Save and Suck?

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

ooSitrioo

Aug 19, 2014 8:02:14

My characters of choice have always been save or suck specialists; debuffs are much more fun for me than damage.  I admit to not reading the entire spell selection yet, but from what I have seen so far I am apprehensive about making this style of build.  

 

I know most all numbers are capped at a much lower level to include spell DCs; I understand the desire for this in it being easier to maintain balance.  But I am used to amping spell DCs.  I haven't seen the baddies, but I think at best I am looking at 50/50 chance of getting a DC based spell to stick.  This greatly discourages save or sucks.  

 

Is there something i am missing, or does this kind of sum it up?

 

 

(PS:  In my oppinion, too much balance led to my lack of enjoyment in 4e.  I need characters to feel different, and from reading the PHB they do this much better now.)

#2

Dracones

Aug 19, 2014 9:21:31

In the playtest the main thing I found with save or suck, is you need to pick your save. I tended to have a combination of Wis and Con save spells so I could choose one or the other depending on the monster. 

#3

Lawolf

Aug 19, 2014 9:24:26

ooSitrioo wrote:
#4

Leugren

Aug 19, 2014 10:01:05

Lawolf wrote:
#5

ooSitrioo

Aug 19, 2014 11:10:55

Thanks for the heads up.  

 

It looks like I just needed to spend some more time with the spell section.  In my old PF group, it wasn't uncommon to hear a GM say something like "He is going to need an 18 (or more) on the dice to make this."  If many spells have removed the option to save, that would alleviate my concerns a lot for the new lower DCs.

#6

kev777

Aug 19, 2014 11:15:19

I took a quick look at the rules in the PHB and from what I can tell those old SoD spells now do damage enough to kill a single target, which is technically the same thing.   

#7

Lawolf

Aug 19, 2014 11:22:44

ooSitrioo wrote:
#8

mellored

Aug 19, 2014 11:25:55

For example.  If your going against a cleric...  (12 Con, 16+Prof Wis)

 

Level 1:  DC 13

Con (1) = save on 12+

Wis (5) = save on 8+

 

 

Bumping Int for you, and Wis on the cleric...

 

Level 20: DC 19

Con = save on 18+

Wis = save on 8+

 

 

Of course, the reverse is true as well.  A high level cleric can hit you with an 90% save-or-suck con save.

#9

Chaosmancer

Aug 19, 2014 12:13:21

Hypnotic pattern is another wizard wis spell that is nasty on a failed save

#10

UngeheuerLich

Aug 20, 2014 3:49:43

Yes, I did the math, and succeeding on a save is nearly as hard as it was in 3.5 if the spellcaster did not boost his save DC:

 

average level 9 spell: DC 10+9+5=24 Bad save:+6

 

Now at level 17: DC 8+6+5=19 Bad save: +0

 

Difference: Lower level spells are also dangerous now. Succeeding on a save is hard. Now most spells allow a new save each round, so your saving throw decides more over the duration than if a spell sticks. So it is comparing apples and oranges honestly.

 

Contagion: Con version seems bugged to me. And I would rule that this specific sickness only takes effect after three failed saves. And especially does not give disadvantage on the save to resist this spell itself. Otherwise it would be overpowered.

#11

FallingIcicle

Aug 20, 2014 4:18:01

The slow spell is also amazing now.

#12

ooSitrioo

Aug 25, 2014 0:26:53

Lawolf wrote:
#13

JohnLynch

Aug 25, 2014 2:11:54

ooSitrioo wrote:
#14

ooSitrioo

Aug 25, 2014 21:35:26

No my favorite games are the close calls.  Sometimes they are cake, but most of the season 4-5 stuff upped the difficultly tremendously.  

 

I actually do like the mechanics and options of that game, but in all honesty I am trying to transition to this one because I find a few of the staff members to be beligerant and I would prefer to no longer support that company.  I bought this book and set up to start a regular game in a few weeks, planning to leave my PF group when this kicks off.  Just feeling a little growing pains while getting used to it.  

 

 

#15

JohnLynch

Aug 26, 2014 0:57:09

ooSitrioo wrote:
#16

dmgorgon

Aug 26, 2014 10:53:54

ooSitrioo wrote: