Strength, Intelligence and Charisma Saves.

[Envyus]

Mike Meals just gave some examples about these saves.



@mikemearls What would be examples of Strength, Intelligence, or Charisma saving throws?
@SnarkKnight1 Strength save - resist a gust of wind or push effect
@SnarkKnight1 Int save - psionics when we do it
@SnarkKnight1 charisma - possession
@SnarkKnight1 I think this is an area where we will see more as designers get more used to the edition

[Tholomyes]

Strength saves I don't think will be a problem, but I'm disappointed in the Int and Cha saves. If Psionics or Possession never come up in game, then their whole "every stat will have saves associated with them" line isn't really true. While those are only examples, and I'm sure there will be some other cases, it doesn't bode well. When the only examples given are relatively rare ones, even if there are other cases, those are likely to be just as rare.

I'm eagerly awaiting someone to create a homebrew document, once the PHB is released, which shuffles around the saves somewhat, especially for mental stats. Charm person, for example, could be a perfect candidate for a charisma save, but it's still just a Wis save, per the basic rules.

[akaddk]

I liked this guy's take on it: http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4107836

[Tholomyes]

I liked this guy's take on it: http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4107836Thanks. I remembered seeing it (EDIT: or, now that I see the time-stamp on that post, it must have been a similar post on the same topic), but I never bookmarked it, because I assumed (faultily, as it seems) that by final printing, they'd do more to make all 6 stats valid for saving throws. I won't make that mistake, now.

[Envyus]

I am assuming monsters will cause most of the saves. The casters I think are just limited because they don't want them to be able to freely attack all 6 saves.

[Tholomyes]

I am assuming monsters will cause most of the saves. The casters I think are just limited because they don't want them to be able to freely attack all 6 saves.I suppose this makes some degree of sense, especially once you get to higher levels where the gap between proficient saves and non-proficient saves is pretty high. But I'd prefer their solution to fix this was to make proficiency a flat bonus (at least for saving throws) and have whatever scaling across levels apply to proficient and non-proficient saves. But that's just me.

[Grac]

Thanks to this thread I went through the Basic PDF and wrote on each spell with a save what the save is, because they don't include the save listed separately, and that gave me a chance to change the charms/suggestions to cha saves and the illusions to int saves (they have int:investigation to defeat it but its still good to have it written in bad, red handwriting).

[Prime32]

I kind of like the idea of giving each attack two save types, with the defender choosing which to use. Illusions might be Int/Wis, fireballs Dex/Con, paralysis Str/Cha and so on. That makes targeting someone's worst saves harder.
("They choose which" rather than "use the highest" so that they can take (Dis)advantage into account - a normally speedy character might try to hold their ground against a fireball instead of dodging it because their feet are entangled)

[TheOOB]

I liked this guy's take on it: http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4107836

Considering his first example is using strength to oppose an enchantment effect which is purely mind affecting, I don't think he knows what he's talking about.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Considering his first example is using strength to oppose an enchantment effect which is purely mind affecting, I don't think he knows what he's talking about.

Part of his thought process from the guy is that he's changing the flavor of it. It's hardly fair to say that just because Hold Person is an Enchantment that it has to be; it'd fit just as well as a magical rope binding people, or a cage of force that can be broken out of.

[Tholomyes]

Considering his first example is using strength to oppose an enchantment effect which is purely mind affecting, I don't think he knows what he's talking about.He actually acknowledges it below (http://community.wizards.com/comment/50814636#comment-50814636). Personally, I like Hold Person better as magical restraints, rather than a mental paralysis anyway. In non-D&D fiction, you're more likely to see a wizard bind an enemy in ethereal bonds, rather than mentally stop them in their tracks (and if they do, it's more likely a side effect of a "Charm Person" effect). Also, it spreads the saves out somewhat.

My only real concern is that Wis might be a little lacking. It feels like most of the traditionally Will-save based effects will be shifted to Charisma, leaving Int and Wis barely better than Int and Cha are right now. While Illusions and Fear effects are notably more common than Possession and Psionics, it still feels like two stats get more niche saving throw domains, while one gets all the rest. A potential fix might be to split enchantments, such that Wis governs Charms (based on the logic that it also governs the Insight skill), while Charisma governs compulsions (based on the logic that charisma, being force of personality and 'mental strength', would be best to fight against an effect that tries to completely dominate your mind). Int could possibly, then also cover mental damage, so while it might still be more niche, it covers more.

[Balyano]

I would think that Charm Person and Suggestion would be wisdom, not charisma. The reason being that in my mind you don't know you are being manipulated by the spell, so you don't resist it with your force of will, you just think the suggestion is your own idea, and you really like that charming fellow. Those spells make you want to do things, but don't actually force you to do them. The wisdom saves let you realize you are being manipulated, thus letting you resist its pull. But with the Dominate spells you know you are being compelled and it literally forces you to take actions you don't want to do, thus your force of will comes into play.

[Tholomyes]

I would think that Charm Person and Suggestion would be wisdom, not charisma. The reason being that in my mind you don't know you are being manipulated by the spell, so you don't resist it with your force of will, you just think the suggestion is your own idea, and you really like that charming fellow. Those spells make you want to do things, but don't actually force you to do them. The wisdom saves let you realize you are being manipulated, thus letting you resist its pull. But with the Dominate spells you know you are being compelled and it literally forces you to take actions you don't want to do, thus your force of will comes into play.The issue with that is that (usually) casting a spell is rather obvious. It has verbal and somatic components, and usually it requires some sort of alternate class feature or feat or some extra boon to make such casting non-obvious. While I don't mind Charms falling under wisdom, the notion that (unless things have changed in this edition) you wouldn't know you're being manipulated isn't exactly right.

[Balyano]

The issue with that is that (usually) casting a spell is rather obvious. It has verbal and somatic components, and usually it requires some sort of alternate class feature or feat or some extra boon to make such casting non-obvious. While I don't mind Charms falling under wisdom, the notion that (unless things have changed in this edition) you wouldn't know you're being manipulated isn't exactly right.

I see your point but I've never played the somatic components of enchantments as something obviously out of the ordinary. In the case of Suggestion at least it's a verbal and material and you have to word it to sound reasonable, so I don't see how the casting is obvious. With Charm Person there is a somatic component, but since they don't describe what it is I would roleplay it out as something simple and nonthreatening, like waving. Now if casting Charm Person involves me dancing around and making naruto ninja hand signs and shouting a long line of jibberish, then yes that would be a problem. But I've always taken enchantment as a subtle kind of casting and made the somatic and verbal components fit that style.

Edit: A non-D&D example would be the jedi mind trick. He waved his hand and made a suggestion the these were not the droids he was looking for, the waving of his hand was a bit odd, and someone that knows some details about force abilities (magic) might realize what he did, but the average joe might not catch on.

[Joe the Rat]

There are some debatable assignments, but as this is effectively houserules until such a time that WotC as a whole remembers there are other saves in the game, not to just copy/paste the 3e/4e save/defenses for spells and do some reassignments. Even then, there are still some mixed cases. Thunderwave for example: per Mearls' tweet, it ought to be a Strength Save for resisting the push, but the Save for half damage suggests/requires Constitution. Damage trumps rider effect?

Pick an interpretation/reassignment, be consistent at the table, and you're good.

Something I'd noticed is that the Basic Four all have one "useful" save proficiency (Dex, Con, Wis), and one "pointless" save (Str, Int, Cha). I'm curious if this is a consistent design trend, or if there will be classes with two good saves (Playtest Monk was Dex/Wis, for example).

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I kind of like the idea of giving each attack two save types, with the defender choosing which to use. Illusions might be Int/Wis, fireballs Dex/Con, paralysis Str/Cha and so on. That makes targeting someone's worst saves harder.
("They choose which" rather than "use the highest" so that they can take (Dis)advantage into account - a normally speedy character might try to hold their ground against a fireball instead of dodging it because their feet are entangled)

I've played this way in multiple editions (3.5, PF, and 4e) and it worked wonderfully in each edition.

Sure you have a few more numbers, but the emersion was fantastic. The player could describe how they are getting out of harms way and stuff.

I had a 3.5 bard who had like... 6 wis. However I used Int versus illusions and cha versus charms. Totally roleplayed the Bard as to niave to be effected by spells (good progression + Int or Cha). The spells themselves just couldn't grasp how niave my character was. Lots of fun.

Edit:

Am I the only one stoked about Psionics? I think this is the first confirmation I heard that they definitely will do it... Of course that may be a year or so from now.

[Sartharina]

I wish Fear were more Charisma-based than Wisdom-based: Too foolish/self-confident to run away. Especially with the Scholar flaw "Most people scream and run when they see a demon. I stop and take notes on its anatomy." And soldier personality "I can stare down a Hellhound without flinching"

[Pex]

I liked this guy's take on it: http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4107836

Once again individual strangers on the internet come up with better rules than the professional designers of 5E.

[Envyus]

Once again individual strangers on the internet come up with better rules than the professional designers of 5E.

Not really. This system makes Casters much more powerful as it makes it even easier for them to attack a weak save. The current system is better. More of the other types of saves will pop up eventually we just have to wait a bit. Monsters will probably be forcing most of the saves.

[Pex]

Not really. This system makes Casters much more powerful as it makes it even easier for them to attack a weak save. The current system is better. More of the other types of saves will pop up eventually we just have to wait a bit. Monsters will probably be forcing most of the saves.

It's not a tragedy that spellcasters get to have their spells actually work reliably. It's the whole point of being a spellcaster.

[Seppo87]

It's not a tragedy that spellcasters get to have their spells actually work reliably. It's the whole point of being a spellcaster.
and the whole point of saves is to make spells less reliable

[Tholomyes]

Not really. This system makes Casters much more powerful as it makes it even easier for them to attack a weak save. The current system is better. More of the other types of saves will pop up eventually we just have to wait a bit. Monsters will probably be forcing most of the saves.I think a solution to that (which is just a generally good solution, even without this, IMO) is to have non-proficient saves still scale alongside proficient ones at the same rate, just at a lower starting value. It may seem like this decreases variance in saves by a lot, but if you notice, for the classes we've seen so far they all have one of their saves be a (common, if not universal) primary stat for that class, and the other is often a secondary stat. As such, the variance in saves still will be noticeable, but it won't be unmanageable.

[Pex]

and the whole point of saves is to make spells less reliable

But not hardly ever work so why bother to cast because everyone makes their save 90% (exaggeration for point) of the time.

[Envyus]

But not hardly ever work so why bother to cast because everyone makes their save 90% (exaggeration for point) of the time.

They will still work. With only 3 choices they can still target the lowest one they can they just won't be able to always target their opponents weakest save.

[Pex]

The point still stands I like the rules of an individual stranger on the internet more than the official 5E content.

Again. (Meaning I have seen other rules by other people in the 5E paradigm I like more than 5E, on these forums.)

[Slipperychicken]

I hope the charisma saves matter, so Charisma doesn't just become the universal dumpstat again.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Evade and Resist.

They should really give two options for each effect like they do for the shove action.

The defender my evade or they may try to resist.

Charm Person

Evade: Will
Resist: Cha

Choose either defensive option and toll a save of that type.

Command

Evade: Will
Resist: Strength (to physically stop your body from following commands)

[Envyus]

I hope the charisma saves matter, so Charisma doesn't just become the universal dumpstat again.

That was Int in my opinion. Charisma was always great for Social situations.

[pwykersotz]

Evade and Resist.

They should really give two options for each effect like they do for the shove action.

The defender my evade or they may try to resist.

Charm Person

Evade: Will
Resist: Cha

Choose either defensive option and toll a save of that type.

Command

Evade: Will
Resist: Strength (to physically stop your body from following commands)

This is an intriguing idea. I like it on first pass. I must think on it more.

[Inevitability]

Evade and Resist.

They should really give two options for each effect like they do for the shove action.

The defender my evade or they may try to resist.

Charm Person

Evade: Will
Resist: Cha

Choose either defensive option and toll a save of that type.

Command

Evade: Will
Resist: Strength (to physically stop your body from following commands)

I like it, although I see some spells' saves becoming unrealistic. How do you resist a Fireball?

[Slipperychicken]

That was Int in my opinion. Charisma was always great for Social situations.

Me: "I'm going go convince this crowd to calm down and not lynch my friend. It'll be a cinch because I have a +18 to Diplomacy!"

DM: "What do you say?"

Me: [Ahem!] "Wait fellow peasants! Even though you might think my friend's a vile witch out to kill you all, it's always best to do a proper investigation first! Also, I got a 32"

DM: "LOL that sucks, so you end up pissing off the crowd even more. Roll initiative because they're going to kill you for befriending the witch."

----


Yeah, that ability score isn't a waste of time at all.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I like it, although I see some spells' saves becoming unrealistic. How do you resist a Fireball?

Constitution Saving Throw

Anything can be resisted or evaded. :smallsmile:

I should make a list or something with the spells and update it as more spells comes out.

DM: An enemy casts fireball at you all, the rogue, the barbarian, and the wizard will be hit. You can either dodge it with a Dex save or resist it with a Con save,give me your saving throws. (The DM then explains what happens based on roll type and pass/fail).

Or.. The fast way...

Fireball drops down, Dex or con save you three. (The DM then e plains what happens based on the rolls and type).

A Barbarian that passes their Con save may be described as not even noticing that the fireball was much more than a Cantrip, sure he got singed (1/2 damage) but "Meh".

[Sartharina]

Constitution Saving ThrowConsititution saves against fireballs by giving you the HP to Not Die against them. I find the idea of it granting Resistance to Fire silly.


Me: "I'm going go convince this crowd to calm down and not lynch my friend. It'll be a cinch because I have a +18 to Diplomacy!"

DM: "What do you say?"

Me: [Ahem!] "Wait fellow peasants! Even though you might think my friend's a vile witch out to kill you all, it's always best to do a proper investigation first! Also, I got a 32"

DM: "LOL that sucks, so you end up pissing off the crowd even more. Roll initiative because they're going to kill you for befriending the witch."

----


Yeah, that ability score isn't a waste of time at all.Nothing can protect against Jerk DMs. That sequence clearly should have lead to the relevant Monty Python sketch.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Consititution saves against fireballs by giving you the HP to Not Die against them. I find the idea of it granting Resistance to Fire silly.

Nothing can protect against Jerk DMs. That sequence clearly should have lead to the relevant Monty Python sketch.

Yes, resisting a damaging spell is silly and dodging the explosion is not. I refer to you the Rogue that dodges a nuclear explosion.

The Dex save is doing the same thing, resistance to the damage. The rogue doesn't leave the blast area but stays there and yet somehow gains resistance to the damage.

So please keep an open mind about fantasy, cause chances are other things you readily believe to make sense are just as silly or you know, fantastical, as what you are putting down.:smallsmile:

[da_chicken]

Yes, resisting a damaging spell is silly and dodging the explosion is not. I refer to you the Rogue that dodges a nuclear explosion.

The Dex save is doing the same thing, resistance to the damage. The rogue doesn't leave the blast area but stays there and yet somehow gains resistance to the damage.

So please keep an open mind about fantasy, cause chances are other things you readily believe to make sense are just as silly or you know, fantastical, as what you are putting down.:smallsmile:

Clearly dodging a nuke should be an Int save (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxkamWaya8k).

[pwykersotz]

Me: "I'm going go convince this crowd to calm down and not lynch my friend. It'll be a cinch because I have a +18 to Diplomacy!"

DM: "What do you say?"

Me: [Ahem!] "Wait fellow peasants! Even though you might think my friend's a vile witch out to kill you all, it's always best to do a proper investigation first! Also, I got a 32"

DM: "LOL that sucks, so you end up pissing off the crowd even more. Roll initiative because they're going to kill you for befriending the witch."

----


Yeah, that ability score isn't a waste of time at all.

It's not a waste. That's a terrible way to GM. Assuming for a moment that I had put into my notes that the crowd could not be won over due to an epic enchantment cast over the town. Assuming that I REALLY wanted the PC to die. Assuming that I hated the gamer making the check and that the town was actually full of level 15 peasants...

For a roll like that I'd STILL let the bard see that his words were having unusually minimal effect and still cause the sheer authority he exuded to confuse the peasantry briefly allowing him to enact another plan of escape. Granted, I wouldn't do any of those things above, but seriously, that example is not an indictment of Charisma, it's an indication of a poor GM.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Clearly dodging a nuke should be an Int save (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxkamWaya8k).

I also forgot to reference Fortitude saves, if HP is what con is only for then why have fortitude saves at all?

Constitution Saves can be pretty awesome way of showing badasses being badasses. Like if my barbarian is walking away from an explosion behind him, instead of dodging the explosion and looking like a walking wuss factory... He could just keep walking and ignore some of the damage (and any movement effect negated on a successful save).

[Knaight]

Yes, resisting a damaging spell is silly and dodging the explosion is not. I refer to you the Rogue that dodges a nuclear explosion.

The Dex save is doing the same thing, resistance to the damage. The rogue doesn't leave the blast area but stays there and yet somehow gains resistance to the damage.

The issue is in not leaving the blast area (or at least taking cover), not in the use of Dexterity.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

The issue is in not leaving the blast area (or at least taking cover), not in the use of Dexterity.

Which is part of the Dex Save. You stand there and dodge without really dodging.

[Knaight]

Which is part of the Dex Save. You stand there and dodge without really dodging.

That's not part of the dex save so much as how it's currently implemented. Having a dex save to actually move out of the way of certain spells (something like lightning bolt could probably be dodged while staying in the square) could easily be implemented.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

That's not part of the dex save so much as how it's currently implemented. Having a dex save to actually move out of the way of certain spells (something like lightning bolt could probably be dodged while staying in the square) could easily be implemented.

Yes it could be implemented but it is not. Doing this actually brings a ton of... Issues with it.

Such as Rogues using fireballs to get free movement. Tons of fun the old games where...

But that would slow down the game a lot, so let's keep things simple.

[Pex]

I like it, although I see some spells' saves becoming unrealistic. How do you resist a Fireball?

Evade: Dexterity
Resist: Constitution, you shrug off the pain so as not to affect you so much, i.e. half damage.

[Sartharina]

Yes, resisting a damaging spell is silly and dodging the explosion is not. I refer to you the Rogue that dodges a nuclear explosion.

The Dex save is doing the same thing, resistance to the damage. The rogue doesn't leave the blast area but stays there and yet somehow gains resistance to the damage.

So please keep an open mind about fantasy, cause chances are other things you readily believe to make sense are just as silly or you know, fantastical, as what you are putting down.:smallsmile:

The rogue that dodges a nuclear explosion is an edge case. Or a fridge case. The dex save represents shielding yourself or taking cover from a damaging effect, not merely facetanking it. The rogue may stay within the same 5' square, but he's not standing still.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

The rogue that dodges a nuclear explosion is an edge case. Or a fridge case. The dex save represents shielding yourself or taking cover from a damaging effect, not merely facetanking it. The rogue may stay within the same 5' square, but he's not standing still.

Even staying in the same square makes no sense if the radius of the blast is 20' and the rogue is in the center. Dex saves aren't about shielding themselves but dodging the explosion.

Seriously as is, Dex saves haven't made sense in forever.

So if you want to go realistic, an explosion should always be a Con Save and never a Dex save because you can't dodge an explosion unless you get out of the blast radius or have a solid object between you and it.

But if we are working with what they are giving us (Dex saves versus explosions) it isn't much of a stretch to allow a resist Con save... Or what one would call Fortitude Defense or Fortitude Save.

[Sartharina]

So if you want to go realistic, an explosion should always be a Con Save and never a Dex save because you can't dodge an explosion unless you get out of the blast radius or have a solid object between you and it.
Or have a decent cloak to shield your body. Or simply manage to shield your more vulnerable body parts with less vulnerable ones or reduce your body's available surface area (Read: Curling up into a ball and covering your face with your arms and knees), which is why Saves are for half damage instead of No damage, unless you've got Roguespace going on (Which should have allowed movement out of the area/to cover as an immediate action instead.)

Dex saves ARE shielding yourself (And I really wish shields gave their AC as a benefit to such saves)

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Or have a decent cloak to shield your body. Or simply manage to shield your more vulnerable body parts with less vulnerable ones or reduce your body's available surface area (Read: Curling up into a ball and covering your face with your arms and knees), which is why Saves are for half damage instead of No damage, unless you've got Roguespace going on (Which should have allowed movement out of the area/to cover as an immediate action instead.)

Dex saves ARE shielding yourself (And I really wish shields gave their AC as a benefit to such saves)

You are trying to resist the blast in your example not dodge it. You are in fact explaining a Con save and trying to tie it to Dex.

[Sartharina]

You are trying to resist the blast in your example not dodge it. You are in fact explaining a Con save and trying to tie it to Dex.CON saves do not involve moving. Minimizing surface area and covering yourself require being able to move fast enough to cover your vital bits with less vital ones before the vital bits get covered in napalm. Dexterity, not Constitution.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

CON saves do not involve moving. Minimizing surface area and covering yourself require being able to move fast enough to cover your vital bits with less vital ones before the vital bits get covered in napalm. Dexterity, not Constitution.

Ok so I see that you way to far in left field to understand what I or yourself said so I'm just going to stop here.