Low base save bonuses [Archive] - Wizards Community

Low base save bonuses [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
zzo38
08-04-07, 04:29 PM I think you should get low base save bonuses so that you don't have a high saves by being too many classes (including but not limited to prestige classes). Make it you get 2 less save bonus than what it says if it is a high save bonus. So all classes start with +0 save bonus all saves, but the high saves bonuses are still increasing quicker than the low ones.
Jagyr Ebonwood
08-04-07, 06:05 PM The game is balanced to take that into account. Yes, if you built a character like fighter1/barbarian1/paladin1/monk1/ranger1, he would have a ridiculous Fortitude save. But his other saves would all suck, and his class abilities wouldn't be worth crap.
Thomar_of_Uointer
08-04-07, 08:40 PM I think you should get low base save bonuses so that you don't have a high saves by being too many classes (including but not limited to prestige classes). Make it you get 2 less save bonus than what it says if it is a high save bonus. So all classes start with +0 save bonus all saves, but the high saves bonuses are still increasing quicker than the low ones.

One variant I've seen is to follow the standard tables in the PHB for Poor and Good saves (and BAB) and only use the character's total levels in the relevant classes to determine their current bonuses. An even more complex use of this is to add the fractions the calculations are based on (thus, a Fighter 3 actually has a +3.5 bonus for his 2 + 1/2 class levels, and if he took two levels of Wizard the +.66 from 1/3 class levels would bump him up to an effective value of +4).
Tequila_Sunrise
08-04-07, 10:00 PM One variant I've seen is to follow the standard tables in the PHB for Poor and Good saves (and BAB) and only use the character's total levels in the relevant classes to determine their current bonuses.

This is the system that I use. So a Fighter 2/Barb 2/Rogue 2/Ranger 2 would have:

Fort (6/2+2=5) + (2/3=0) = +5
Ref (4/2+2=4) + (4/3=1) = +5
Will (8/3=2) = +2

So even insanely multiclassed characters don't have stupidly high good saves or pathetically low bad saves.
runestar
08-04-07, 10:52 PM You could just have good saves improve at +0.5 and poor saves scale by +0.333 each lv (as appropriate for the class). Simply total them up and round down at each lv.

Thus a rogue1/cleric1/barb1 would have a fort save of +1.33 (0.5x2 + 0.333, round down to +1), a reflex save of +2.67 (round down to +2) and a will save of +1.17 (round down to +1).
Jagyr Ebonwood
08-05-07, 09:24 PM I use the fractional base bonuses rule from UA. However, it still results in someone with many classes getting one really good save.
Which is fine by me. If they want to waste potential power on boosting one save through the roof? That's their choice.
But gods help them when they have to make a different save, or try to use a class ability that would've scaled by now if they didn't multiclass.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
zzo38 08-04-07, 04:29 PM	I think you should get low base save bonuses so that you don't have a high saves by being too many classes (including but not limited to prestige classes). Make it you get 2 less save bonus than what it says if it is a high save bonus. So all classes start with +0 save bonus all saves, but the high saves bonuses are still increasing quicker than the low ones.
Jagyr Ebonwood 08-04-07, 06:05 PM	The game is balanced to take that into account. Yes, if you built a character like fighter1/barbarian1/paladin1/monk1/ranger1, he would have a ridiculous Fortitude save. But his other saves would all suck, and his class abilities wouldn't be worth crap.
Thomar_of_Uointer 08-04-07, 08:40 PM	I think you should get low base save bonuses so that you don't have a high saves by being too many classes (including but not limited to prestige classes). Make it you get 2 less save bonus than what it says if it is a high save bonus. So all classes start with +0 save bonus all saves, but the high saves bonuses are still increasing quicker than the low ones. One variant I've seen is to follow the standard tables in the PHB for Poor and Good saves (and BAB) and only use the character's total levels in the relevant classes to determine their current bonuses. An even more complex use of this is to add the fractions the calculations are based on (thus, a Fighter 3 actually has a +3.5 bonus for his 2 + 1/2 class levels, and if he took two levels of Wizard the +.66 from 1/3 class levels would bump him up to an effective value of +4).
Tequila_Sunrise 08-04-07, 10:00 PM	One variant I've seen is to follow the standard tables in the PHB for Poor and Good saves (and BAB) and only use the character's total levels in the relevant classes to determine their current bonuses. This is the system that I use. So a Fighter 2/Barb 2/Rogue 2/Ranger 2 would have: Fort (6/2+2=5) + (2/3=0) = +5 Ref (4/2+2=4) + (4/3=1) = +5 Will (8/3=2) = +2 So even insanely multiclassed characters don't have stupidly high good saves or pathetically low bad saves.
runestar 08-04-07, 10:52 PM	You could just have good saves improve at +0.5 and poor saves scale by +0.333 each lv (as appropriate for the class). Simply total them up and round down at each lv. Thus a rogue1/cleric1/barb1 would have a fort save of +1.33 (0.5x2 + 0.333, round down to +1), a reflex save of +2.67 (round down to +2) and a will save of +1.17 (round down to +1).
Jagyr Ebonwood 08-05-07, 09:24 PM	I use the fractional base bonuses rule from UA. However, it still results in someone with many classes getting one really good save. Which is fine by me. If they want to waste potential power on boosting one save through the roof? That's their choice. But gods help them when they have to make a different save, or try to use a class ability that would've scaled by now if they didn't multiclass.