that can obliterate waves of mooks in a single action meaning only high level PC’s have the stamina needed to keep up a fight with them for more than a round or two… which is why kingdoms hire adventurers to deal with giant fire breathing lizards unless they have no other choice (a kingdom could kill a dragon by throwing enough bodies at it, but it would be a textbook Pyrrhic victory that would devastate the kingdom for years to come due to a lack of sufficient manpower to plant, harvest and all the other tasks you pulled conscripts from to deal with the dragon… adventurers on the other hand; point them at the dragon and tell them they can keep its horde as a reward and the problem will be solved without even needing to dip into the king’s own purse).
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Jaeger on September 22, 2021, 08:01:42 PM
In D&D 5e you either roll to hit or they get a saving throw.  Area effect stuff is more likely to use the savingthrow.

This is always one of those things that bugged me about some saves in 5e.

You don't save against arrows? Why a big deadly blast like Dragon Breath?

So you are standing in the corridor - end of your turn with nowhere to run. Dragon blasts you, but you still get to 'save' to only take half damage!? Really?

Maybe you can only "save" against Dragon Breath for 1/2 dmg if you have a large shield or bigger.

Or maybe in the system if you have a large enough shield you can 'save' to avoid most of the damage?

Or shields are factored into your AC and if the dragon 'misses' with their dragon breath attack it is assumed that you raised your shield / hit the dirt, etc.

IMHO - you really have to define what a save is for and how it fits into your action economy to not have it seem overly arbitrary.

And in systems that subsume active defense into something like AC, is an attack roll a literal roll to hit? Or a roll to 'damage'.



Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Jam The MF on September 22, 2021, 10:07:46 PM
Personally I like the Swords & Wizardry option of a single saving throw for everything.  Much simpler than ability checks, conditions, etc. 

Say your save is a 10.  You know what you need in every scenario.

Player: "Do I fall into the lava?"
DM: Roll a save.

Player: "Do I dodge the trap?"
DM: Roll a save.

Player: "Do I resist the poison?"
DM: Roll a save.

Maybe less granular,  but quicker at the table for sure.

The C&C Siege Engine is also pretty simple, but it takes awhile to get used to which ability scores go with which saves.  Plus, you need to account for levels, ability score adjustments etc.  So it can be more steps.

How does "Shadow of the Demon Lord" do it?  I've heard that's pretty rules light, but I've never played it.


A SST speeds up the game, for sure.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Lunamancer on September 22, 2021, 10:34:47 PM
Something I came across that I thought was interesting.

In post-Gygax AD&D (2E), if you take more than 50 damage in one shot, you have to make a save (system shock) or die instantly.

In post-AD&D Gygax (LA), if you take more than 50 harm in one shot, you get a special save (disaster avoidance) to reduce or even avoid all harm entirely.

This seems to suggest that it's not about just making sure there's a die roll associated with any attack. It's about, in the former case, making an attack dangerous that would otherwise not be a threat to someone with triple-digit hit points. Or in the latter case, for an attack that would surely kill a character not at full health (and even some that are), giving the character a fair chance at surviving.

Seems to me saves aren't for the sake of rules symmetry or for internal coherency or anything like that. They are there to keep possibilities in play, whether to imperil even the most powerful characters, or to give a fighting chance to a target against even the most powerful attacks.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Steven Mitchell on September 23, 2021, 12:36:30 AM
Seems to me saves aren't for the sake of rules symmetry or for internal coherency or anything like that. They are there to keep possibilities in play, whether to imperil even the most powerful characters, or to give a fighting chance to a target against even the most powerful attacks.

Yes, that's part of the argument for "save or die" effects.  Specifically, the save is not your only shot.  It's your last shot after you, presumably, did something stupid to need to make the save in the first place.  I'm not sure I buy that fully for anything but really old school dungeon crawl, but I'm also not willing to toss it entirely.  Saving throws as chance to get away with it when you say, "Hold my beer.  Watch this!" kind of fits the game I want to run. 

There's also the related thought discussed I don't remember where exactly (maybe Delta's hot spot blog?) that the original saves with their names of "Death", "Paralyzation", etc. are really just colorful names for increasing severity.  Characters generally have a better save against "Death" than they do against "Spells" to give them a little edge against the most severe effects.

However the most important point to me is that as the character levels, their saves definitely get better, and it's bloody obvious to everyone at the table.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 23, 2021, 09:47:16 AM
Something I came across that I thought was interesting.

In post-Gygax AD&D (2E), if you take more than 50 damage in one shot, you have to make a save (system shock) or die instantly.

In post-AD&D Gygax (LA), if you take more than 50 harm in one shot, you get a special save (disaster avoidance) to reduce or even avoid all harm entirely.

This seems to suggest that it's not about just making sure there's a die roll associated with any attack. It's about, in the former case, making an attack dangerous that would otherwise not be a threat to someone with triple-digit hit points. Or in the latter case, for an attack that would surely kill a character not at full health (and even some that are), giving the character a fair chance at surviving.

Seems to me saves aren't for the sake of rules symmetry or for internal coherency or anything like that. They are there to keep possibilities in play, whether to imperil even the most powerful characters, or to give a fighting chance to a target against even the most powerful attacks.
What is 'LA'?

The massive damage rule persisted into 3.5e, pretty much the same as it was in 2E except for being a DC 15 Fortitude save rather than a system shock roll.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Chris24601 on September 23, 2021, 12:21:23 PM
What is 'LA'?
Lejendary Adventures; one of Gary’s post TSR game systems that he was associated with from 1999 up until his death.

Basically the poster was showing how Gary didn’t necessarily view saving throws as gotchas so much as a way to avoid gotchas (in LA’s case it was an additional check to avoid being autoganked by massive damage; i.e. even if you only have 25 health and 50 damage comes your way, you still get a roll to miraculously survive).

Similarly, post-Gary D&D seems to have forgotten that as it was only after Gary was out at TSR that the check vs. death by massive damage was added to the system.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: deadDMwalking on September 23, 2021, 02:54:46 PM
There's a psychology to saving throws.

If you roll an attack roll and kill me, it feels like it is completely unfair and I couldn't do anything about it.

If I roll a defense die and I fail, it feels like it's my fault because I could have rolled well and avoided it. 

Obviously having the attacker roll the attack and then applying the effect is faster to resolve, and most players are okay with it MOST OF THE TIME, but most of them also feel like they should get a chance to avoid something (like falling in a pit) even if the act of failing to notice it says you just resolve it.  Ie, if you walk on a section of floor that opens into a pit trap, the most reasonable thing is that 'you fall in the pit'.  If you don't want to fall into a pit, don't step on the pit trap.  AND YET, most people still feel like they should have had a chance to 'leap aside' or 'grab the edge'. 

People are approaching things from the perspective of Action Movie Physics.  If you take out saving throws in all situations, you'll usually end up having players ASKING for them in some situations.  It's probably better just to be clear about when they are appropriate and when they're not and go from there. 

For example: an attack that does level appropriate damage with an attack roll (no save) is by definition appropriate.  An attack that does 2x level appropriate damage but offers a save (50% chance) for no damage works out about the same.  Giving people a saving throw against the more powerful attack will make them feel lucky when they make the save, and gives you another way to distinguish monsters from each other. 
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Persimmon on September 23, 2021, 06:14:22 PM
Something I came across that I thought was interesting.

In post-Gygax AD&D (2E), if you take more than 50 damage in one shot, you have to make a save (system shock) or die instantly.

In post-AD&D Gygax (LA), if you take more than 50 harm in one shot, you get a special save (disaster avoidance) to reduce or even avoid all harm entirely.

This seems to suggest that it's not about just making sure there's a die roll associated with any attack. It's about, in the former case, making an attack dangerous that would otherwise not be a threat to someone with triple-digit hit points. Or in the latter case, for an attack that would surely kill a character not at full health (and even some that are), giving the character a fair chance at surviving.

Seems to me saves aren't for the sake of rules symmetry or for internal coherency or anything like that. They are there to keep possibilities in play, whether to imperil even the most powerful characters, or to give a fighting chance to a target against even the most powerful attacks.

Yeah, I still use that 50 HP of damage rule in my OSR games.  Plus, we have a fairly lethal critical system so even low level foes can pack a punch if they gewt lucky.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Jaeger on September 24, 2021, 01:13:31 AM
Sort of. IIRC, 4E inverted the saves and turned them into armor class DCs. You had physical AC, and then Reflex, Will, and Fortitude, based on 10 + the better of two attribute modifiers related to it (this cut down on the MAD) plus bonuses.

An enemy would use a power, let's say 'confusion', and he'd roll to hit your Will AC, rather than having you make a saving throw.

This is certainly one of the more elegant ways to do a 'save'.

It eliminates an additional die roll at the table, and tracks with how standard AC works for D&D.

4e did have some good ideas, but man did they screw them up in execution and overcomplication.


Then there's this:

There's a psychology to saving throws.

If you roll an attack roll and kill me, it feels like it is completely unfair and I couldn't do anything about it.

If I roll a defense die and I fail, it feels like it's my fault because I could have rolled well and avoided it. 

Obviously having the attacker roll the attack and then applying the effect is faster to resolve, and most players are okay with it MOST OF THE TIME, but most of them also feel like they should get a chance to avoid something (like falling in a pit) even if the act of failing to notice it says you just resolve it.  Ie, if you walk on a section of floor that opens into a pit trap, the most reasonable thing is that 'you fall in the pit'.  If you don't want to fall into a pit, don't step on the pit trap.  AND YET, most people still feel like they should have had a chance to 'leap aside' or 'grab the edge'. 
...

There is a lot to that...

In design terms one would have to really define what they wanted saves to do.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Vic99 on September 24, 2021, 08:33:57 AM

Thanks for all the constructive input.  I can get over the history part that says " . . . because we've always done it this way."


DeadDMwalking said: "There's a psychology to saving throws.

If you roll an attack roll and kill me, it feels like it is completely unfair and I couldn't do anything about it.

If I roll a defense die and I fail, it feels like it's my fault because I could have rolled well and avoided it."


This is part of what I wrestle with.  Part of me wants to be objective and stick with just mechanics, but part of me says the psyche piece is very real. 

I'm looking for fast, efficient, and at least somewhat realistic for combat and danger (I know I'll never get completely there).  I'm not doing a player rolls everything system.  What I'm trying to create is d20, significantly more lethal than 5e, but not OD&D lethal, and hopefully a more streamlined rules lightish system.

Ideally I'd like none, one, or two save categories.  The obvious choices are:

-None: Save is baked into the to hit roll.

-One category: Luck attribute

-Two categories: Will & Fortitude type groups

The other thing I wrestle with is that if I'm going to have saves, what qualifies to get a save? As others have said, D&D  doesn't give a save when you get shot by an arrow, but does if a dragon breathes all over you.  I feel like I'm missing the way to delineate between what makes some dangers qualify for save and others not . . . remember this is a roll to hit, even for spells, system.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Steven Mitchell on September 24, 2021, 08:52:18 AM
Vic, I found the article on saves that I referred to above.  You might find it useful, more the thoughts behind it than any direct mechanics.  It's from an OD&D perspective, but comes at the whole question from a different angle.

Saves as Severity (http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/12/saves-as-severity.html)
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: deadDMwalking on September 24, 2021, 12:18:45 PM
The other thing I wrestle with is that if I'm going to have saves, what qualifies to get a save? As others have said, D&D  doesn't give a save when you get shot by an arrow, but does if a dragon breathes all over you.  I feel like I'm missing the way to delineate between what makes some dangers qualify for save and others not . . . remember this is a roll to hit, even for spells, system.

If you want to keep it 'rules light', you give players a pool of 'fate points' that they can use to get a save.  Outside of spending a fate point saves don't exist (and you balance the game around that). 

I walk onto the pit.  The pit opens, I fall in and take damage.  Or I say 'I'm spending a fate point', and I roll a save.  Since I'm spending it, I get to describe my action in a way that justifies it.  If I say 'I grab the edge and hang on for dear life' I make a Strength save.  If I say 'I leap to the solid ground before I fall' I make a Dex save.  Since it's rules-light you don't define it rigidly.  If the wizard player says 'As I step onto the pit trap I notice the seam in the floor growing, indicating movement.  I intelligently step back' let them save via INT.  There's still a chance they fail. 

You can offer 50/50 - full effect or no effect; or you can offer 33/33/33 - full effect, half effect, or no effect.  Or whatever. 
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Mishihari on September 24, 2021, 03:34:01 PM
There's a psychology to saving throws.

If you roll an attack roll and kill me, it feels like it is completely unfair and I couldn't do anything about it.

If I roll a defense die and I fail, it feels like it's my fault because I could have rolled well and avoided it. 


Very true.  This is why I prefer systems where both the attacked and defender roll, despite the extra bit of work.  That feeling of empowerment makes the game a lot more fun even though I know the math is the same.  (okay, it's not exactly the same - assuming one die for an attack roll, it turns the results into a triangular distribution rather than linear, but whatever - close enough)
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Vic99 on September 24, 2021, 10:13:46 PM
Steven Mitchell - good info.  I hadn't thought of saves quite that way.  Thanks.

deadDM - Fate points are an interesting idea.  I'll mull this over.  Have to pick the right number and if/how they would ever increase.  Too many will make the game too heroic, but I like this concept and am currently seeing how it fits in with the design I have.  Saw that Warhammer fantasy rpg has them.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Bren on September 25, 2021, 04:19:20 PM
Vic, I found the article on saves that I referred to above.  You might find it useful, more the thoughts behind it than any direct mechanics.  It's from an OD&D perspective, but comes at the whole question from a different angle.

Saves as Severity (http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/12/saves-as-severity.html)
Thanks for the link. That's an interesting analysis. I wish he'd extended the analysis to the other classes (MUs and clerics) to see how they compare as the same inferred rule doesn't hold for those classes. There it seems the case that the designer was considering which classes would be more or less resistant to the various effects. For example, clerics (who, IIR, get the Death Ray spell if they are evil and, I think, have a Neutralize Poison spell) have the best save vs. Death Ray and Poison.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_xEP385oGrk/WOy62SMWEeI/AAAAAAAAJC8/IsNyjZFD8_QR8lwAqtBH4yEDSjuSfiQXwCPcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-11%2Bat%2B7.15.04%2BAM.png)
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Thondor on September 26, 2021, 03:53:17 PM
Some advice from D.H. Boggs Champions of ZED*: 

You can use saving throws instead of ability checks if you think it is something a more experienced character should be better at.
So let a character roll a save vs dragon's breath to avoid falling into pit trap -- they should get better at this at higher levels.
However, arm-wrestling isn't really about experience, it is more of a pure strength test so roll an ability check for that.

*Champions of Zero-Edition-Dungeoneering is a intriguing book that posits what if Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax worked together a little closer, and their visions were harmonized a little more by a diligent editor. It was painstakingly researched and has some interesting quotes. I highly recommend it.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: DocJones on September 26, 2021, 08:45:37 PM
Saving throws were originally for things which either didn't have an attack roll (medusa's gaze or dragon's breath) or things where an attack did damage with the possibility of extra effect (spider's poison or ghoul's paralysis). If you are making a home brew, there's no need to have saving throws if there is already some method for character to avoid the specific damage effect.
For attacks that cause secondary effects you could consider it in a single attack roll.
Snake rolls to hit for regular damage.  If the snake exceeds the roll by 4 plus the targets constitution modifier, then the target is poisoned.
Less rolls more math.
*choose your poison*

Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: RebelSky on September 27, 2021, 03:16:11 PM
4e's Saves as Defenses originally came from Star Wars Saga Edition. So that's probably the game to look at on how/why WotC really changed how saves would work.

The original idea for why Saving Throws came about is because Gygax and Arneson saw them as another chance for the characters to Survive. To them, only heroic characters had saving throws because saving throws let these PCs survive against supernatural forces, special abilities, and things that are magical where a normal, non-class character couldn't.

That's why the Saves were against things like Magic, Dragon Breath, Wands, Petrification, and so on. These are all non-normal and very much supernatural in origin.

When WotC changed them to Fortitude, Reflex and Will, they lost their significance. Now ANYBODY could try and Save. It was no longer special to just PCs. PCs lost a bit of their heroism.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: deadDMwalking on September 27, 2021, 05:27:02 PM
When WotC changed them to Fortitude, Reflex and Will, they lost their significance. Now ANYBODY could try and Save. It was no longer special to just PCs. PCs lost a bit of their heroism.

In my opinion - first off, tying saves to abilities makes sense.  Someone who is dodgy can probably jump out of the way of a blast of fiery breath than someone who is not.  If that's what saves represent, then it makes sense that natural ability factors in.

Secondly, I strongly disagree with the proposition that a PC is less special because they do something everyone else does better.  PCs and NPCs should both be able to kill a dragon by stabbing it with swords - PCs should be better at it because they have levels. 

There are things that highly trained people should do that untrained people should not, but saving throws are not one of them.
Title: Re: Saving Throws in fantasy rpg
Post by: Opaopajr on September 29, 2021, 08:56:34 AM
It is a way to divorce from AC benefits without feeding into stat inflation or progression.

Meaning you can separate from Armor, enchantment, or DEX benefits (AC) completely.

And though Stat (a.k.a. Attribute or Ability) is a logical supplement -- because those 6 stats are just sitting there -- you need a way to show advancement over time (Levels) without thresholding (you need stat this high to ride the game) or focus fire bloating (stat raising over time your class strength &/or weakness, e.g. 5e D&D ASIs).

Further, the separate chart of class progression allows additional class differetiation without a heavier imprint upon core play. It basically becomes an addendum for exceptional situations.

It allows different thematic interpretations for your core rules without getting stuck on cascading problems due to the Elegance Trap. That trap is: just because it looks clean, integrated, and easy, you can end up with less flexibility and more problems due to less adjustable levers from more interconnected functions. i.e. Ravenloft Masque of the Red Death works better (IMHO) in its Priest Poision/Paralysis/Death acceptable favortism because of a gapped and typically ungameable progression rate, whereas (IMHO) Will save is far too chargen gameable.

Sometimes discrete (separated) functions give a clearer designing space with less headaches.