I was wondering if you could please introduce intermediate saving throws.
A number of the classes could be modified, classes found to be week or too powerful could be tempered.
What is an intermediate saving throw?
It is identical to a poor saving throw, but with a +1 at levels 1, 10, and 19.
An example:
A fighter could get an intermediate reflex bonus.
A paladin could get an intermediate will bonus.
A cleric could get an intermediate fort save.
So what do you think?
I have fiddled around with a progression that is identical to the Poor progression, except it starts out at +2. Basically it is strong in the beginning but loses its strength in mid to late game, boosting low level survivability.
I posted this in the Alpha2 thread for this...
--------------
Here's how I'd figure the numbers for intermediate.
If High Save is 2 + 1/2 per level, and Poor Save is 0 + 1/3 per level, then Medium Save would be smack in the middle, 1 + 1/2.5 per level.
In decimal, that's 1 + 0.4 per level.
So your saves would look like this:
Lvl Fraction Bonus
1 .... 1.4 .... +1
2 .... 1.8 .... +1
3 .... 2.2 .... +2
4 .... 2.6 .... +2
5 .... 3.0 .... +3
6 .... 3.4 .... +3
7 .... 3.8 .... +3
8 .... 4.2 .... +4
9 .... 4.6 .... +4
10 ... 5.0 .... +5
11 ... 5.4 .... +5
12 ... 5.8 .... +5
13 ... 6.2 .... +6
14 ... 6.6 .... +6
15 ... 7.0 .... +7
16 ... 7.4 .... +7
17 ... 7.8 .... +7
18 ... 8.2 .... +8
19 ... 8.6 .... +8
20 ... 9.0 .... +9
-------------
Here's a link to that thread.
I think this would make the most sense for an intermediate save. You want middle of the ground, then this is it exactly. It spreads out the saves more evenly compared to just adding a +1 here or there, and it makes mathematical sense.
Also, I agree with having Intermediate saves. It would allow for a better spread of class equivalency. Don't want to be as good as Rogue in Reflex, or a caster in Will, or a Barbarian in Fort, well then an intermediate save would be what you want.
Binary system of either "Really Good" or "Really Bad" doesn't give many options. This could also mean that the Monk could be reduced in saves a bit and boosted in other places (BAB, etc) to give him a more solid role like folks were wanting.
The only problem I can see with this is that this might break too much of the backward compatibility without giving enough in other areas. Reducing saves might anyways... so Cleric and Monk might still have to be offlimits for being changed. Adding intermediate saves to Fighter might still work.
Do you guys think a barbarian should get an intermediate saving throw?
If so what stat would you think it should be? Ref, or Will
Saves are what they train in. I'd look at "maybe" in the Reflex as they have precedence for being mobile characters (trap sense and fast movement).
They do not train in Mind powers. Their only ability at shrugging off potential mental effects is basically a circumstantial bonus from raging. This should still be left to rage, a temporary boost or immunity, but not for the class in general.
Saves are what they train in. I'd look at "maybe" in the Reflex as they have precedence for being mobile characters (trap sense and fast movement).
They do not train in Mind powers. Their only ability at shrugging off potential mental effects is basically a circumstantial bonus from raging. This should still be left to rage, a temporary boost or immunity, but not for the class in general.
Good points
Given Monte is on the design team, I think they are familiar with the concept of Intermediate Save Progression.
Who is Monte.
Monte Cook is a game designer, and was one of the major contributors/designers for 3e at release. He's fairly high profile, so not sure if you've just not been aware of game designer whodeewho, or just teasing (as per my next point).
However, Monte Cook is just a design consultant here, not a designer. I'd imagine his capacity in this is "Hey, you wrote the rules for 3e, does this new thing look mechanically compatible with 3e rules?", or maybe "What were you guys smoking when you came up with the Grapple rules?", rather than "Monte, make me some rules for boosting the Fighter".
...
In other words... just because Monte did something in his own works, doesn't mean it'll filter into Pathfinder. Pathfinder has it's own design philosophy to follow, that might not allow just adding in Monte's stuff.
Monte Cook is a game designer, and was one of the major contributors/designers for 3e at release. He's fairly high profile, so not sure if you've just not been aware of game designer whodeewho, or just teasing (as per my next point).
However, Monte Cook is just a design consultant here, not a designer. I'd imagine his capacity in this is "Hey, you wrote the rules for 3e, does this new thing look mechanically compatible with 3e rules?", or maybe "What were you guys smoking when you came up with the Grapple rules?", rather than "Monte, make me some rules for boosting the Fighter".
...
In other words... just because Monte did something in his own works, doesn't mean it'll filter into Pathfinder. Pathfinder has it's own design philosophy to follow, that might not allow just adding in Monte's stuff.
OK thanks, I just didn't know him.
Being a fan of Arcana Evolved, I favor using Intermediate Saving Throws . . . probably not gonna happen though! ;^)
Being a fan of Arcana Evolved, I favor using Intermediate Saving Throws . . . probably not gonna happen though! ;^)
What is this "Arcana Evolved" class you speak of?
that might not allow just adding in Monte's stuff.
-His influence can be seen in the new DR system, and I doubt a design team that is using Monte as a consultant is unfamiliar with his work.
That is what people are saying, but why haven't they implement it?
See, the first part of the quoted sentence was "Pathfinder has it's own design philosophy". THIS is why they might not just want to slap on Intermediate Saves.
A change to DR is portable to the old system. Changing the saves a class has can potentially cause issues with rebuilding NPCs or Characters. Backward Compatibility.
They have to take more consideration for this kind of change, regardless if "Monte did it".
See, the first part of the quoted sentence was "Pathfinder has it's own design philosophy". THIS is why they might not just want to slap on Intermediate Saves.
A change to DR is portable to the old system. Changing the saves a class has can potentially cause issues with rebuilding NPCs or Characters. Backward Compatibility.
They have to take more consideration for this kind of change, regardless if "Monte did it".
Good point. Guess I will have to wait till PRPG 2.
Attack Magic in D&D has always been a matter of Paper/Rock/Scissors. You find the spell to use against your target's weak save (or if they have none, you use non-save spells that use other things).
Golems and other spell immunity creatures are the penultimate of this concept.
A Fighter will nearly always (auto-fail on a 1) land his first attack. This attack can be boosted in many ways, or ways of multiplying it (haste, twf, etc), and he has certain defense he needs to overcome (incorporeal, DR, etc).
Why can the Fighter get his weapon that'll hurt his enemy, and "land his hit every time", but the Wizard has to be shafted so that NO ONE has a crappy enough save for him to find a "weak point" and attack it with a spell?
Low Saves are in the game for a reason. Fighters and Rogues get Phantasmal Killed, or Dominated... the party has to deal/protect against it. The Wizard and Rogue get hit with Disintegrate, the Cleric and Fighter get hit with Fireballs, Polar Rays and Meteor Swarms.
An increase to low saves across the board would depower magic. And not in the good way. Who likes playing a class who's attacks are a bunch of misses/low effects.
..
Also, I have a problem with the concept of not letting anyone excel at something.
By 20th level, going by the 'half character level + class bonus', before any stat modifiers the differences between your High and Low saves are going to be 2 points.
That means a Wizard who spent money and xp making himself a Belt of Constitution (since this tends to be his focused stat after Int), could potentially become better at Fort saves than a Fighter who's build has a lot of MAD. Or look at a Paladin, Ranger or Monk for that matter... they might have to put a low-ish stat in Consitution (12-14) and give up increasing it in favor of other stats, as opposed to this Wizard.
With only a 2 point difference, these are the weirdness you'll encounter. When your base class bonus gives a 6 point difference, it's rare that you'll ever see this kind of thing happen (if ever! I haven't seen it yet).
I answered both your points already.
I acknowledged the +2 difference between High and Low, but disagree that it's any appreciable amount of difference. Remember that these are on d20 rolls, a +2 modifier difference doesn't influence much over random chance (with all other things being equal, you only have a 10% chance better at avoiding it than the weaker person?).
The second point of devaluing the High save was also addressed. Why take away the ability to excel at something? This is something I REALLY disliked about the 4e system as presented to us in their articles. Everyone was "pretty good" at everything.
Making a change like you propose to Saves moves things towards the 4e concept of "no one can suck, no one can excel", which is what is driving people to making 3.75e.
Yes, 4e has some good mechanics that I'm not adverse to adding to my game. I'm not completely anti-4e and shout down any concepts that might come up.
However, this is a fundamental change to the way you look at Saving Throws, to something entirely no longer 3e in concept.
...
Here's what I mean.
I think that Initiative should be less dependent on the die roll. So there needs to be a bonus someplace.
Now the problem with Initiative is that EVERYONE could use a bonus to it. Getting to attack first is important no matter your class.
"No one sucks", 4e Thinking: Give everyone a + based on level so that higher level people are better than lower level people. But everyone around the same level are still the same.
"Let people excel", 3e Thinking: Don't give any particular class a bonus, since everyone can use this. Make it choosable outside of class, or make it like BAB/Saves where it's based on class but variable.
Give an "Initiative Save" that's low or high (or Intermediate, *wink*), that is based on the class (Rogues = High, Fighters = High or Intermediate, etc).
OR give an extended Feat Chain for Improved Initiative. Pathfinder gives more feats per level, so everyone could take advantage of this without hurting too much.
This is the difference in thinking between keeping 3e the feel it has, and changing it to Saga/4e feel.