PDA

View Full Version : Saving throws are too probable



shadow_archmagi
2009-04-11, 11:04 AM
Maybe I'm just terrible at buffing save DCs, but it seems to me that it's very rare for the save DC to be 20 above the enemy's save modifiers. (Our games rarely get up above level 10 or so) Come to think of it, it's pretty rare for the save DC to be above 20 to begin with. (10 base, +3 for spell level, +5 for casting stat, +1 for feat still nets me only 19).

So, say I want to use Hold Person. Even a completely average 1st level character has a 5% chance to escape every 6 seconds. Statistically, I'll be lucky if he's still tied up at the end of the second minute.

Thematically, it seems wrong that a 10th level wizard should have to blow his entire 3rd level array just to keep a single commoner busy for ten minutes, much less a bear or something.

What's the solution here? Or am I just wrong?

Eldariel
2009-04-11, 11:13 AM
Well see, Hold Person isn't meant to hold Commoners at bay for 10 minutes. It's meant to hold a raging Barbarian at bay for 1-2 rounds while your allies hack him to pieces. Simply, you're using the wrong spell here. If you want for something to last 10 minutes, use a long duration spell.

Also, you underestimate the casting stat. A Gray Elf (and a dozen other LA +0 races, but Gray Elf is the only Core LA +0 option for Wizard) can start with 20 Int. Level 4 adds 1 point, level 8 another. Middle-Aged would add another one giving you 22 on level 4. Additionally, +2 Int Headband adds +2, giving you +7 to DCs from stat. +6 for Middle-Aged Human on 5, +5 for standard Humans (+6 on 8, +7 if using Fox's Cunning).


But really, one failed save is enough to screw someone over. Think Glitterdust - a failed save blinds and the DC is something sick like 17-18. Most characters on that level don't have more than +3-+4 to Will-saves (save Clerics & Druids which you'd obviously target with Web instead) and you can target multiple creatures with Glitterdust. That gives them like 30% chance if lucky for succeeding in their save (that's without Spell Focus + Greater Spell Focus and for a young Human with +2 item), and there're multiple saving throws, so chances are ~3/4th of the targets you hit get blinded. And that's without trying.

I'd almost say saving throws are too hard. PCs are just bound to fail some bad ones that might screw them over big time (think Flesh to Stone or such) unless you're a Cleric/Druid.

tyckspoon
2009-04-11, 11:28 AM
As mentioned you're just using that particular spell wrong. If you want to get somebody out of your hair with a 3rd level spell, try Deep Slumber or Stinking Cloud. If you must use Hold Person, walk up to them and inflict a non-lethal Coup de Grace. Or drop down a spell level and use Web, Blindness/Deafness, or Glitterdust.

18-19 really is not a bad save DC for 5th level. Check out the CR5 monsters- almost all of them have a better than 50% chance of failing on their good saves.

Crow
2009-04-11, 10:25 PM
I'm so sick of Grey Elves. Every "example" wizard in every thread is a grey elf.

Remember that you can also use the heighten spell feat to cast lower level spells as higher ones. This boosts the save DC also. This is usually a lot better for sorcerers, but there is nothing stopping a wizard from using it too if she absolutely must have a specific spell effect.

JackMage666
2009-04-11, 10:44 PM
I'm so sick of Grey Elves. Every "example" wizard in every thread is a grey elf.

Remember that you can also use the heighten spell feat to cast lower level spells as higher ones. This boosts the save DC also. This is usually a lot better for sorcerers, but there is nothing stopping a wizard from using it too if she absolutely must have a specific spell effect.

When searching for mathematical evidence, people optimize. Grey Elves are an optimal race for Wizards, due to +0 LA and the +2 Int.

Though I agree, I think they should use Humans, as they're a good baseline.

Ent
2009-04-11, 10:46 PM
Even low level casters have access to debuff spells.

A Clr 3 can Bane and Doom to Cause Fear, a Web or Entangle can set up targets for Reflex save spells, etc.

Chronos
2009-04-12, 01:05 AM
You do know that even for an epic-level archmage with a 50 Int casting tenth-level spells, a first-level commoner still has a 5% chance of saving, right? A natural 20 on the roll always saves, no matter what the modifier or DC is.


Even low level casters have access to debuff spells.

A Clr 3 can Bane and Doom to Cause Fear, a Web or Entangle can set up targets for Reflex save spells, etc. Except that all of those debuffs also offer saves. If you're going to cast one spell with a save to soften up the target for some other spell with a save, then you'd be better off just casting the second spell twice.

Tempest Fennac
2009-04-12, 01:25 AM
Crow, would it help if I mentioned my Fenneckin homebrew race in Wizard threads to counteract Grey Elves? :smalltongue: Being serious, I see Hold Person as the sort of spell you'd use to stop an enemy with low Will saves so that an ally can kill them on their next action (targeting enemy's weak saves is the key with these sorts of spells).

Hawriel
2009-04-12, 02:21 AM
The OP was asking about spell saves and how to make them stronger. So naturaly most posters start picking apart his example and how sub obtimal it is.

So your right. A 20th level wizard casting a 9th level spell with a int of 21 (Yes I know you can boost INT with items thats not the point) has a spell save of 24. Well there you go a save over 20. But not by much. Any character using its good save will make it. There are feats for casting spells at a higher level and focusing which adds to the save DC. Specializing in a school does this for example.

I do think you right in questioning saves. DCs against PCs are generaly higher, player DCs usualy lag behind.

MeklorIlavator
2009-04-12, 02:54 AM
Well, they're mostly saying that his example has some problems, plus he's making assumptions about the spells. They're trying to show that when using spells in the way they're meant to, that it does work.

sonofzeal
2009-04-12, 07:21 AM
Well... I think this raises a fair question. I've played little over level 15, and my characters are a bit more defensive than most, but I routinely see saving throws over 20, occasionally as high as 25. In other words, even a fairly optimized DC (call it 8 for spell level, 8 for Int/Cha, 2 misc) has only a 15% chance of success. I don't know if that's typical, but it seems to imply that spells with saving throws start off at maybe 75% reliability and descend from there to maybe about 25% over 20 levels. Does that mesh with anyone else's experience?

Riffington
2009-04-12, 08:13 AM
Any character using its good save will make it.

But casters typically target poor saves, not strong saves.
The question should be: if a caster uses a save-or-lose at range on a non-Paladin non-monk character of the same level, what should be the chances of it working?

I'd like to claim a priori that the chances should be 35%. (similar to "how many rounds should it take an archer to kill a wizard who has partial cover", which should be about 3)

1st level wizard casts sleep (DC 15) on a fighter (save 0): chance of working is actually 75%, which is much higher than my a priori 35%.
in SonofZeal's example, not sure why the poor saves are so high. A 15th level rogue has a Fort Save of (5 base + 5 Con + 5 cloak) = 15 if he spends a lot on defense. His save DC given is 28, or a 65% - still quite high.

Eldariel
2009-04-12, 08:17 AM
Well... I think this raises a fair question. I've played little over level 15, and my characters are a bit more defensive than most, but I routinely see saving throws over 20, occasionally as high as 25. In other words, even a fairly optimized DC (call it 8 for spell level, 8 for Int/Cha, 2 misc) has only a 15% chance of success. I don't know if that's typical, but it seems to imply that spells with saving throws start off at maybe 75% reliability and descend from there to maybe about 25% over 20 levels. Does that mesh with anyone else's experience?

All saving throws over 20? The idea is to target their weak saves. But yeah, let's talk level 15:
DC 10+8+Int+2

Int is: 20+3+6 and either Middle-Aged or +1 Int book consumed. Gives us a total of DC 30. A character with poor base saves has saving throw base of +5, and ~+4 from stat, +6 resistance. Total save bonus of +15, meaning there's a 70% of failing the save. Of course, this doesn't account for spells that lower saves or some such. But still, as long as you aren't trying to debuff Paladin 2/Sorcerer X Gish, you should be able to find a weak save. Not to mention, much of that save comes from item - one Chained Greater Dispel Magic and we're talking about miniscule saves.

But it's not usually really worth buffing the save DC beyond that as it tends to take a lot of resources.

ericgrau
2009-04-12, 10:05 AM
When searching for mathematical evidence, people optimize. Grey Elves are an optimal race for Wizards, due to +0 LA and the +2 Int.

Though I agree, I think they should use Humans, as they're a good baseline.

And they should use the average rolled high stat: 15. If you have an 18, you're either saying, "I'm talking about something way above the norm" or "Our DM gives us much higher stats than usual to make the game easier on it because we need it" or "our DM thinks we'll be happier if he gives us stats like candy" (but the monsters will have to be harder too, which means they have higher saves anyway).

So a 4th level wizard should have a 16 int to get a glitterdust save DC of 15 (or 16-17 with feats), which about half of monsters can make.

At level 15 his int is 15+3+6=24 (+7 mod). His save DCs are 25 for 8th level spells, or 27 with feats. The average CR 18 BBEG has saves of 20/16/19 (fort/ref/will) and 224 HP, while a more common CR 13 monster has average saves of 14/10/12 and 167 HP. The BBEG makes 75% of his fort/will saves and 50% of his reflex saves, while the common monster (in a group) fails 75%. At this level a lot of monsters have SR too, which typically stops about 50% of targetted spells. The BBEG's HP also means that you're better off firing empowered maximized scorching rays (93 average damage) or the like rather than SoD's, and that's not even counting the damage your allies are doing (which doesn't stack so well with SoD's). Against the group of CR 13's an AoE debuff heightened to 8th level is devastating if you want to expend it, or even the non-heightened one could knock out half of them. Still very nice.

Chronos
2009-04-12, 10:21 AM
Well, they're mostly saying that his example has some problems, plus he's making assumptions about the spells. They're trying to show that when using spells in the way they're meant to, that it does work.This is another part of the problem: Why should spells that offer a saving throw work all of the time? Isn't the whole idea that they don't?

And even at that, good saving throws scale at about the same rate as spell DCs: Increasing by one point per two levels, and based on a single ability mod. So a spellcaster targeting a good save should have an approximately steady chance for success. Then you consider that most spellcasters have a choice of spells, and can usually hit the weak save.

ericgrau
2009-04-12, 10:33 AM
If we take dragons as an example, their will save is usually only a couple points lower than their fort save and they have a million immunities anyway. Reflex saves are significantly lower for dragons (and on average), but reflex SoL's like resilient sphere or wall of stone aren't too helpful except sometimes as an escape tactic or against groups. But single target SoL's instead of AoE's are kind of a waste against a group. So "targetting a weak save" is kinda misleading. It only helps a little. Dragons in particular tend to have high fort & will saves (and not too shabby reflex saves) and a million immunities, making 95% of SoD's fall flat against them. Against other monsters, it seems more balanced (see previos post), but will save still may not vary too much from fort.

Flickerdart
2009-04-12, 11:07 AM
If you're looking down the barrel of a loaded dragon, or a Monk or anything else with good saves all across the board, you can always use either spells with no save (Orbs of X metamagicked unto infinity, Enervation, and suchlike) or spells which don't care about the save (Web still has an effect, at least when it's still relevant). Save or X spells are only for when there is a more reliable chance of X than there is of Save.

kjones
2009-04-12, 11:23 AM
Let me get this straight. Your problem is that sometimes spells with saving throws sometimes don't work?

If it bothers you that much, there are spells without saves, and there are ways to boost save DCs, and there are ways to lower your enemy's saves. Mix, match, apply as desired.

Talya
2009-04-12, 11:31 AM
The human sorceress I'm playing at level 16 (not a particularly high-magic item campaign, either) currently casts her highest level spell (level 7, she's multiclassed 2 bard for a PrC requirement) at DC 28. If she's deprived of gear, that drops to DC 25 (Cloak of Beauty +6 is not that expensive, not that our DM lets us buy gear on demand. The party crafter made it for her.) If it's an enchantment, that goes up to DC31 (28 naked). If she were single classed, these would be level 8 spells and therefore +1 higher. At level 20 her level 9 spell would be DC31 (34 for enchantments.)

I just don't see that PC save DCs are all that low.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-04-12, 11:46 AM
Yes, .95^20 =~ .35

That's math. Why are you trying to use a spell intended for short-duration combat immobilization (hold person) outside of combat? Your problem, overall, seems to be only with hold person and the fact you get a save every round. If that bugs you, just remove that part - it won't affect the spell's deadliness all that much (certainly every hold person spell in combat is followed by a quick coup de grace on the same or next round anyway?).


DC31 (28 naked)

Ah, Sunites.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-12, 11:52 AM
And they should use the average rolled high stat: 15. If you have an 18, you're either saying, "I'm talking about something way above the norm" or "Our DM gives us much higher stats than usual to make the game easier on it because we need it" or "our DM thinks we'll be happier if he gives us stats like candy" (but the monsters will have to be harder too, which means they have higher saves anyway).

Or, you live in the crazy land of Point Buy, where you can actually design your stats in a way that allows you to play the character you want to play, like every other RPG worth playing.

But yeah, dealing with reality is less fun then insulting everyone that doesn't share your values.

Eldariel
2009-04-12, 11:57 AM
And they should use the average rolled high stat: 15. If you have an 18, you're either saying, "I'm talking about something way above the norm" or "Our DM gives us much higher stats than usual to make the game easier on it because we need it" or "our DM thinks we'll be happier if he gives us stats like candy" (but the monsters will have to be harder too, which means they have higher saves anyway).

No, mostly it just is like stating "our DM uses point buy". Casters don't need Cha/Wis/Int (the two non-casting ones) or Str so they can afford an 18 on point buy. Also, if you read all the "help with characters"-thread, you'll notice they're almost invariably rolled with insane stats which leads me to believe a ton of rerolling is a common practice. So the players rolling tend to roll until they get nutty stats and more experienced players use point buy anyways. Either way, the 18 is there.

aje8
2009-04-12, 12:17 PM
Yah... +1 to Point-Buy FTW.

Moving on, just noting here but there are many really frickin good no-save spells. Enervation any1?

Dragons should also not be used as an example for anything. Dragons get inexplicably huge buffs for their CR and compared to other characters in general because Wizards is like OMG DRAGONS!! RAWR for no apparent reason. They're really not a good example.

monty
2009-04-12, 12:24 PM
Dragons should also not be used as an example for anything. Dragons get inexplicably huge buffs for their CR and compared to other characters in general because Wizards is like OMG DRAGONS!! RAWR for no apparent reason. They're really not a good example.

Well, the game is called Dungeons & Dragons. If dragons were weak, that wouldn't make much sense.

sonofzeal
2009-04-12, 01:05 PM
Int is: 20+3+6 and either Middle-Aged or +1 Int book consumed. Gives us a total of DC 30. A character with poor base saves has saving throw base of +5, and ~+4 from stat, +6 resistance. Total save bonus of +15, meaning there's a 70% of failing the save. Of course, this doesn't account for spells that lower saves or some such. But still, as long as you aren't trying to debuff Paladin 2/Sorcerer X Gish, you should be able to find a weak save. Not to mention, much of that save comes from item - one Chained Greater Dispel Magic and we're talking about miniscule saves.
Be that as it may, for most lvl 20 characters I've played it's usually non-obvious what their weakest save is. A multiclassed Dwarven Defender / Deepwarden is likely to have Will save through the roof despite looking like a Fighter, and will likely be wearing light armor which is a warning sign against Ref. And a Barbarian tripmonkey who dipped Factotum for that tasty Int bonus (and possibly Rogue for SA, since BAB isn't important for tripping) is going to have a surprisingly good Ref save, and a healthy Will bonus while Raging, as well as a killer Fort save.

There's also all the hundreds of options out there that make even the weak save powerful. Paladin does it, but so does Binder, or the Diamond Mind school, or Divine Mind, or Marshal, or Monk dips, or any number of other options. Ref saves can be more or less balanced by high hitpoints or energy resistances, and Will saves can be almost ignored if you gain immunity to Mind-Affecting (not hard at high level). And almost none of that stuff is immediately evident to the observer.

In practice, sometimes you can guess what the weakest save is, but usually it's a rock/paper/scissors where, even if you through your most powerful spell at their weakest save, and their weakest save is legitimately weak, and you're pretty darn optimized for DCs, you've still got a 30% chance of failure. Fun times.

Eldariel
2009-04-12, 01:12 PM
As a rule, hit Reflex for heavy armor types, Will for light armor ones and Fort for the non-armored. Works very much of the time, unless you roll your Knowledge (which, let's face it, as a Wizard you always should). Yes, there're exceptions when that doesn't work, but how often you fail your Knowledge and run into a character whose weak save is non-obvious? Not often, to be sure.

Riffington
2009-04-12, 01:47 PM
In practice, sometimes you can guess what the weakest save is, but usually it's a rock/paper/scissors where, even if you through your most powerful spell at their weakest save, and their weakest save is legitimately weak, and you're pretty darn optimized for DCs, you've still got a 30% chance of failure.

What do you think the chance of failure ought to be? How many rounds does it take one of those foes to take you out (assuming you are at range, have Greater mirror image, contingency, etc. up but that they have bypassed your most paranoid Batman defenses)

RebelRogue
2009-04-12, 02:29 PM
If anything, I think it's too easy for casters to target a weak save and/or buff the DC into the stratosphere, especially when the consequences are often as dire as it is.

I remember the time, when Saves were static target numbers (determined by class and level). Back then (Save or Suck) spells with saves were usually something you only bothered with when it came to low-level foes. The high-level ones made it just about every time. Not saying that's a great scenario, but it has at least some appeal when compared to the rocket tag of high-level 3.5, IMO.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-12, 04:59 PM
Be that as it may, for most lvl 20 characters I've played it's usually non-obvious what their weakest save is. A multiclassed Dwarven Defender / Deepwarden is likely to have Will save through the roof despite looking like a Fighter, and will likely be wearing light armor which is a warning sign against Ref. And a Barbarian tripmonkey who dipped Factotum for that tasty Int bonus (and possibly Rogue for SA, since BAB isn't important for tripping) is going to have a surprisingly good Ref save, and a healthy Will bonus while Raging, as well as a killer Fort save.

There's also all the hundreds of options out there that make even the weak save powerful. Paladin does it, but so does Binder, or the Diamond Mind school, or Divine Mind, or Marshal, or Monk dips, or any number of other options. Ref saves can be more or less balanced by high hitpoints or energy resistances, and Will saves can be almost ignored if you gain immunity to Mind-Affecting (not hard at high level). And almost none of that stuff is immediately evident to the observer.

In practice, sometimes you can guess what the weakest save is, but usually it's a rock/paper/scissors where, even if you through your most powerful spell at their weakest save, and their weakest save is legitimately weak, and you're pretty darn optimized for DCs, you've still got a 30% chance of failure. Fun times.

That's all great, but here's something crazy:

What about monsters. Most of the things I face are monsters. They are usually pretty easy to figure out. As someone who buffs saves hardcore, I am aware of what save modifiers can be, but the thing is, if you have even one competent Warblade in your party he can solo any Paladins, Monk Dips, Marshals, ect you face. So that's not really a big deal. And the rest of the time, you are looking at much higher DCs then the OP gave examples, since you should at least be able to match the DCs of outsiders of your CR, and you really should be better with your high level ones.

First number is a Human with an 18, (Or Grey Elf with a 16, since everyone knows that all Wizards are grey elves, right Crow,) second number is a two age category grey elf (who dumps con and goes necropolitian as soon as possible.) Add feats and such to that.

level 1: DC 15-17
level 5: DC 18-20
level 9: DC 22-24
level 13: DC 25-27
level 17: DC 28-30
level 20: DC 31-33

I'm not seeing the problem of having your DCs not go up with level.

Chronos
2009-04-12, 07:13 PM
Quoth Talya:
If it's an enchantment, that goes up to DC31 (28 naked).I thought your characters were supposed to be more effective naked?

sonofzeal
2009-04-12, 07:33 PM
What do you think the chance of failure ought to be? How many rounds does it take one of those foes to take you out (assuming you are at range, have Greater mirror image, contingency, etc. up but that they have bypassed your most paranoid Batman defenses)
I honestly don't really know what it should be. I think that there should be more options for casters to focus on things like DCs at the expense of other things (like Spells Known or Spells-per-day), but that a caster who hasn't made any particular sacrifices to get his DCs up should be seeing something like a ~75% success rate against a "poor" defense, a ~50% against a "good" defense, and a ~25% success rate against an "excellent" defense. I do think there should be the option for casters to pay to increase those odds, and I'm not aware of any method for that in D&D, but c'est la vie. I'd allow characters in my games to double-cast, expend two slots of the same level to boost the DC by.... +2? +4? What's reasonable? Does this already exist somewhere?

RebelRogue
2009-04-12, 07:38 PM
Casters certainly don't need such an option, balancewise. Why do you feel this is necessary?

BlueWizard
2009-04-12, 08:03 PM
Part of the Game. :smallcool:

Riffington
2009-04-12, 08:16 PM
I honestly don't really know what it should be.

Would you agree that an archer and a wizard, both of whom have their guards and defenses up, who decide to slog it out should have roughly equal chances of killing one another?

Better: that the archer should ideally have a slightly better chance of winning, since the wizard can always "cheat" on the second round if badly injured on the first by using teleport, obscuring mist, or some other no-save spell that ends the fight in a tie?

If this makes sense, count how many rounds it takes an archer to off a well-defended wizard. If it takes N rounds on average, the wizard's success rate against the archer's worst save should be 1/N.

Knaight
2009-04-12, 08:38 PM
If we take dragons as an example, their will save is usually only a couple points lower than their fort save and they have a million immunities anyway. Reflex saves are significantly lower for dragons (and on average), but reflex SoL's like resilient sphere or wall of stone aren't too helpful except sometimes as an escape tactic or against groups. But single target SoL's instead of AoE's are kind of a waste against a group. So "targetting a weak save" is kinda misleading. It only helps a little.
Sure, but Touch AC is practically a save, and when it comes to weak saves, Touch AC is the king of it. Most dragons have pitiful touch ACs, and can be hit with ray attacks almost effortlessly.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-12, 08:52 PM
Sure, but Touch AC is practically a save, and when it comes to weak saves, Touch AC is the king of it. Most dragons have pitiful touch ACs, and can be hit with ray attacks almost effortlessly.

To be fair, the effects of ranged touch spells are generally speaking much worse then the effects of failed saves.

Dizzy Ray=single target slow for a touch attack, level 5 spell. Slow, AoE, level 3 same thing.

Holds across the board.

ericgrau
2009-04-12, 09:33 PM
Sure, but Touch AC is practically a save, and when it comes to weak saves, Touch AC is the king of it. Most dragons have pitiful touch ACs, and can be hit with ray attacks almost effortlessly.

The dragon was just one example. A lot of other monsters have fort & will saves that aren't too far apart. In core and maybe a lot of common splatbooks no save ray attacks usually mean direct damage, which isn't exactly what I'd call SoD. I've heard of shivering touch being used against just about everything, but I've also heard it pointed out as broken (which I'd agree). While I knew some high CR monsters have horrid touch ACs, I was surprised to find that on average touch AC doesn't go up with CR. I'm not sure if that's from the negative touch ACs bringing down the average though.

sonofzeal: That's exactly what I found for a core wizard vs. the average saves in monster manual I. See previous post. Maybe additional books let it get higher, and that causes a problem. But with attribute bonus, spell level and maybe greater spell focus, that's what it is.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-12, 10:02 PM
The dragon was just one example. A lot of other monsters have fort & will saves that aren't too far apart. In core and maybe a lot of common splatbooks no save ray attacks usually mean direct damage, which isn't exactly what I'd call SoD.

There are lots of touch AC type moves that can also be done:

1) Ray of Dizziness or Ray of Stunning. Slow based on RTA and several round stun off RTA respectively.
2) Stacking stuff: Ray of Clumsiness+Ray of Exhaustion (you only need Fatigue, so the save doesn't matter).
3) Ray of Stupidity: Mind affecting, but it does Int damage, so if they aren't immune to it, killer.

None of it is "or die" as much as it is "or lose." But as I said above, in most cases, RTA based spells are worse then save based spells if they had failed the save. (Except Ray of Stupidity, but that has an easy immunity.)

sonofzeal
2009-04-12, 11:00 PM
Casters certainly don't need such an option, balancewise. Why do you feel this is necessary?
Because I don't think it would mess with balance too badly, and would be tactically interesting. It'd give you an extra choice (and choices are fundamentally a good thing) without any extra bookkeeping or being in any way counterintuitive. You've already got the magical energy to create several Glitterdust effects; why can't you take extra time or effort or magical energy to make your Glitterdust more reliable? I suppose that's what Heighten Spell is for, but Heighten Spell costs you a feat, doesn't raise the DC enough, and burns through your highly limited upper level spell slots. Psi augmentation solves at least some of it, but there's still a void there.

Same goes for melee characters too - there's not really a mechanic for an archer to take a really really careful shot. And I think there should be, because it's fun and interesting and not really exploitable if all you're doing is raising the odds of something that could already occur.


Would you agree that an archer and a wizard, both of whom have their guards and defenses up, who decide to slog it out should have roughly equal chances of killing one another?

Better: that the archer should ideally have a slightly better chance of winning, since the wizard can always "cheat" on the second round if badly injured on the first by using teleport, obscuring mist, or some other no-save spell that ends the fight in a tie?

If this makes sense, count how many rounds it takes an archer to off a well-defended wizard. If it takes N rounds on average, the wizard's success rate against the archer's worst save should be 1/N.
I don't think that's a perfect analogy; ideally, Archers and Wizards should excel in slightly different environments and contexts, and be useful in-game in slightly different ways. Anti-mundane-NPC and Anti-caster-NPC are certainly two of the areas to specialize in, but saying that an Archer's "anti-caster-NPC" rating should be equal to a Wizard's "anti-mundane-NPC" rating is honestly a little silly. In an abstract game of my own invention that vaguely resembles D&D, I'd put archers on "single target DPS" duty, while Wizards would be more about "multi target debuffs/DPS". And in that world, an Archer would probably wipe the floor with a Wizard, while an army of Wizards would likely beat an army of Archers.

That said, you're also making the assumption that a single failed save wins the day for the Wizard, and that also shouldn't be (but unfortunately is) the case. No solutions offered here, I'm just pointing it out.


You know, I think I got it right in that first paragraph - what I'm looking for is basically just the psi Augmentation system, with a few minor tweaks and a new coat of paint. As long as DCs and Saves progress at roughly the same rates (and it appears they might), then, like cookies for Cookies Monster, that's good enough for me.

ericgrau
2009-04-12, 11:43 PM
There are lots of touch AC type moves that can also be done:

1) Ray of Dizziness or Ray of Stunning. Slow based on RTA and several round stun off RTA respectively.
2) Stacking stuff: Ray of Clumsiness+Ray of Exhaustion (you only need Fatigue, so the save doesn't matter).
3) Ray of Stupidity: Mind affecting, but it does Int damage, so if they aren't immune to it, killer.

None of it is "or die" as much as it is "or lose." But as I said above, in most cases, RTA based spells are worse then save based spells if they had failed the save. (Except Ray of Stupidity, but that has an easy immunity.)

For the 3rd one in core there's only touch of idiocy and feeblemind, neither of which can drop int below 1. Specifically to avoid the habit of putting low int creatures into comas rather than making smart things stupid like the spells were intended to do. My point was that you have to look outside of core to find such things, and even then you have to do some cheese hunting. Shivering touch is a major example. In core, and avoiding cheese outside of core, you can debuff a little but not disable (no "or lose") or you can do direct damage.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-13, 01:00 AM
For the 3rd one in core there's only touch of idiocy and feeblemind, neither of which can drop int below 1. Specifically to avoid the habit of putting low int creatures into comas rather than making smart things stupid like the spells were intended to do. My point was that you have to look outside of core to find such things, and even then you have to do some cheese hunting. Shivering touch is a major example. In core, and avoiding cheese outside of core, you can debuff a little but not disable (no "or lose") or you can do direct damage.

So to sum up, anything good is cheese?

Seriously, you can't say there are none and then just declare Ray of Stunning/Dizziness/Stupidity cheese. Shivering Touch is cheese. Stupidity does barely any int damage (1d4 oh noes! it can beat an animal 3/5ths of the time!) and it's easy to be immune to.

If you declare all rays that debuff "cheese" then yeah, there are none except cheese. What else is a 2-5 round stun? A slow effect for CL rounds? That's a lose and a suck(if caster)/lose(if full attack user) right there.

Myrmex
2009-04-13, 01:16 AM
There are lots of touch AC type moves that can also be done:

1) Ray of Dizziness or Ray of Stunning. Slow based on RTA and several round stun off RTA respectively.
2) Stacking stuff: Ray of Clumsiness+Ray of Exhaustion (you only need Fatigue, so the save doesn't matter).
3) Ray of Stupidity: Mind affecting, but it does Int damage, so if they aren't immune to it, killer.

None of it is "or die" as much as it is "or lose." But as I said above, in most cases, RTA based spells are worse then save based spells if they had failed the save. (Except Ray of Stupidity, but that has an easy immunity.)

Worth noting that most of this is only useful if you have a party. Just-lose gets as good as save-or-dies when you have a couple of beatsticks waiting to pummel the living crap out of it while you stun lock it. Metamagic'd stupid rays are very good, though, like a cheaper enervate. Both are fairly easy to have defenses against, though, either through monster type, loot, or class levels.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-04-13, 08:08 AM
Because they're relevant:http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m126/stoopidtallkid/savessriu4.jpghttp://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m126/stoopidtallkid/touchnormalacro0.jpg

Chronos
2009-04-13, 12:47 PM
There must be something wrong with the SR plot on that graph... There's no way CR 1 monsters have an average SR of 16. Most CR 1 monsters don't have any SR at all.

Worira
2009-04-13, 01:08 PM
I'm pretty sure it just doesn't enter monsters without SR into the calculation. 16 is the average of creatures that have SR.

lsfreak
2009-04-13, 01:23 PM
There must be something wrong with the SR plot on that graph... There's no way CR 1 monsters have an average SR of 16. Most CR 1 monsters don't have any SR at all.

I think for SR the graph only lists those that have SR. Grigs and Nixies are both CR1 with 16-17SR, for example.
EDIT: I really need to refresh pages more often when I open 20 of them at once >.>

J.Gellert
2009-04-13, 01:26 PM
Age-old problem. If your character doesn't focus around optimizing his DCs, don't even bother casting these spells.

Use buffs, summons and rays.

Kantur
2009-04-13, 01:32 PM
There must be something wrong with the SR plot on that graph... There's no way CR 1 monsters have an average SR of 16. Most CR 1 monsters don't have any SR at all.

Using the srd and only looking at monsters with a CR of 1 (Didn't bother with the fractional CR creatures), I actually got an average of 14. Still surprisingly high, but it's mainly because of Nixies (SR16), Pseudodragons (SR19!) and Grigs (SR17), though pulling the average back down is the Fiendish Large Monsterous Centipede at SR8, along with the most expected CR creatures in the Svirfneblin and Drow (Both SR12).

As you said, most CR1 creatures don't have a SR at all, but the ones that do can still make it challenging for a caster...

mostlyharmful
2009-04-13, 02:01 PM
I do think there should be the option for casters to pay to increase those odds, and I'm not aware of any method for that in D&D, but c'est la vie. I'd allow characters in my games to double-cast, expend two slots of the same level to boost the DC by.... +2? +4? What's reasonable? Does this already exist somewhere?

The Spell Power High Arcana line is exactly that.

For a lower level similar idea there's the Red Wizard which gives up more flexibility for a greater save DC in it's school along with the Circle Cheese. If you toss the broken bit and the entrance restrictions and swap in some alternate class thingies to make it more interesting to play it can make a very nice basis for a save DC PrC.

Gorbash
2009-04-13, 02:55 PM
The Spell Power High Arcana line is exactly that.

No, it doesn't, what are you talking about? Spell Power = +1 CL and that's it.

mostlyharmful
2009-04-13, 03:23 PM
No, it doesn't, what are you talking about? Spell Power = +1 CL and that's it.

oooops. 3.0/3.5 mix up, Ive been playing from my mates book for the last few months since the move. please ignore:smallredface:

Myrmex
2009-04-13, 03:59 PM
Standard PB is 25, by the DMG. Starting stats would look like:

str 6 = 8 - 2
dex 13 = 11+2
con 12 = 14 -2
int 20 = 18 + 2
wis 8 = 8
cha 8 = 8

13 dex and 12 con are awful. Monsters will likely be able to drop you into the negatives with a single blow through most levels. With dex that low, your touch attacks are at +1 at level 1, and not scaling very fast. They will likely have a higher failure rate than your save-or-whatevers, even against low touch AC monsters. And if they get into melee before you get a chance to go? Your touch attacks will never land.

Also, with a con that low, making concentration checks to cast your spells are going to be difficult until the low mid to mid levels. Like "I'm wearing plate" difficult.

With strength of six you will lose grapples to commoners and goblins.

And if you decide to go up in age categories? Good luck making it through the first 6 levels. You'll be spending so much time every combat making sure you don't die or bouncing in and out of the negatives that you'll be less useful than the barbarian.


I'd rather PB up to 16 int, then put the rest of the points in con and dex, so you end up with
18 int (not 20) and 14 con/15 dex.

Eldariel
2009-04-13, 04:23 PM
25pb on a Gray Elf would probably be 14/14/17 - at least that's how I'd buy it. Ends up in 16/12/19. You'll be fine with those, especially seeing that it's 25pb and thus an average-powered game, meaning you'll be dealing with CR appropriate encounters, something you can easily do with the massive save DC you can force. On the first levels, you'll have to do some extra work to survive though - getting a Toad-familiar helps, but sucks in the long run; carrying . 28pb would get you that 20 Int.

A dumber but more efficient solution would be to get a Tower Shield (you can carry it + 15 lb of clothes and stuff with heavy load) and move with it providing you total cover, then drop it when it's time to cast. You need no proficiency for that. That said, it's just so wrong RP-wise that I wouldn't use this. Instead, you could also cross-class Hide & Move Silently and use them - with your 16 Dex, you'll be pretty well off in that regard. Another option is to get a mount and use it for cover (just standard cover though) - again, you can crossclass the ranks. Light War Horse costs 150gp, possibly affordable on level 1, although not usually for Wizards. Of course, first level "optimal" Wizard sells his spellbook and buys a bunch of Riding Dogs. Not endorsing that though.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-13, 04:40 PM
Standard PB is 25, by the DMG.

And Standard PB by what people actually play is 32. So? I have never met anyone ever who has played an actual PnP D&D game (IE not CRPG) with 25 PB.

The "correct" 25 PB for a Gray Elf Wizard is:
Str 7 age ->4
Dex 17 age ->14
Con 6 age ->3
Int 20 age ->22
Wis 8 age ->10
Cha 8 age ->10

And then either take Faerie Mysteries Innate or become a Necropolitian at level 3.

Because hell no, I am not playing in a 25 PB game, and neither is any non-Druid.

Myrmex
2009-04-13, 04:45 PM
25pb on a Gray Elf would probably be 14/14/17 - at least that's how I'd buy it. Ends up in 16/12/19. You'll be fine with those, especially seeing that it's 25pb and thus an average-powered game, meaning you'll be dealing with CR appropriate encounters, something you can easily do with the massive save DC you can force. On the first levels, you'll have to do some extra work to survive though - getting a Toad-familiar helps, but sucks in the long run; carrying . 28pb would get you that 20 Int.

A dumber but more efficient solution would be to get a Tower Shield (you can carry it + 15 lb of clothes and stuff with heavy load) and move with it providing you total cover, then drop it when it's time to cast. You need no proficiency for that. That said, it's just so wrong RP-wise that I wouldn't use this. Instead, you could also cross-class Hide & Move Silently and use them - with your 16 Dex, you'll be pretty well off in that regard. Another option is to get a mount and use it for cover (just standard cover though) - again, you can crossclass the ranks. Light War Horse costs 150gp, possibly affordable on level 1, although not usually for Wizards. Of course, first level "optimal" Wizard sells his spellbook and buys a bunch of Riding Dogs. Not endorsing that though.

All those are horrible long term solutions, and/or rather silly. Getting Hide & Move Silent wouldn't be outrageous- a sneaky wizard would be quite good. Using shrink person on yourself would increase your AC by 2, and hide by 5. Doable, but as I said, using spell slots to keep yourself alive for the first 3 levels leaves you with few spells to actually overcome an encounter with. If you could take a feat or get a class feature to get one or both as class skills, you would actually do pretty well for yourself.

16/12/19 is doable, for sure. You can afford a mithril buckler by 3rd level, too, and start putting enhancements on that for more protection. Until you get the spell slots to start burning on layering illusions on yourself, AC is a pretty good way to keep yourself from dying from a random goblin javelin. Pearls of power are pretty solid, too. Means more offense or defense, as the situation requires. They get expensive fast, though.

monty
2009-04-13, 04:49 PM
And Standard PB by what people actually play is 32. So? I have never met anyone ever who has played an actual PnP D&D game (IE not CRPG) with 25 PB.

Actually, I've only ever played two games with 32. In my experience, 28 is much more common, although that's still preferable to 25.

Myrmex
2009-04-13, 04:49 PM
And Standard PB by what people actually play is 32. So? I have never met anyone ever who has played an actual PnP D&D game (IE not CRPG) with 25 PB.

And I've never played in a game where the DM just threw monsters with MM/DMG CR guidelines at the party. So what?


The "correct" 25 PB for a Gray Elf Wizard is:
Str 7 age ->4
Dex 17 age ->14
Con 6 age ->3
Int 20 age ->22
Wis 8 age ->10
Cha 8 age ->10

And then either take Faerie Mysteries Innate or become a Necropolitian at level 3.

And no one actually plays with either of those. And, at least for the former, your concentration checks are going to be ABYSMAL. Low level casters (under level 13, the part of the game that everyone actually plays) end up in bad situations all the time where they're threatened, grappled, or in distracting conditions.


Because hell no, I am not playing in a 25 PB game, and neither is any non-Druid.

Thanks for sharing your outrage?

Chronos
2009-04-13, 04:51 PM
Standard PB is 25, by the DMG.Which corresponds to the Elite Array and to the 4d6 drop lowest method of stat rolling. I always think it funny when someone goes with rolled stats, and is surprised to find that they get less than the equivalent of 25 point buy. Yeah, that should happen about half the time. But there's a human tendency to think "if I roll stats, I can get straight 18s, so rolled stats are better". Of course, the entire city of Las Vegas is constructed entirely out of this human tendency.

Gorbash
2009-04-13, 04:54 PM
And Standard PB by what people actually play is 32. So? I have never met anyone ever who has played an actual PnP D&D game (IE not CRPG) with 25 PB.

The "correct" 25 PB for a Gray Elf Wizard is:
Str 7 age ->4
Dex 17 age ->14
Con 6 age ->3
Int 20 age ->22
Wis 8 age ->10
Cha 8 age ->10

And then either take Faerie Mysteries Innate or become a Necropolitian at level 3.

Because hell no, I am not playing in a 25 PB game, and neither is any non-Druid.

Good look surviving untill lvl 3 with 6 HP...

When I see this type of build, I cannot help but laugh. Consider how high your Fort save (and Will, for that matter) will be. Anything that targets fort will kill you outright and good luck rolling saves on those Feebleminds later on.
This character wouldn't survive one serious fight since everything and anything can kill him, and for what? +2 on DCs? Not worth it, since they probably won't come into play. All this talk how Wizards should be all-around characters and this is the worst one-trick pony I ever saw.

Myrmex
2009-04-13, 05:06 PM
Good look surviving untill lvl 3 with 6 HP...

When I see this type of build, I cannot help but laugh. Consider how high your Fort save (and Will, for that matter) will be. Anything that targets fort will kill you outright and good luck rolling saves on those Feebleminds later on.
This character wouldn't survive one serious fight since everything and anything can kill him, and for what? +2 on DCs? Not worth it, since they probably won't come into play. All this talk how Wizards should be all-around characters and this is the worst one-trick pony I ever saw.

Faerie mysteries replaces con to ac with int to ac (still stuck with an abysmal fort save). Necropolitan turns you undead, you lose your con score, and get d12 HD. Going both nets you more HPs than the dwarven barb, but your fort save will be rather low. Fortunately, you have little at that level that will force fort saves out of you.

Of course, you have to survive long enough to scrounge up the 1k gold and requisite experience to undergo the process that makes you undead.

Oh, and now being undead, prepare to get the crap turned out of you by any antagonist clerics. Unlike enemy undead, using turning against PC undead is highly effective.

...anticipating ninjas.

Draz74
2009-04-13, 05:08 PM
Which corresponds to the Elite Array and to the 4d6 drop lowest method of stat rolling. I always think it funny when someone goes with rolled stats, and is surprised to find that they get less than the equivalent of 25 point buy. Yeah, that should happen about half the time. But there's a human tendency to think "if I roll stats, I can get straight 18s, so rolled stats are better". Of course, the entire city of Las Vegas is constructed entirely out of this human tendency.

Actually, 25 PB was constructed to be a very conservative simulation of the typical results of standard 4d6-drop-one. I've seen some pretty convincing statistics that show how, on average, standard rolling actually leaves you with something like 27 Point Buy.

32 PB is, of course, much more "power creeped."

Eldariel
2009-04-13, 05:10 PM
All those are horrible long term solutions, and/or rather silly. Getting Hide & Move Silent wouldn't be outrageous- a sneaky wizard would be quite good. Using shrink person on yourself would increase your AC by 2, and hide by 5. Doable, but as I said, using spell slots to keep yourself alive for the first 3 levels leaves you with few spells to actually overcome an encounter with. If you could take a feat or get a class feature to get one or both as class skills, you would actually do pretty well for yourself.

Which is why I bought 'em up as "options" (Hiding/Moving Silently was one too). No matter your stats, surviving level 1 as a Wizard is going to be an uphill battle if opponents don't just flat-out ignore you or you don't do weird stuff (although being mounted and kinda trying to intercede it between you and the potential adversaries isn't totally senseless - mounts ARE pretty expensive though).

Really, Hiding is probably the best way to go - let the Druids and their animal companions handle the smaller skirmishes and Sleep/Color Spray/Grease the tough ones - as you can't afford a Longbow anyways, you shouldn't worry about your damage output and just get a sling so you have something to do sometimes (unless you happen to have 35 gold lying around for a Light Crossbow, but a Wizard gets 3d4*10 - average 75 starting gold and you have more important purchases...). First level, the difference between 5 and 6 HP is very miniscule. Both mean you're like to survive one hit from a character without Str bonuses, get knocked to the negatives by one hit from a character with Str bonuses, and risk getting killed by one crit.

The Con-bonus grows in value along levels, but so do the Wizard's capabilities to protect himself. And you can get the damn Toad-familiar if you really feel the need for few extra HP - it's decent for the first three levels and then shortly thereafter starts to be trivial.


16/12/19 is doable, for sure. You can afford a mithril buckler by 3rd level, too, and start putting enhancements on that for more protection. Until you get the spell slots to start burning on layering illusions on yourself, AC is a pretty good way to keep yourself from dying from a random goblin javelin. Pearls of power are pretty solid, too. Means more offense or defense, as the situation requires. They get expensive fast, though.

Yeah, first levels (first two, really - on third level, getting second level spells almost doubles your slots available so you start to be able to afford some defensive magic, especially if specialized or a generalist) you shouldn't waste slots on defensive spells anyways. You need all your slots for offense to be not-dead-weight and to avoid having the party slaughtered by a bunch of stupid Ogres.

Gorbash
2009-04-13, 05:11 PM
Faerie mysteries replaces con to ac with int to ac (still stuck with an abysmal fort save). Necropolitan turns you undead, you lose your con score, and get d12 HD. Going both nets you more HPs than the dwarven barb, but your fort save will be rather low. Fortunately, you have little at that level that will force fort saves out of you.

Of course, you have to survive long enough to scrounge up the 1k gold and requisite experience to undergo the process that makes you undead.

Oh, and now being undead, prepare to get the crap turned out of you by any antagonist clerics. Unlike enemy undead, using turning against PC undead is highly effective.

...anticipating ninjas.

I know what both of those do, but get me a DM who'll allow that, and sign me up for his next campaign where I'll play Pun-Pun.

monty
2009-04-13, 05:18 PM
I know what both of those do, but get me a DM who'll allow that, and sign me up for his next campaign where I'll play Pun-Pun.

Hyperbole much? Lots of HP is hardly game-breaking, especially when there are so many other ways to get killed.

Myrmex
2009-04-13, 05:18 PM
Which is why I bought 'em up as "options" (Hiding/Moving Silently was one too). No matter your stats, surviving level 1 as a Wizard is going to be an uphill battle if opponents don't just flat-out ignore you or you don't do weird stuff (although being mounted and kinda trying to intercede it between you and the potential adversaries isn't totally senseless - mounts ARE pretty expensive though).

Really, Hiding is probably the best way to go - let the Druids and their animal companions handle the smaller skirmishes and Sleep/Color Spray/Grease the tough ones - as you can't afford a Longbow anyways, you shouldn't worry about your damage output and just get a sling so you have something to do sometimes (unless you happen to have 35 gold lying around for a Light Crossbow, but a Wizard gets 3d4*10 - average 75 starting gold and you have more important purchases...). First level, the difference between 5 and 6 HP is very miniscule. Both mean you're like to survive one hit from a character without Str bonuses, get knocked to the negatives by one hit from a character with Str bonuses, and risk getting killed by one crit.

The Con-bonus grows in value along levels, but so do the Wizard's capabilities to protect himself. And you can get the damn Toad-familiar if you really feel the need for few extra HP - it's decent for the first three levels and then shortly thereafter starts to be trivial.



Yeah, first levels (first two, really - on third level, getting second level spells almost doubles your slots available so you start to be able to afford some defensive magic, especially if specialized or a generalist) you shouldn't waste slots on defensive spells anyways. You need all your slots for offense to be not-dead-weight and to avoid having the party slaughtered by a bunch of stupid Ogres.

Those are all really good reasons why no one should play level 1. Start at level 2 or 3, and avoid the part where the whole party dies to an orc who crits twice in a row.

But I agree, in order to reasonably survive as a level 1 wizard, you either have to take weird options, or make high opportunity cost decisions. Once you hit level 3 to 4, if your DM isn't stiffing you on wealth, the high int is worth it, the not-a-toad familiar is worth it, and not taking toughness is worth it. Combat casting/skill focus: concentration are useful up until around level 7 to 10, depending on when you can afford your first con boosting item. Lower if you can convince your DM to get a +2 concentration tool (coffee beans? red bull?)

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-04-13, 05:27 PM
My standard low-level Wizard, 28 Pt-Buy(save-builds don't work otherwise, forcing you to rely on buffing and such, but can be done with a good party, losing 3 points from Dex and Con)
Grey Elf, level 1
18 Int-20
14 Con-12
14 Dex-16
8 Str-6
8 Wis-8
8 Cha-8
Precocious Apprentice
Focused Specialist:Conjuration
Gets you 2 second-level Conjurations(save DC 17) and 3 first level Conjurations, plus an additional 2 first-level spells. I'd snag the Rapid Summoning and Enhanced Summoning variants(for later, since they require giving up nothing you care about), and will make any Summon you deign to use more powerful(a valid tactic at this level if your enemy has SR or is a Dragon or something). I'd go with Glitterdust, Grease, SM 1, and Enlarge Person as soon as you can afford the spells. Retain Prec App at level 5 or so, if the game goes that long without your character dying, which in my experience it doesn't. People who compare high-level D&D to Rocket Launcher Tag should try playing at first sometime.

Edit:I've used Necropolitan in a game before. It's not unbalanced in any way, shape, or form. The downsides make up for the benefits of a few more HP and losing a Con penalty.

Gorbash
2009-04-13, 05:53 PM
Hyperbole much? Lots of HP is hardly game-breaking, especially when there are so many other ways to get killed.

I'm not saying lots of HP is game breaking (my 12th lvl wizard about 124 with Heart of Earth and False Life), I'm saying that no DM will allow that type of character, because the idea has no sense whatsoever and it's based solely on mehcanical benefits. As is the idea of Pun-Pun, Old Dragonwrought Kobolds etc.

Chronos
2009-04-13, 08:52 PM
Good look surviving untill lvl 3 with 6 HP...I make it only 2 HP that he gets: He's got a Con mod of -4 and a d4 HD, which means that he gets a grand total of 1 HP per level. When you're that squishy, you can't really contribute anything meaningfully to a party.

And the Faerie Mysteries Initiate feat is way overhyped, considering that you need two people to take it in order to gain any benefit at all from it. Good luck finding someone else who not only has the feat, but is willing to engage in an "exuberant sensual act" with a sickly, pallid guy with a bad cough and arthritis.

tyckspoon
2009-04-13, 09:02 PM
And the Faerie Mysteries Initiate feat is way overhyped, considering that you need two people to take it in order to gain any benefit at all from it. Good luck finding someone else who not only has the feat, but is willing to engage in an "exuberant sensual act" with a sickly, pallid guy with a bad cough and arthritis.

You only have to actually do that once, tho; the effects last "until you perform the rites again", which will be.. never. And if you do you're just going to do the Int-to-HP one again. Your other participant will naturally be another Gray Elf Wizard who would rather like having his/her/its own frail body embiggened by his/her/its massive intellect. Or just some other qualifying being, since, IMO, if you're from a culture where these rites are practiced it probably isn't all that hard to find somebody else willing to perform this deeply symbolic/religious/meaningful act with you (they don't have to know you're just using them to better stay alive when you go adventuring.)