Saving Throws proficiency - balance question

[Citan]

Hi all!

I've been thinking hard about saving throws proficiencies, and how bad it would be to get proficiency in two "strong" saving throws as a class feature.

I understand well that all stats are not equal in terms of "how dangerous for the character could be having a low stat without proficiency". It's commonly admitted that DEX (for offense spells), CON (for keeping concentration and a few nasty spells) and WIS (for charm/frighten/confuse), aka "the strong" are usually more important than STR (shove/prone/restrained) / INT (illusions) / CHA (charm?), aka "the weak".

In that regard, any and all base classes of D&D 5 have a pair of "strong" and "weak". So you could say that getting two strong could create a significant imbalance... Or maybe not?

After all...
- at low levels it's a matter of +2/+3. Yeah, it's great, but if you roll really bad if won't save you.
- some class ultimately get the same result or better (thinking Paladin and Monk obviously, also Fighter with a feat since it has many ASI, maybe forgot another).
- picking a Resilient feat is a popular choice especially when you rolled stats good enough to avoid stat bumps.

So, would it be THAT bad if, for example, you'd say a Monk gets proficiency in Dexterity AND Constitution?

If indeed having a 2nd "strong" is too powerful, would the alternative idea of getting instead half-proficiency in both a weak and a strong be useful enough for the character?
(My gut would tell yes, because a +3 is always helpful but... ;)

Thanks for your opinions and advices.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Hmm, I never really noticed that before but you're right. Con/Dex/Wis get heavy use, as they're basically Fort/Ref/Will; the other three are basically afterthoughts, though Str makes a certain amount of sense.

[Zman]

It isnt terribly imbalancing, and it is already worth around half a feat i.e. The Resilient(Ability) feat.

[mer.c]

I think that more than imbalancing the game, I'd be worried about diluting the value of Resilient and/or the classes who specialize in broader saving throws (Monk, Paladin).

Then again, that's not exactly a crowded niche. It would probably hold up just fine with a little more company, especially if it's from a kit or something instead of a base class.

Or maybe even make it a racial thing? Or is that maybe a less good idea? Hmm…

[Citan]

Thanks all for your replies. :)

Indeed it eats quite a bit at a Resilient feat which is, as far as "eating at other classes" goes, is the main concern.
Paladin gets +CHA to all saves in addition to its proficiencies which is still far better than "just" 2 strong proficiencies.
Monk eventually get proficiencies in all which is also much better.

So it's really more a question of "balance".
Let's go full disclosure. ^^
This question actually comes from my current work on a homebrew class, where I intended to provide only one strong saving throw from the base classe (with MADness, 1d8 hit die and situational damage reduction similar to Evasion), while 5 archetypes would each provide the second saving throw in another stat. As such, two of the archetypes would end with only strong saving throws, hence my interrogation on whether...
- 2nd proficiency in "strong" is acceptable, even if a bit powerful (perfect for me ^^).
- It's too strong, but replacing it with half-proficiencies in one strong and one weak is balanced and still useful.
- I'd better drop the idea entirely because it's just too complex or tiring to balance (certainly hope not ^^).

[MrStabby]

It is not a bad feature to consider. My one concern is that you are taking what could be a pretty strong and important feature of some subclasses and making it passive. If you balance it then it means less power from the fun activated ability side. See the abuse the Champion gets for so much of its power being in the passive side of the character.

[NewDM]

At low levels it won't be unbalancing, but the higher the players go the more unbalancing it will become.

[ravenkith]

Hi all!

I've been thinking hard about saving throws proficiencies, and how bad it would be to get proficiency in two "strong" saving throws as a class feature.



Getting two 'strong' saves as a class feature would be a little imbalancing, yes. As far as I know, NO class currently gets this.


If you do grant two strong saves as a class feature, you almost have to do it on a weak hit dice, like a d6. Pairing say, dex and will, or dex and con, or will and con with a d8 or higher, and there's almost no reason NOT to take that class as your first level dip on a primary arcane caster, especially if the class gets ANY kind of combo of medium or heavy armor and shields.

I'm just spit-balling here, but if I were going to build around this theme - improved saving throws - I'd probably make it an archetype, and have it run off of either the ranger or rogue chassis.

The archetype would be called 'Survivalist', or something like that: at various levels you would gain proficiency in different saves, pick up evasion, indomitable will, maybe a variation of bladesinger's int to ac, and maybe resistances (a la the bear totem barbarian) or some variation of mastery of death (a la the monk of the long death). His whole stick is that he's just one tough little nut to crack.

Obviously, this is all just preliminary thought-work, so I've no idea how balanced (or imbalanced) that would be, but the idea has a lot of appeal, in terms of the fantasy genre.

The concept of the tough guy, who basically takes it on the chin and keeps on coming not matter what, who wills his way through where others fail, the one who never gives up and never surrenders, well that's a pretty common trope, and the only class kinda like that is paladin at the moment...

I don't know, what do you guys think?

[Citan]

It is not a bad feature to consider. My one concern is that you are taking what could be a pretty strong and important feature of some subclasses and making it passive. If you balance it then it means less power from the fun activated ability side. See the abuse the Champion gets for so much of its power being in the passive side of the character.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I follow... :)
What "abuse" are you talking of?



Getting two 'strong' saves as a class feature would be a little imbalancing, yes. As far as I know, NO class currently gets this.


If you do grant two strong saves as a class feature, you almost have to do it on a weak hit dice, like a d6. Pairing say, dex and will, or dex and con, or will and con with a d8 or higher, and there's almost no reason NOT to take that class as your first level dip on a primary arcane caster, especially if the class gets ANY kind of combo of medium or heavy armor and shields.

Dang, I was so focused on thinking "in my bubble" that I didn't even account multiclassing.
Still, as far as my current work go, it would be a costly dip:
- requiring 13 in WIS and DEX (I really really wanted to use INT as other stat because INT is a stat that needs love -only Wizard for now-, but the fluff that backs my class revolves around environment and natural energy so WIS is kinda mandatory).
- dipping at least 3 levels because it comes from archetype.


At low levels it won't be unbalancing, but the higher the players go the more unbalancing it will become.
Knowing that the class getting this particular feature would be as MAD as a Paladin or Monk or even Barbarian, with only "light armor class" AC, would you still say this?

After all, MAD classes means more probability to "have to" (emphasis quote, cf current threads on stats and boundaries) spend your ASI on bumping your stats instead of taking a Resilient: Feat, as well as starting with a more all-around array if point buy.

-------
@all: thank you very much all for nurturing the discussion like this, it's really helpful.

[eastmabl]

Getting two 'strong' saves as a class feature would be a little imbalancing, yes. As far as I know, NO class currently gets this.


If you do grant two strong saves as a class feature, you almost have to do it on a weak hit dice, like a d6. Pairing say, dex and will, or dex and con, or will and con with a d8 or higher, and there's almost no reason NOT to take that class as your first level dip on a primary arcane caster, especially if the class gets ANY kind of combo of medium or heavy armor and shields.

Some classes get ST proficiency in multiple "high use" STs.

Monk gets Diamond Soul at 14th level, which makes them proficient with all STs.

Rogue gets Blindsense at 15th level. At this point, you have proficiency in Dex and Wis STs.

[Citan]

Some classes get ST proficiency in multiple "high use" STs.

Monk gets Diamond Soul at 14th level, which makes them proficient with all STs.

Rogue gets Blindsense at 15th level. At this point, you have proficiency in Dex and Wis STs.
Hey, thanks for the reminder, I knew that I forgot one class which could grab another strong proficiency (although at a decently high level like Monk). :smallsmile:

[ravenkith]

Some classes get ST proficiency in multiple "high use" STs.

Monk gets Diamond Soul at 14th level, which makes them proficient with all STs.

Rogue gets Blindsense at 15th level. At this point, you have proficiency in Dex and Wis STs.

You are correct sir: the failure is mine: I failed to clarify that I knew of none that got multiple 'stong' saves at first level.


I'm sorry, I'm not sure I follow... :)
What "abuse" are you talking of?


Champion is often considered extremely weak in comparison to Battlemaster or Eldritch knight (it is). Some people think that the only people who would take that particular archetype are those that are bad at math (Me. I think that.).



Dang, I was so focused on thinking "in my bubble" that I didn't even account multiclassing.
Still, as far as my current work go, it would be a costly dip:
- requiring 13 in WIS and DEX (I really really wanted to use INT as other stat because INT is a stat that needs love -only Wizard for now-, but the fluff that backs my class revolves around environment and natural energy so WIS is kinda mandatory).
- dipping at least 3 levels because it comes from archetype.


Yes, the pre-requisites here would be a hurdle for for most casters, and 'holding back' the extra save till at least level 3 helps immensely to prevent dipping INTO the class.

Note that you are pretty much guaranteeing a dip OUT of the class to get heavy armor and shields (War Cleric looks likely).



Knowing that the class getting this particular feature would be as MAD as a Paladin or Monk or even Barbarian, with only "light armor class" AC, would you still say this?

After all, MAD classes means more probability to "have to" (emphasis quote, cf current threads on stats and boundaries) spend your ASI on bumping your stats instead of taking a Resilient: Feat, as well as starting with a more all-around array if point buy.


Between the 'light armor only', pre-reqs, and not getting the desired benefit until at least level 3, you've done a good job on reducing the dip-ability of this class.



@all: thank you very much all for nurturing the discussion like this, it's really helpful.

You are welcome.

Instead of out right giving a 'strong' save, have you looked at the possibility of abilities like the paladin save aura at 6th and the fighter indomitable will ability at 9 (I think)?

[Citan]

Champion is often considered extremely weak in comparison to Battlemaster or Eldritch knight (it is). Some people think that the only people who would take that particular archetype are those that are bad at math (Me. I think that.).

Ah, sure. Well, I confess that I'm part of those people as far as the first part is concerned. Or rather, I'm sure that an experienced player could find many ways to play in creative ways with the Champion (especially with a trusting DM), but I know that me at least lack the required imagination and experience (as in "what could be reasonable to do as an improvised action") to do it. :)



Yes, the pre-requisites here would be a hurdle for for most casters, and 'holding back' the extra save till at least level 3 helps immensely to prevent dipping INTO the class.

Note that you are pretty much guaranteeing a dip OUT of the class to get heavy armor and shields (War Cleric looks likely).

Point noted. :)
As a matter of fact though, I was pondering about offering medium armor (only) at lvl 1. Any way, around lvl9, you can learn another proficiency in armor or weapons. So players patient enough will get the one proficiency they want (shield, heavy armor, long-range or two-handed). :)
Besides, I don't see the problem is dipping one level in Cleric. For a class that has no spell slots to fuse with spellcaster's normal slots, I'd say it's a rather costly dip. :)



Between the 'light armor only', pre-reqs, and not getting the desired benefit until at least level 3, you've done a good job on reducing the dip-ability of this class.

I'm glad to know this. :)



Instead of out right giving a 'strong' save, have you looked at the possibility of abilities like the paladin save aura at 6th and the fighter indomitable will ability at 9 (I think)?
To be honest, no. :smallbiggrin:
Because I railroad myself into "one archetype = strong relationship with particular stat".
And I was a bit afraid of "tip-toeing" too much on other classes's core features. But it may be a good idea though...
I'll still wait a bit to see other's opinions on the initial idea before dropping it though. :)

[MrStabby]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I follow... :)
What "abuse" are you talking of?





Ah maybe I wasn't particularly clear. A lot of people consider the Champion a boring archetype as none of the power is in an actively chosen option - like paladin smites, battlemaster dice, spell slots etc..

If you put a lot of the power of your class into a passive ability then, if it is balanced in terms of power, you have less power to distribute between the "fun" activated abilities.

Potentially you could make it weaker but more reactive to expend a resource to gain proficiency in the save or to gain advantage in it or something.

[djreynolds]

I call them the big 3, wisdom, con and dex.

You want 2, you need 2.

Now some characters have spells or features.

But I find con and wis are huge. Just as a cleric in Ravenloft, if we get surprised by ghouls, I almost died from two hits. Auto-crit. So con saves are huge for melee. Wisdom is huge.

So I might select resilient con and not for concentration spells, but just for the boost itself. Paralyze is awful.

I cannot stress enough how important PFGE is and its 10 minutes so cast it ahead of time and cast it on team mates if you are a wizard in the back row.

[Citan]

Ah maybe I wasn't particularly clear. A lot of people consider the Champion a boring archetype as none of the power is in an actively chosen option - like paladin smites, battlemaster dice, spell slots etc..

If you put a lot of the power of your class into a passive ability then, if it is balanced in terms of power, you have less power to distribute between the "fun" activated abilities.

Potentially you could make it weaker but more reactive to expend a resource to gain proficiency in the save or to gain advantage in it or something.
Aaaah, ok. I understand it better said like this (and so I understand also why Ravenkith hinted me towars Indomitable and such). :)

You're obviously right, and I tried already to keep this in mind when designing the class features and archetypes...
Although I've been luring myself into the inflation trap lately (you know, the... "archetype A has 2 features, B 3, etc... Now D has 7 great features, I don't want to remove them, so I'll add new features to the others... XD").
I hope I have a version I can present to the Playground soon (although there will certainly be feedback I don't like fufufu:smallbiggrin:).

But I DO have to make some archetype balancing by removing features instead of piling them up (otherwise the class will be plainly too powerful or complex, or both) so it takes some time. ^^


Anyways, from all current posts in this thread, what seems to stand out is the following.

1. A second saving throw in a "strong" stat can work as long as...
- it is considered a powerful feature (meaning that some balancing will need to be done with "active" abilities or general class resilience -hp, armor, defensive abilities).
- you don't get it at the starting levels (lvl3 seems far enough to me, maybe I'm wrong) to avoid sure-dip from other classes.

2. Alternatively, balance it by using a resource to gain the benefit.

3. Nobody has any opinion (unless I missed a post ^^) on whether providing instead half-proficiency in one strong and one weak would be useless, useful and balanced, or also too powerful.
It could be the simplest solution for me though. :)

[Flashy]

1. A second saving throw in a "strong" stat can work as long as...
- it is considered a powerful feature (meaning that some balancing will need to be done with "active" abilities or general class resilience -hp, armor, defensive abilities).
- you don't get it at the starting levels (lvl3 seems far enough to me, maybe I'm wrong) to avoid sure-dip from other classes.

3. Nobody has any opinion (unless I missed a post ^^) on whether providing instead half-proficiency in one strong and one weak would be useless, useful and balanced, or also too powerful.
It could be the simplest solution for me though. :)

1. So is the class only going to be proficient in a single save for two levels? That's sort of rough.

3. That'd probably be fine? It's so far outside the norm for 5e it's really hard to judge though. You're messing with a pretty fundamental balance factor here that no other homebrew I've seen really touches. If you don't mind my asking, what is it about the idea of subclass linked saving throw proficiency that appeals to you so much?

[Citan]

1. So is the class only going to be proficient in a single save for two levels? That's sort of rough.

3. That'd probably be fine? It's so far outside the norm for 5e it's really hard to judge though. You're messing with a pretty fundamental balance factor here that no other homebrew I've seen really touches. If you don't mind my asking, what is it about the idea of subclass linked saving throw proficiency that appeals to you so much?
Hi! ;)

I don't mind at all I just hope I can express the idea clearly enough. ^^
Well, my homebrew class was born from the frustration of an underpowered Monk of Elements and more generally, having so few "weapon-related" abilities. (Note I've been working on this since far before the SCAG).

So basic concept revolves around agile warriors using elemental energy from their body and environment to empower themselves (I thought it was original, a friend slapped me in the face by telling it's like Naruto's Chakra mixing: and yes, it's exactly as such). Hence the Dexterity, Constitution and Wisdom direct reference (and the MADness).
But, since Dex+Wis, Dex+Con or Wis+Con would be definitely be too strong, if I wanted "global saves" I would have to take another stat in the "weak" sides.
Problem is, as is, no "weak stat" really relates to the class in fluff:
STR? These people are supposed to be more like Rogues or Monks (although I made viable STR-based builds, such as Rogues can be STR-based in spite of being geared towards DEX).
INT? Intelligence is usually strongly related to Wizard and more generally arcanic magic, so it's also outside.
CHA? Could always work since it's a more "social-related" fluff but there is again nothing really that would justify it in the fluff or abilities of the core class.

Aside from that, I built my main archetypes around the concept of 4 Elements (Well, 5 here, because of Ligthning).

To be honest, this is an aspect of D&D I hate with my guts. There is no clear rules on what damage type would be associated with an idea of element, and no consistency between different parts.

You have spells with "earth" or "wind" fluff that will deal "physical" damage but none with such fluff that would deal acid or poison damage AFAIK. At the same time, "elemental" features such as Nature Cleric's Ward list only fire/cold/lightning damage, Elemental Weapon and Adept lists acid and thunder in addition... Chromatic Orb even adds poison.
Some "water-fluff" related spells will also deal physical damage in addition to the obvious cold, such as Ice Knife...
"Lightning" is heavily represented in spells and features, but at the same time you have no Lightning Elemental or Genasi origin.

In the end, D&D don't follow any classical frame (Greek 4 Elements, Chinese 5 elements

So, while "Fire" and "Lightning" elements are easily matched with existing damage types (fire, lightning+thunder)...
For Water, you have cold AND bludgeoning or piercing damage on a regular basis.
For Earth, there are only "physical" damage types. And acid or poison could as easily be associated with Earth as with Water fluff-wise.
Same for Wind. the only "named" damage type that could be associated would be force damage, but I have the feeling that in D&D world, the "force" damage is very tightly associated with "magical energy" idea, not "force as in brute force". Unless you decide to say that wind includes all storm/thunderbolt related concepts and put lighting/thunder in it.

Sooo. Well, one could either shoehorn one Element with one named damage type, creating an imbalance (since force is rarely resisted, poison and acid are among the most common) and needing a heavy text of fluff to try and justify it...

Or create specific damage types just for the homebrew and then add two whole pages of text just to try and make them work with all spells/class features that are usually associated with the concept of "elemental energy".

Or just go "Wind and Earth have no dedicated damage type and so be it" but then you'd have to craft specific features to go with it...

My few tries at finding information about damage types and elements association in D&D universe just made me find this image (http://s873.photobucket.com/user/kurishae/media/InnerPlaneBall2.jpg.html), which didn't help me much. ^^


To make them different from one another, I decided to closely associate them with a stat that would affect everything: their usual way of life, the kind of abilities they would usually gain, and the role they would fulfill...

Lightning associated with the idea of speed, so DEX, gaining effects to move faster or increase rate of attacks ("striker").
Water associated with the idea of empathy, hence associated with Charisma, with skills and healing abilities (support/face).
Earth with Constitution, with defense and one-vs-one abilities (tank).
Fire mimicking arcanic spells to deal AOE damage (hence a link to Intelligence)
Wind using air to lift things (such as wielding heavy weapons one-handed) and easily push/unbalance people ("the wind is your Strength"), or create kamaitachi or wind walls...

Hence my thought of following the same process to provide the second proficiency, to enforce this fluff-association with a mechanic.

I recognize that some of all this could be easily debated as there is a part of arbitrary / artificial choices (which element to pair with which stat), but since I then designed quite the fluff and features around it... I could always drop the whole idea but it would be a bit of a waste. :)

[mrumsey]

Hi! ;)

So basic concept revolves around agile warriors using elemental energy from their body and environment to empower themselves (I thought it was original, a friend slapped me in the face by telling it's like Naruto's Chakra mixing: and yes, it's exactly as such). Hence the Dexterity, Constitution and Wisdom direct reference (and the MADness).

I typically look at the attributes like this:

Strength: Strength of Body: Offensive - is resisted more than it resists
Constitution: Toughness of Body: Defensive - Resists more than is resisted (HP, Save or Die/Lose)
Dexterity: Fluidity/Adaptability of Body: Utility/Flex - Ranged damage/to hit, most AoE saves (damage related), initiative, AC

Intelligence: Active Use of Mind: Offensive - is resisted more than it resists
Wisdom: Experience (mostly passive): Homerun - Save or die, wisdom based casters, perception skill. Clearly used a lot
Charisma: Active Use of Personality (Force of Self): Offensive/Niche - Charisma Casters and Social Uses (YMMV with this stat/DM).

My personal rant is that the fluff around mental stats is not as clear as the physical ones. They are [3x offense, 1x defense] instead of [2x offense, 2x defense].

For Agile Warriors (Dex) who harness elemental energy from their body/environment... The second save could be Int/Wis/Cha depending on the fluff. If through study and knowledge - Int.
If through determination and just hard-headedness - Wis (2x strong saves)
If through expression of self against the established rules - Cha.

I would probably lean toward Int/Cha. You may need to adjust some abilities to deal with the secondary save, but they could be Chasis-related saves.

For your archetypes, the saves from their specific abilities could be based on an associated ability, allowing for more flexibility in design, as all saves are based on the concept of Agile Harnessers.

Maybe this helps, maybe it doesn't. Either way I hope you find a good fit for your class!

[MrStabby]

Hi! ;)

I don't mind at all I just hope I can express the idea clearly enough. ^^
Well, my homebrew class was born from the frustration of an underpowered Monk of Elements and more generally, having so few "weapon-related" abilities. (Note I've been working on this since far before the SCAG).

So basic concept revolves around agile warriors using elemental energy from their body and environment to empower themselves (I thought it was original, a friend slapped me in the face by telling it's like Naruto's Chakra mixing: and yes, it's exactly as such). Hence the Dexterity, Constitution and Wisdom direct reference (and the MADness).
But, since Dex+Wis, Dex+Con or Wis+Con would be definitely be too strong, if I wanted "global saves" I would have to take another stat in the "weak" sides.
Problem is, as is, no "weak stat" really relates to the class in fluff:
STR? These people are supposed to be more like Rogues or Monks (although I made viable STR-based builds, such as Rogues can be STR-based in spite of being geared towards DEX).
INT? Intelligence is usually strongly related to Wizard and more generally arcanic magic, so it's also outside.
CHA? Could always work since it's a more "social-related" fluff but there is again nothing really that would justify it in the fluff or abilities of the core class.

Aside from that, I built my main archetypes around the concept of 4 Elements (Well, 5 here, because of Ligthning).

To be honest, this is an aspect of D&D I hate with my guts. There is no clear rules on what damage type would be associated with an idea of element, and no consistency between different parts.

You have spells with "earth" or "wind" fluff that will deal "physical" damage but none with such fluff that would deal acid or poison damage AFAIK. At the same time, "elemental" features such as Nature Cleric's Ward list only fire/cold/lightning damage, Elemental Weapon and Adept lists acid and thunder in addition... Chromatic Orb even adds poison.
Some "water-fluff" related spells will also deal physical damage in addition to the obvious cold, such as Ice Knife...
"Lightning" is heavily represented in spells and features, but at the same time you have no Lightning Elemental or Genasi origin.

In the end, D&D don't follow any classical frame (Greek 4 Elements, Chinese 5 elements

So, while "Fire" and "Lightning" elements are easily matched with existing damage types (fire, lightning+thunder)...
For Water, you have cold AND bludgeoning or piercing damage on a regular basis.
For Earth, there are only "physical" damage types. And acid or poison could as easily be associated with Earth as with Water fluff-wise.
Same for Wind. the only "named" damage type that could be associated would be force damage, but I have the feeling that in D&D world, the "force" damage is very tightly associated with "magical energy" idea, not "force as in brute force". Unless you decide to say that wind includes all storm/thunderbolt related concepts and put lighting/thunder in it.

Sooo. Well, one could either shoehorn one Element with one named damage type, creating an imbalance (since force is rarely resisted, poison and acid are among the most common) and needing a heavy text of fluff to try and justify it...

Or create specific damage types just for the homebrew and then add two whole pages of text just to try and make them work with all spells/class features that are usually associated with the concept of "elemental energy".

Or just go "Wind and Earth have no dedicated damage type and so be it" but then you'd have to craft specific features to go with it...

My few tries at finding information about damage types and elements association in D&D universe just made me find this image (http://s873.photobucket.com/user/kurishae/media/InnerPlaneBall2.jpg.html), which didn't help me much. ^^


To make them different from one another, I decided to closely associate them with a stat that would affect everything: their usual way of life, the kind of abilities they would usually gain, and the role they would fulfill...

Lightning associated with the idea of speed, so DEX, gaining effects to move faster or increase rate of attacks ("striker").
Water associated with the idea of empathy, hence associated with Charisma, with skills and healing abilities (support/face).
Earth with Constitution, with defense and one-vs-one abilities (tank).
Fire mimicking arcanic spells to deal AOE damage (hence a link to Intelligence)
Wind using air to lift things (such as wielding heavy weapons one-handed) and easily push/unbalance people ("the wind is your Strength"), or create kamaitachi or wind walls...

Hence my thought of following the same process to provide the second proficiency, to enforce this fluff-association with a mechanic.

I recognize that some of all this could be easily debated as there is a part of arbitrary / artificial choices (which element to pair with which stat), but since I then designed quite the fluff and features around it... I could always drop the whole idea but it would be a bit of a waste. :)

So I am wondering if there is an option to do something like the mephits, and each aspect be the union of two elements?

This then lets you create pairs of strong and weak elements and maintains a strong theme but with a slightly broader base.

Say:
Magma=fire+earth=int+con proficiency?
Storm=Air/Thunder+lightening=Dex+Int
Ice=water+cold=cha+wis
And so on...

So an ice theme would gain proficiency in cha and wis saves and could chose either as their casting stats. Their abilities would be water and cold themed abilities/spells?

[Telok]

This might be helpful, it's a chart from about 70 semi-randomly selected common monsters with save effects.
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo198/jcc_telok/saves_zpspp9pdzqv.jpg (http://s375.photobucket.com/user/jcc_telok/media/saves_zpspp9pdzqv.jpg.html)

This one is that same chart scaled to and overlaid on a chart of the die rolls at various attributes and proficency levels.
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo198/jcc_telok/saveNroll_zpsfgb9jrkh.jpg (http://s375.photobucket.com/user/jcc_telok/media/saveNroll_zpsfgb9jrkh.jpg.html)

[Citan]

I would probably lean toward Int/Cha. You may need to adjust some abilities to deal with the secondary save, but they could be Chasis-related saves.

For your archetypes, the saves from their specific abilities could be based on an associated ability, allowing for more flexibility in design, as all saves are based on the concept of Agile Harnessers.

Maybe this helps, maybe it doesn't. Either way I hope you find a good fit for your class!
Thank you very much, you bred interesting ideas here. Altough I'm not sure I understood completely your last suggestion. :)
If weak save is mandatory, INT would probably be the less afar from fluff. You could argue after all that manipulating energy requires a keen mind to shape it as you wish. ^^
Anyways, your feedback IS helping so thank you for this. :)


So I am wondering if there is an option to do something like the mephits, and each aspect be the union of two elements?

This then lets you create pairs of strong and weak elements and maintains a strong theme but with a slightly broader base.

Say:
Magma=fire+earth=int+con proficiency?
Storm=Air/Thunder+lightening=Dex+Int
Ice=water+cold=cha+wis
And so on...

So an ice theme would gain proficiency in cha and wis saves and could chose either as their casting stats. Their abilities would be water and cold themed abilities/spells?
Dang...
You know what? I'm annoyed by your idea, because it's a very good one. :smallbiggrin: Although it would require quite a rework in abilities it indeed provides a coherent glue between fluff and mechanics. :) I'll be sure to look into it also.
Incidentally, your suggestion at "determining the casting stat through archetype" hints to me that it could be an acceptable mechanic. I had thought about it for a particular archetype, but I was afraid that it would break a bit the spontaneity of character building. Since it implies that a player checked the class far enough to know which stats he wants to main. Or introduce a bit of confusion if I described a spellcasting stat in the class. Well there is an obvious workaround to this, just realized thanks to you ^^: give no "spelllike" ability before you get archetype so that there can be no confusion...


This might be helpful, it's a chart from about 70 semi-randomly selected common monsters with save effects.

This one is that same chart scaled to and overlaid on a chart of the die rolls at various attributes and proficency levels.

Thank you very much, this is very helpful indeed. :)
Just to be sure I understand the first illustration the right way, it shows the effects that the monsters can try to inflict on players, right (and not the opposite, the saves the monsters are generally good at)?

Thank you all for the input, many good ideas here. :)
Now I'm eager to get to end of next week when I can work again on this (main reason because it takes so much time... You're supposed to earn your living, and did not yet find a way to do that without working hard every day... XD)

[Telok]

Thank you very much, this is very helpful indeed. :)
Just to be sure I understand the first illustration the right way, it shows the effects that the monsters can try to inflict on players, right (and not the opposite, the saves the monsters are generally good at)?

Pretty much. It's dominated by Con saves up to the low teens, then Dex and spellcasting after that. In general there are twice as many Con saves as Dex saves, about 50% more Dex than Wis or spellcasting saves, and about half that many Str saves. The chart doesn't include NPCs, that would all be spells and is very DM dependent.

Porportionally: 1 Str per 2 Wis or spells per 3 Dex per 6 Con.
Spells are about evenly split between the big three (30+ each) with about teen-something each for Str and Charisma, plus three Int saves.

Oh, and I think I saw a Charisma save on some secondary ability somewhere but it wasn't one of the important abilities. Sort of like how the lich has a paralyzing touch with a save, I didn't count that because the lich gets dominate monster/disintegrate/power word kill/AoE hp transfer. The spells are much more important than a save that's basically never going to matter.

[Aldarin]

I agree with most of the things stated in the OP post. However, here is my view on the saves.

STR: In my opinion, the worst save. Very uncommon, and STR saves are pretty much save or trip/take some weak damage.

DEX: Second-best save in my opinion. Pretty common. Save or damage in most cases. Good to have.

CON: Best save in my opinion. Quite common. Save or disease/broken concentration/necrotic/cold damage as a general rule.

INT: Okay, I'm conflicted on INT saves. They're either the least or the second-least common, but INT saves, quite often, are save or massive suck. Feeblemind, Intellect devourers, mind flayers--but also, they're used to save against illusions. Pretty tame in the case of illusions. 4th best save for me.

WIS: Fairly common. Save or charm/fear/mind control. Pretty good. 3rd best save in my opinion.

CHA: Pretty uncommon. Save or banish almost always. 5th best.

Those are just my opinions, though.

[MrStabby]

Hmm. I can only really judge myself as DM here, and I use a bit of homebrew but:

Wisdom is probably top vs my encounters - ether the enemy attacks mentally or physically and if mental this is the most common save and the biggest difference between a save and a fail.

Constitution is second. The physical counterpart to the first. Often damage but less often unable to act than from a failed wisdom save. Slightly weaker as I find the things that attack physically are more evenly spread between stats. As damage is still ofthen halved rather than ignored on a successful save it loses a bit of its edge.

Dex is secondary physical save - often for half damage like con. More damage but less debilitating effects. So often a good offence is a good defence so still being able to act is a bonus here.

Str is the first weak save but I suspect I overplay this one. As Str save effects are relatively mild I tend to load up a bit more on them - it can force some new tactics without spoiling the fun of the game (for the fourth round in a row you are running away/paralysed etc.).

Int/Cha are used by some spells and abilities, but to be honest I tend to find i use these more as specialist abilities for playing out a theme than generic effects. A maze spell or effect would be a tool for a specific wizard for example.

[MrStabby]

So how is this progressing? Did you resolve the difficulties you were having? Did it work?

[Citan]

So how is this progressing? Did you resolve the difficulties you were having? Did it work?
Hey! Hi!
I'm very sorry for the lack of answer, didn't see someone bumped it. Thanks for taking news.

I'll be following your advice, since after some thoughts it actually fits very well with the idea I had about each archetype and resolves nicely the "avoid two strong saves".

Although it creates two (minor) problems.
Since the proficiencies would be a "archetype ability" and not a class ability, I have to avoid it being a multiclass benefit.
And usually, you get your proficiencies at lvl 1, while in my current work, archetypes come at lvl 3.
So I'm wondering whether...

1. I bend the usual multiclassing rules and make a special "multiclassing section" in which I say that saving throw proficiencies are not taken whatever happens. But then I have to rework to make archetypes chosen at lvl 1. Not necessarily a bad thing but makes many things move. May be the best solution in the end though, "a bad for a greater good" or such. XD

2. Or I push the saving throws proficiencies at lvl 3 minimum (current) to avoid making the dip too worthwhile. But then player would have no saving throw proficiency at lvl 1-2 and it's a bit embarrassing. I could make a "1/short rest" ability where you add your bonus to any saving throw though but it fells clunky.

Also, sadly, until, like, last week, I had no time to work on this since the last post on the thread... So it does progress, but very (too) slowly to my taste... ^^

[CNagy]

WotC recently did a UA Ranger archetype (Underdark, maybe?) which gets Wisdom Saving Throw proficiency as a level 6 archetype feature. Would it be particularly inconvenient to start your class with 1 strong and 1 weak save, and then put an additional saving throw proficiency somewhere down the line? They wouldn't even all have to line up (i.e. level 3 archetype ability for weak saves, level 6 for the two archetypes with strong saves, two archetypes would end up getting the same save as a archetype ability to keep with 5 archetypes). Then you wouldn't have to throw in a bunch of rules altering multiclassing: your level 1 proficiencies come with the class, and then your additional proficiency comes somewhere in the archetype, deep enough in that you wouldn't dip the class just to grab that proficiency.

Example: Class starts with Wis and Int saves. At level 3, Archetype 1 gets Str save, Archetypes 2 and 3 get Cha save. Archetypes 4 and 5 get some ability. At level 6, Archetypes 1-3 get an ability, while Archetype 4 gets Con save and Archetype 5 gets Dex save.

[Oramac]

I know I'm coming in super late here, but it's worth comparing your class to a Paladin of 6th level, as they will tend to have the strongest saves until late Tier 3 or Tier 4 play.

Just for example: a VHuman using 15, 8, 15, 8, 8, 15 (27 point buy) and the Resilient (Con) feat will be in auto-save territory for Con and Cha saves by 6th level, and his lowest saves (Dex/Int) are still a +2.

So I'd balance your saving throw proficiency against Aura of Protection first, playtest a bit, and change it around from there.