The +2 at level 1 given to the good saving throw causes problems with multiclassing, because it leads to enormous saves of some multiclass builds, as they stack their good saves to incredible heights. Fractional saves are a possible way to mitigate this, but they introduce additional complexity and in any case, they are not OGL.
An alternative would be to frontload races with the saving throw bonus instead of the classes. There are several ways of doing this:
1a) Each race gives a +1 bonus to all saves, but the good saving throw progression is reduced by 1, so good saving throws start at only +1 at first level. In practice, this means that good saves will stay the same for single class characters, but saving throw bonus stacking will be greatly mitigated. Poor saving throws retain the same progression, but thanks to the racial bonus, they will be better by +1 for all characters. This latter feature means, that this change would unfortunately constitute a slight power-up, but it is in an area that has been problematic due to the discrepancy between the good and bad saves at high levels anyway, so it should not be a problematic power-up.
1b) Same as above [see 1a], but all races get a +2 bonus to all saves and good saving throw progressions are reduced by 2, thus starting at +0 at first level. The disadvantage is that this system would provide an even bigger power up and the advantage is the complete elimination of saving throw bonus stacking through multiclassing and the further closing of the distance between low saves and high saves.
2a) Each race gives a +1 bonus to one save appropriate to its nature. Half-Orcs and Dwarves would get a bonus to Fortitude saves, Halflings would get a bonus to Reflex saves, Elves either to Reflex or Will, and Humans would chose one save to which their bonus would apply. In return, the good saving throw progression would be reduced by 1, so good saving throws would start at +1 at 1st level. Of course, unlike the system in 1a/1b this system might not yield the same results for good saving throws at level 1 as the standard 3.5E system, because the good save of the class and the race might differ, but this system does not provide a power-up - in fact, it is a power-down for classes that have more than one good saving throw.
2b) Same as above [see 2a], but each race gets a +2 bonus to its saving throw and good saving throw progressions are reduced by 2, thus starting at +0 at first level.
Note that it is also possible to give multiple racial good saving throws under systems in 2a/2b, but that would probably be overpowering. Tying their number and type to starting class would, in turn, create unfair multiclassing based on order (Monk/Fighter would always be better than Fighter/Monk under such a system), so I would not recommend that either.
Also note that, it is possible to compensate for the power-up in systems 1a/1b, by giving the equivalent negative bonus also to poor saving throw progressions, but this would unduly penalize multiclass characters, rather than merely eliminate deliberate saving throw stacking, so I would be loathe to do that.
One of the four systems I have outlined, I think, would be a decent enough solution.
Game rules are not patent-able, so saying "fractional saves aren't OGL" can't prevent Paizo from implementing them.
I'd actually prefer something like "fractional saves", or, achieving the same effect: Just give each class a Good/Poor rating for each Save category. For each Save Category, you add together class levels with the same rating (Good, Poor). Each Save is then calculated with the (consolidated) Good AND Poor bonuses added together.
I like this because it actually helps your poorer Saves, while minorly nerfing your Good ones, which don't need the help.
Game rules are not patent-able, so saying "fractional saves aren't OGL" can't prevent Paizo from implementing them.
Aren't fractional saves OGL content? They were printed in Unearthed Arcana.
???.... Could be...
The idea occurred to me without reading it anywhere in the first place...
(if anyone could re-phrase for simplicity my "Fractional Save Variant", please do..."
We don't need funky math, just a simple rule.
Saving throws have 2 columns. Good and bad.
Rule:
Regardless of any other rule, base saving throw numbers can not progress faster than "good".
(obviously a better wording for it would be needed, but I'm tired and my brain refuses to cooperate)
In practice? very simple. No matter how many times you take lv1(fort best save) class you still can't progress faster than the "good save" on the chart at the beginning of the PHB.
If someone MC's ranger and fighter we don't add their BAB, why do we add their saves?
-S
We don't need funky math, just a simple rule.
Saving throws have 2 columns. Good and bad.
This is pretty much exactly how I house rule it.
If you have 2 classes with Good Save X, then those levels stack for Good Progression. If you have a Class/Classes with Poor Save X, and have enough levels to get a bonus towards X, you add that on top of the good save. If all your Classes have Poor Save X, all your levels stack towards Poor Progession in that Save. Each Class no longer would need to list the entire Feat Progression, that would be a "universal" Table, with "Good" and "Poor" columns, and each Class would just need to indicate which of it's Saves are Good.There's no fractions or rounding-down, yet it achieves 80% the same thing as Fractional Saves.
If you have many classes, the Poor Saves would tend to be slightly lower than true Fractional Saves, but they're better over-all than Standard SRD.
If only I could word this system better & more concisely, it might have a chance of making it into Pathfinder's Multi-Class rules :-)
Exactly, you got it. All Good = Good Single Class, All Poor = Poor Single Class.
If not all your Class' Saves stack, everything reduces to just:
I love it, because Single Class "Good" Saves are already fine: "stacking" the 1st level bonuses of Good Saves (in the standard manner) is just silly (esp. when the corresponding Stat bonus is often significant).
It's the *Poor* Saves that I worry about being totally gimped: if I happen to take several Warrior classes for example, they may never advance beyond +1 or +2 in their Poor Saves, even if my Character Level is 10+. These Saves WILL STILL BE "POOR", but they will be equal to what a Single Class Character (with that Poor Save) would have.
...So I would hope that this could make it into Pathfinder: given the opportunity of Pathfinder being revised in all aspects, it seems a great opportunity to just put in a "Universal" Good/Poor Save Table... Is there a better forum to post this in? At a later point? Or is it already over????
Note: for the interest of beginning players, each class would still list it's own Save Progression.
The "Universal" Progression, with Good/Poor columns for each Save,
would fit in the section describing Multiclassing.
Each class would just need a short blurb listing: for clarity's sake.
Sure, and I think each class should still include it's own Chart.
You only have to worry about this stuff if you're multi-classing,
and the Classes would just have a short blurb "F:Good/R:Poor/W:Good"
which the Multi-Classing section explains how to combine. Otherwise, you never need to worry about it.
Sure, and I think each class should still include it's own Chart.
You only have to worry about this stuff if you're multi-classing,
and the Classes would just have a short blurb "F:Good/R:Poor/W:Good"
which the Multi-Classing section explains how to combine. Otherwise, you never need to worry about it.
I like that. The short blurb could just stand in the header of the chart under the saving throw... in extra fine print, even, as it is obvious for experienced players by the progression itself.
I love the idea of class levels stacking towards Good/Poor saves and Good/Medium/Poor BAB. It makes things so much simpler and far less harsh on multi-classers. (Then again, I do like my rogue-rangers and rogue-fighters and what-not, so I'm probably biased.)
I've also been looking at fractional saves and BAB for a good while now.
Firstly, capping save bonus based on character level doesn't work out in practice, because builds like Ftr1/Barb1/Ranger1/Sorcerer5 would have the same Fort as a Fighter8 (+6).
As for just adding them up... what you run into (that other 20% that Quandary mentioned) are cases like Bard2(Good Ref/Will)/Ranger2(Good Fort/Ref).
Under a fractional system, it would have Fort +3/Ref +3/Will +3.
Under the add-em up system, it comes out Fort +2/Ref +3/Will +2.
Mixing good-save classes with poor-save classes leads to some issues if you have unfinished "sets" of save bumps. In the example, the Bard2/Ranger2 had one "extra" Bard level and two "extra" Ranger levels adding to Will. Where in a fractional system, that would equate to 1/2 + 2/3 = 1 1/3, rounded down to +1. But in the add-em-up system, there's no benefit.
In the end, it's down to figuring out how to write up fractional saves in a manner that's digestible for it to work. We'd be using fractional BAB, right? Why not fractional saves?
-Matt
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Jason will probably be along any minute now to obliterate this thread with his backward compatibility flail, but in the meantime, I think it's a great line of discussion.
I have always felt that saves were one of the most broken elements of multiclassing. They function fine in a single-class situation, but once you start adding multiple +2's together for 1 level in individual classes, it breaks really fast. I guess we should bring this up again when we discuss multiclass rules, as that's where it really applies.
My favored solution is to grant a +2 1t first level only. For all other new classes, good saves begin at +1. Thus a Fighter would get +2 fort at 1st level, but if he multiclassed into ranger he would only add +1 for the second class. A variant on this is to only add a +2 once per save, so that a ftr 1/wiz 1 would have +2 fort and +2 wil, but if he then multiclassed into cleric, he would only get +1 for the third class's wil save as he had previously received a good bonus in that save from another class.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Jason will probably be along any minute now to obliterate this thread with his backward compatibility flail
Let me do it for him.
Any change like this kills backward compat.
I honestly don't see the point of attempting to nerf saves for anyone multiclassing. If you multiclass and gain good (excellent) saves, you
are generally weaker in other areas (for one example the poor save is usually even worse.)
There are plenty of reasons to stay in a single class with the new rules, there isn't more need to make it even better by destroying the alternative.
Jason will probably be along any minute now to obliterate this thread with his backward compatibility flailLet me do it for him.
Any change like this kills backward compat[ibility].
The favored class boosting and new racial modifiers already kill backward compatibility. Suddenly, all NPCS of PHB races have different stats, and all NPCs gain either hit points or skill points.
And then there's the issue of favored classes for monsters. For example, I've gotta add either hit points or skill points to any Troll with Fighter levels, since Fighter is a favored class for a Troll. (By the way, is it fair that PHB demihumans can choose between two favored classes, but non-PHB races can't? I'll probably have to add Ranger as a favored class possibility for a Troll.)
And then you've got the issue of figuring out favored classes for monsters that aren't listed as having one. Since, it's not fair that a Troll can gain benefits for having Fighter levels, but a Succubus gains nothing for having Bard levels. (Or is it Sorcerer? Oh crap, I've gotta use guesswork now.)
Point being... the changes to benefit single-classing already are already a detriment to backwards compatibility. Perhaps the better solution would be to change the universal multiclassing rules (which Elves, Trolls, and Succubi all follow) in such a way that boosting single-class characters is no longer necessary.
-Matt
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Perhaps the better solution would be to change the universal multiclassing rules (which Elves, Trolls, and Succubi all follow) in such a way that boosting single-class characters is no longer necessary.
-Matt
You and I shall have to agree to disagree about that. I think changing the universal rules is drastically more damaging to backward compat than the favored class rules.