All or nothing high level spells, do they bother you?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I've noticed a tendency for higher level spells to retain the same all or nothing approach some Cantrips do.

On one end, if you fail a save and get stuck in a Resilient Sphere its a pretty big deal vs losing a few hit points to a Cantrip.

On the other, the save is just as easy to make! I'm starting to get an urge to use Hex on someone before blowing a 4th level or higher slot on a 50/50.

[Willie the Duck]

Well, they've been dealing with this since forever. That was basically what the saving throw concept was invented for.

Mind you, they've done a halfway decent job of mitigating that (by making the expectation being that you'll fail the save and worth backwards from there). The failures of that change are where most people find high level play less than perfectly balanced.

The one advantage the offense (caster) always has is that they get to size up their opposition and make some judgment calls on what a given opponent will be good and bad at resisting, so most likely by the time you get to the point of rolling dice, it isn't a 50/50 situation.

[Unoriginal]

I've noticed a tendency for higher level spells to retain the same all or nothing approach some Cantrips do.

On one end, if you fail a save and get stuck in a Resilient Sphere its a pretty big deal vs losing a few hit points to a Cantrip.

On the other, the save is just as easy to make! I'm starting to get an urge to use Hex on someone before blowing a 4th level or higher slot on a 50/50.

That's the trade-off for magic power. Some of your spells will fail and cost you ressources.

If you're risk-adverse and want to do something over and over until you succeed, you probably don't want to go into the path of magic.

[Daphne]

Most spells that deals damage like Fireball and Cone of Cold deal half the damage on a successful save, so you are not wasting the slot. And there's a lot of spells that simply works at higher levels:Haste, Polymorph, Greater Invisibility, Fire Shield, Telekinesis, Wall of X, Forcecage, Foresight...

[KorvinStarmast]

Well, they've been dealing with this since forever. That was basically what the saving throw concept was invented for. Not completely. Originally, most 7-9 spells could not be saved against. 7th Level: (Spells with no saving throw unless otherwise indicated!) (Greyhawk, p. 24) A quick check of 7th level cleric spells in the 1E AD&D PHB found most saving throws to be none. (Exception was Symbol). Druid: None, except Confusion, Finger of Death, FireStorm; Magic User: None except Delayed Blast Fire Ball (7th), Antipathy(8th), Incendiary Cloud (8th) Mass charm (8th), Symbol (8th), Trap the Soul; Meteor Swarm; Prismatic Sphere.

Note that Power Word Blind, for example, could not be saved against. Nor Power Word Kill. Granted, this has changed over time ...

The one advantage the offense (caster) always has is that they get to size up their opposition and make some judgment calls on what a given opponent will be good and bad at resisting, so most likely by the time you get to the point of rolling dice, it isn't a 50/50 situation. That's what smart players do, yes. :smallcool:

[darknite]

This is one reason you need to choose your high level spells with care. Spells are a very limited resource and you should take steps to mitigate their drawbacks.

[Willie the Duck]

Not completely. Originally, most 7-9 spells could not be saved against. 7th Level: (Spells with no saving throw unless otherwise indicated!) (Greyhawk, p. 24) A quick check of 7th level cleric spells in the 1E AD&D PHB found most saving throws to be none. (Exception was Symbol). Druid: None, except Confusion, Finger of Death, FireStorm; Magic User: None except Delayed Blast Fire Ball (7th), Antipathy(8th), Incendiary Cloud (8th) Mass charm (8th), Symbol (8th), Trap the Soul; Meteor Swarm; Prismatic Sphere.

You have your sets and subsets reversed. I'm saying that saves are designed for all-or-nothing effects, not that all all-or-nothing effects (even in the subset of high level spells) are saving throw gate-kept. My position is pretty arguable, but this doesn't do so. Obviously the saving throw mechanism isn't the only way to do it. There's the sleep method (X hp or higher=immune) or the forcecage method (size is a limiter, otherwise have a countermeasure).

My primary point, was this (and I'll take a little more time on it this time) -- the primary combat-pacing mechanism for the game is chance of hitting (AC and the various incarnations of attack bonus, to-hit, ThAC0, etc.) times hit points (dealt by offense, and possessed by defense). That is 'the norm' of the game. Saving throws (minus a few things like half damage for fireballs and lightning bolts) exist mostly to adjudicate a side-category of all-or-nothing effects --spells, but also poisons and things like medusa petrification and the like (<side rant>: why in the era of having a separate saving throw column for rods, staves, and wands was there not a column for pit traps? That seems like the #1 thing you would need saves for).


The OP left the base topic rather open ended. Do all-or-nothing effects bother me? Well, what is the other option, have all spells be in the form of hp-style pacing (so damage?) and/or not-all-or-nothing-but-instead always occurring lesser effect (so for instance web would not have save, but instead have a relatively minor penalty)?

I mean, once we get into hypothetical land where we are effectively designing a new system, I'm open to all ideas. But taking away high level 'this might work, and if it does, it will vastly change the success possibilities' effects would be a sea-change in how the game plays and what design space is open.

[dreast]

There are 9th level spells besides Foresight?

[KorvinStarmast]

You have your sets and subsets reversed. I'm saying that saves are designed for all-or-nothing effects, not that all all-or-nothing effects (even in the subset of high level spells) are saving throw gate-kept. My position is pretty arguable, but this doesn't do so. Yeah, there's a bunch of stuff that does half damage. There are also spells like Thunderwave that have the save or suck touching on a different effect:
Full damage and get knocked down/pushed,
or
Half damage and no knockdown.

This strikes me as a parallel with things like the wolf's attack that knocks you down if you don't save versus Str ...

The OP left the base topic rather open ended. Do all-or-nothing effects bother me? Well, what is the other option? Mostly half damage, without changing system.

I think what I was trying to demonstrate is that save or suck is something that the system has grown into, since the original premise for magic at that level was "you don't even get a save" in most cases. That suggests to me that save or suck for high level spells represents an improvement. Do you agree?

tThere are 9th level spells besides Foresight? My simulacrum just called, and told me about a spell called Wish. :smallcool:

[mephnick]

I'm glad mages can waste their turn if the spell doesn't land. Everyone talks about how great magic is on forums, but at the table I see my Cleric get sadder and sadder as he loses turns while I cut things in half over and over. Sure they have major narrative power, but at the table I think it's balanced out by major disappointments quite well.

[darknite]

I'm glad mages can waste their turn if the spell doesn't land. Everyone talks about how great magic is on forums, but at the table I see my Cleric get sadder and sadder as he loses turns while I cut things in half over and over. Sure they have major narrative power, but at the table I think it's balanced out by major disappointments quite well.

This is a valid point. There aren't too many saves or counterspells vs a well-aimed sword blow. A fighter can hack and slash all day long without losing 'attack slots' by doing so. I think casters have a serious gimp in 5e because spells have been, by and large, nerfed - relatively low damage, lots of every-turn saves, concentration keeps you from stacking buffs, etc. This has been done purposefully to bring casters back to earth, but players need to appreciate and plan for how magic works (or doesn't work) in the game.

[dreast]

My simulacrum just called, and told me about a spell called Wish. :smallcool:

I have yet to meet a DM that would allows that combo. I certainly wouldn't. That said, it's more or less how I beat BG2... simulacrum->animate dead multiple times to overwhelm a beholder hive with highly magic-resistant skeleton warriors is my favorite memory from that game. It turned BG2 into a RTS! Sword Coast Stratagems mod had nothing on the simple ability to cheese with magic. Simulacrum->Wish to get party all spells back came later, of course.

Still, DM's are not computers. That's why D&D still exists... and why if a simulacrum casts wish, it will go horribly, horribly wrong... no matter HOW careful you are with the wording. (I always rule that the wish is being made TO an entity, who is capricious, powerful, free-willed, and doesn't like cheese any more than I do. Player beware!)

[Willie the Duck]

I think what I was trying to demonstrate is that save or suck is something that the system has grown into, since the original premise for magic at that level was "you don't even get a save" in most cases. That suggests to me that save or suck for high level spells represents an improvement. Do you agree?

It went from "you don't even get a save" to "at high levels, you will rarely fail a save, but when you do, you might just plain die" (save or die), to "at medium-to-high levels, you will often fail a save, and when you do, you might just plain die, so don't let the other guy get off a shot" (the 3e rocket-tag issue) to this hodge-podge of the old and new but with few if any save-or-dies and much more survivable save-or-sucks, but saving throw math that favors the caster.

I think it is conceptually an improvement, but that there are legitimate complaints regarding the implementation. There are too many monsters at high level that much of the party will never succeed in a save against their abilities (and the consequences are quite high). The effects came in an edition where they also said you don't need any one character role filled, and then oh look forcecage will shut down your average fighter unless there is a teleporter in the group (and potions of gaseous form or the like aren't sold in every corner store). I could go on with specific complaints, but the general point is I like the idea, but the implementation has issues.

[dreast]

It went from "you don't even get a save" to "at high levels, you will rarely fail a save, but when you do, you might just plain die" (save or die), to "at medium-to-high levels, you will often fail a save, and when you do, you might just plain die, so don't let the other guy get off a shot" (the 3e rocket-tag issue) to this hodge-podge of the old and new but with few if any save-or-dies and much more survivable save-or-sucks, but saving throw math that favors the caster.

I think it is conceptually an improvement, but that there are legitimate complaints regarding the implementation. There are too many monsters at high level that much of the party will never succeed in a save against their abilities (and the consequences are quite high). The effects came in an edition where they also said you don't need any one character role filled, and then oh look forcecage will shut down your average fighter unless there is a teleporter in the group (and potions of gaseous form or the like aren't sold in every corner store). I could go on with specific complaints, but the general point is I like the idea, but the implementation has issues.

You also have to factor in legendary resistance, which basically exists to rope-a-dope casters to prevent the "why do we have anyone BUT the wizard?" from earlier editions. That said... I still feel that the whole game is a) balanced and b) engaging, it just requires teamwork and careful planning far more than earlier editions. Mages (wizards and sorcerers, I mean) have gone from "teh winners" to "powerful, especially against groups, but bursty"... which is much more balanced with other classes across the entire spread. I approve!

[Citan]

I'm glad mages can waste their turn if the spell doesn't land. Everyone talks about how great magic is on forums, but at the table I see my Cleric get sadder and sadder as he loses turns while I cut things in half over and over. Sure they have major narrative power, but at the table I think it's balanced out by major disappointments quite well.
This. And besides the obvious balance aspect, it feels if not natural, at least justifiable. After all, we are speaking about spells that can really alter the world in big ways. Those things ought to be still difficult to master.
Of course, WoTC may have designed a check system instead of relying on save DC, which may feel too random to be fair for players...
But imo it helps keep things entertaining for everyone (otherwise, I wouldn't understand lore-wise why either Wizards, Clerics or Druids didn't end dominating every world XD).

[JNAProductions]

Also, minor note: Hex does nothing to saving throws. it affects ability checks.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Also, minor note: Hex does nothing to saving throws. it affects ability checks.

I am going to goof that up constantly for the rest of my life apparently.

[Callin]

With Legendary Resistance I dont bother casting high level spells. By the time they would be gone the damage dealers have already killed it

[fbelanger]

I've noticed a tendency for higher level spells to retain the same all or nothing approach some Cantrips do.

On one end, if you fail a save and get stuck in a Resilient Sphere its a pretty big deal vs losing a few hit points to a Cantrip.

On the other, the save is just as easy to make! I'm starting to get an urge to use Hex on someone before blowing a 4th level or higher slot on a 50/50.

Hex don’t affect saves. Only ability check.

[darknite]

With Legendary Resistance I dont bother casting high level spells. By the time they would be gone the damage dealers have already killed it

There's something to be said for this. Many of my PCs' high level spells are buffs or defensive rather than attack.

[UrielAwakened]

Most spells with do well to have a secondary effect even on a save. You saw this a lot on 4e Dailies and it left you as a player feeling like you didn't completely waste your turn.

It's really just good game design. It's weird that they didn't apply it unilaterally to more than just damage spells.


With Legendary Resistance I dont bother casting high level spells. By the time they would be gone the damage dealers have already killed it

And yeah. This. All the more reason for the secondary affects on a save IMO.

[Deathtongue]

The idea doesn't really bother me, but there are three things they run up against that sour me on them.

1) Legendary Resistance. It makes it so that unless you're doing summon/simulacrum abuse or have a monk in the party you might as well not even bother. It'd be a lot less of a bother if they had secondary effects on a save or Legendary Resistance became less effective at hit point breakpoints (i.e. after the ancient red dragon loses 75 hit points, it also lost a Legendary Save)

2) Lopsided saving-throw effectiveness. For CR 10+ creatures? Unless you're intimate with the monster manual, don't bother with saving throws that target WIS, STR, or CON and probably not CHA. INT and DEX or GTFO.

3) A lot of the all-or-nothing high level spells don't exactly turn the tide even if you punch through 1 and 2. Disintegrate ain't a half-bad spell, but it won't turn around a combat like Transmute Rock or Whirlwind or Banishment will.

[Pex]

Spellcasters can make Legendary Resistance work against the monster by manipulating the DM. The player knows the DM is saving the autosave against his potent spells. Therefore he only casts the low level and middle spells. The DM doesn't want to waste an autosave on them so they can affect the monster normally. Some of them are still potent/relevant for high level play. It's a good way to get mileage out of them.

[Unoriginal]

Casters having more troubles against the big bosses than against swarm of mooks, while the reverse is true for martials, is written in 5e's DNA, anyway. As much as those categories can be separated.

[DireSickFish]

Casters having more troubles against the big bosses than against swarm of mooks, while the reverse is true for martials, is written in 5e's DNA, anyway. As much as those categories can be separated.

I don't think that's true. Spellcasters save their spells and will often nova a big bad or solo monster out of the game. While against hoards of seemingly weaker monsters tend to not want to waste their good spells on mooks, so resort to cantrips or low level spells.

[jaappleton]

It really depends.

If the 'all' effect is worth it, then no, it doesn't bother me.

Disintegrate is a great example. I think that's worth it. 10d6+40? Yes. Let's do that.

[Kadzar]

I am going to goof that up constantly for the rest of my life apparently.Yes. What you want is Bestow Curse.

[DireSickFish]

Yes. What you want is Bestow Curse.

But it has to fail the save on Bestow Curse first.

[Deathtongue]

The other annoying part about Legendary Resistance in conjunction with bounded accuracy (or rather, the lopsidedness of saving throws) is how Legendary Resistance encourages cookie-cutter build parties. The Astral Dreadnaught has no chance of making level-appropriate INT saves, but Legendary Resistance makes it not a good tactic... unless you have three casters blasting away at its Legendary Resistance with INT/CHA saving throws until someone perma-stuns it with a Psychic Scream on round 2.

But if you're playing with a 'balanced' party, that's just not an avenue you can use.

Again, it'd be much better for the game if there was a way where people who did pure hp damage would make the ability of monsters to make saves worse.

[mephnick]

The other annoying part about Legendary Resistance in conjunction with bounded accuracy (or rather, the lopsidedness of saving throws) is how Legendary Resistance encourages cookie-cutter build parties. The Astral Dreadnaught has no chance of making level-appropriate INT saves, but Legendary Resistance makes it not a good tactic... .

Sure it is. The monster has to fail the save to burn a LR so you still want to target weak saves. You don't burn LR by throwing spells they're going to save on. People don't seem to understand this when talking about LR. They act like you can just throw out stunning strikes and sacred flames and burn through LR as if the monster is actually going to fail those saves.

[Deathtongue]

The monster has to fail the save to burn a LR so you still want to target weak saves. You don't burn LR by throwing spells they're going to save on. No kidding. But that exacerbates the cookie-cutter build problem.

If you want to punch through legendary resistance in a reasonable amount of time, these things need to be true:
A) You need to target saves the monster is likely going to fail anyway. This rules out WIS, CON, and surprisingly CHA saves.
B) The saves need to target saves the monster wants to/needs to make. This rules out a lot of DEX and STR saving throws. No monster is going to burn a LR if they fail a Sacred Flame or Fireball saving throw.
C) If A and B hold true, you need to keep the effects coming fast enough for it to make a difference in a reasonable amount of time. It's all well and good to force an Astral Dreadnaught to keep making saves against Phantasmal Force or Enemies Abound until you nail it with a Psychic Scream, but if it takes four rounds to set up your trick your time would have been better spent throwing out pure damage spells. If you're trying to punch through LR but the party kills it with pure damage by round 3, YOU WASTED YOUR TIME.

This strongly encourages cookie-cutter party builds. A balanced party just sucks more against a monster with Legendary Saves than a party configuration that leans heavily on pure-DPR (who don't care about LR) or with three casters with Crowd Control toolkits (who can more easily meet caveats A, B, and C).

The only real exception I've seen are Monks. And that's because even if you have a +10 CON save bonus against DC 17 it's hard to make four of those in one round without leaning on Legendary Resistance.

[ZorroGames]

I've noticed a tendency for higher level spells to retain the same all or nothing approach some Cantrips do.

On one end, if you fail a save and get stuck in a Resilient Sphere its a pretty big deal vs losing a few hit points to a Cantrip.

On the other, the save is just as easy to make! I'm starting to get an urge to use Hex on someone before blowing a 4th level or higher slot on a 50/50.

That was an issue in OD&D. “Do you feel lucky...”

[Deathtongue]

That was an issue in OD&D. “Do you feel lucky...”
*Uses Resilient Sphere or Reverse Gravity against a CR 15 monster with no LR and a DEX save of +2*
Hrm. No. Luck isn't much of a factor this time.

[halarin]

With regard to the all or nothing aspect of high level spells, I am bothered a bit because high level slots are such a limited resource. However, a lot of those spells are also crazy and removing saves from them would really unbalance things. Let's be honest, even with the limitations that they added to casters this edition, they still feel way more powerful than the martial classes at later levels.


A lot of the high level spells bother me to be honest. It's one of the reasons i have a love/hate relationship with warlocks. On one hand, I really like the way they designed the casting system for the class. On the other hand, even with the more limited casting if they don't get frequent short rests I still feel like they are overpowered as hell. To be honest though, one of the main reasons people play the game largely because the thought of being able to use magic is really awesome. I do think that some of the spells are too open to abuse while others simply pale in comparison to other spells. I low key hate polymorph, conjure animals, clone, wish, and simulacrum because they tend to derail games so very much.


That being said, give the optional spell point rules from the DMG a try. It honestly makes a very large difference in how playing a caster feels. You would be surprised at how often someone playing a wizard will choose to simply spam fireball all day every day rather than actually abuse the higher level spells. Having the option to simply cast the lower-level but reliable spells is enough to cover the disappointment of having a high level spell fail spectacularly.

[Deathtongue]

Only for people that look at game as a spreadsheet to be 'won', rather than as a way the consequences of your character's actions are held to the the same standard for everyone

Super optimizers basically 'break' the game and perform way higher than the CR charts anticipate, so frankly, it's the people approaching the game like Moneyball that are doing the exacerbating

I've played AL games and I've seen people who don't 'get' this aspect of LR. It makes them and their characters feel useless. And it's extremely cruel for you to go 'stop powergaming' when they don't want to feel useless.

Legendary Resistance is an extremely hard counter against people who use Saving Throw effects. It doesn't matter how cleverly you use your spells or how well you choose your spells, until you get through it your tactics mean nothing.

And if you're unable to get around it in a reasonable amount of time, you should be doing something else unless you want to be That Guy who willfully screws over their party for the sake of ~~ROLEPLAYING~~. If you can't overcome LR, you're only putting the party at risk and wasting resources to achieve... nothing. Typically, this means either A) bypassing the LR mechanic entirely with pure DPR or B) forcing the monster to make enough saves to punch through LR. But unless you're abusing Simulacrum, B) is only possible if you have buy-in from the party.

What's the net result of making a conscious choice not to ram your head up against the wall because of some misguided notion of fairness or not being a powergamer? Why, encouraging cookie-cutter party builds.