Kaervas
03-01-2010, 05:33 AM
DDO is a combat centric game.
Unlike pen and paper, there is no real support for roleplaying, any non-standard encounters are largely on-rails, and aside from some gimmicky puzzles, there is generally just one way to solve problems in the game - hit it until it stops trying to hit you back.
With the huge amount of combat going on, each day I regularly hack and blast through a whole slew more monsters than I do while playing PnP.
Due to this, I am subject to, and subject my enemies to, many more saving throws.
This means that I see the natural 1 failures and natural 20 successes pop up with far greater frequency per play session, regardless of what my saves or DCs are like.
What I propose:
If a die-modified saving throw is more than X points above the save DC, a roll of 1 is no longer automatic failure.
If a die-modified saving throw is more than X points below the save DC, a roll of 20 is no longer automatic success.
I propose that X is 5 to start with.
It is a reasonable number that represents the character's heroic ability to shrug off chance with pure skill or training.
In detail:
If Jim has Evasion and a Reflex save of 30, and is hit by a DC 20 Fireball, even if he rolls a 1, that 1 + 30 gives a modified roll of 31 - this is more than 5 points above than the DC of the Fireball, and he will always make the save against an identical spell.
However, if Jim was hit by a DC 26 Fireball, and rolled a 1, he would still be subject to the automatic failure as his modified roll of 31 is only 5 points higher than the DC. He would need to reach a modified roll of 32 to bypass failure on a roll of 1.
If Bob casts a DC 35 Finger of Death at an Orc with a Fortitude save of +5, and the Orc rolled a 20, the Orc's modified roll of 25 would not let it automatically save against the spell, as it was not within 5 points of the DC.
If Bob cast the same Finger of Death at an Ogre with a Fortitude save of +10, and the Ogre rolled a 20, the Ogre's modified roll of 30 would still let it automatically save as the modified roll was only 5 points below the DC. If the Ogre's Fortitude save was only +9, it would never be able to save against Bob's Finger of Death (unless his DC of 35 was reduced for any reason).
The implications:
This change largely affects three things, regarding characters.
1. Heavier investment in saves can pay off.
When you know that pushing your saves up to a certain point will mean you can NEVER get Greater Commanded to the floor by certain casters, or fail a save against a certain Disintegrate, or die from beholders even without Deathblock slotted, then it becomes a very desirable/viable choice.
More players may consider obtaining better all-round saves rather than relying on immunity items or spell effects.
The builds which already have high saves will no longer be subject to the aggravating 5% chance of failure.
The investment in saves will provide a solid return - not one that is subject to random chance no matter how high you manage to push your save modifiers.
2. DC-centric characters' reliability increased slightly.
This portion is not as game-changing, as anything that would only make its saving throw on a 20 is very likely not a threat at all. All it does is increase the reliability of such characters, mainly casters, while running lower level content, which I think is a good thing as their resources are finite. Missing a melee swing means all you need to do is swing again, an enemy getting a lucky 20 save roll means your SP are wasted.
While anything that would only fail its save on a 1 now has a good chance of being entirely immune, I view this as a good thing. The creature is far beyond your power. Casting the same spell repeatedly at it until it happens to hit that 5% failure chance is not heroic, it is a cornered man's act of desperation and relying on an unrealistic game mechanic to win (it also promotes mass potion chugging in the attempt to force the aforementioned 1 roll). What are you doing in content where you need to do this, anyways?
3. Disruptors, Cursespewers, and similar weapons would need some reassessment.
In the case of Disruptors there would now be many enemies that it would be pointless to use them on. The style of TWF'ing pairs of these to force a barrage of saves until the enemy failed by rolling a 1 would no longer be viable. I guess the ML of the effect would need to be lowered somewhat (6 instead of 10 would give the attribute a longer active life) or the DC would need a slight increase.
Cursespewing would need Greater Cursespewing introduced with 24-26 DC and an appropriate ML.
The on-hit effects of many items would need to be reassessed. Hopefully in the same vein, their Epic upgrades would have suitably Epic DCs, such that they would be useful in the very same content it took to obtain them.
Unlike pen and paper, there is no real support for roleplaying, any non-standard encounters are largely on-rails, and aside from some gimmicky puzzles, there is generally just one way to solve problems in the game - hit it until it stops trying to hit you back.
With the huge amount of combat going on, each day I regularly hack and blast through a whole slew more monsters than I do while playing PnP.
Due to this, I am subject to, and subject my enemies to, many more saving throws.
This means that I see the natural 1 failures and natural 20 successes pop up with far greater frequency per play session, regardless of what my saves or DCs are like.
What I propose:
If a die-modified saving throw is more than X points above the save DC, a roll of 1 is no longer automatic failure.
If a die-modified saving throw is more than X points below the save DC, a roll of 20 is no longer automatic success.
I propose that X is 5 to start with.
It is a reasonable number that represents the character's heroic ability to shrug off chance with pure skill or training.
In detail:
If Jim has Evasion and a Reflex save of 30, and is hit by a DC 20 Fireball, even if he rolls a 1, that 1 + 30 gives a modified roll of 31 - this is more than 5 points above than the DC of the Fireball, and he will always make the save against an identical spell.
However, if Jim was hit by a DC 26 Fireball, and rolled a 1, he would still be subject to the automatic failure as his modified roll of 31 is only 5 points higher than the DC. He would need to reach a modified roll of 32 to bypass failure on a roll of 1.
If Bob casts a DC 35 Finger of Death at an Orc with a Fortitude save of +5, and the Orc rolled a 20, the Orc's modified roll of 25 would not let it automatically save against the spell, as it was not within 5 points of the DC.
If Bob cast the same Finger of Death at an Ogre with a Fortitude save of +10, and the Ogre rolled a 20, the Ogre's modified roll of 30 would still let it automatically save as the modified roll was only 5 points below the DC. If the Ogre's Fortitude save was only +9, it would never be able to save against Bob's Finger of Death (unless his DC of 35 was reduced for any reason).
The implications:
This change largely affects three things, regarding characters.
1. Heavier investment in saves can pay off.
When you know that pushing your saves up to a certain point will mean you can NEVER get Greater Commanded to the floor by certain casters, or fail a save against a certain Disintegrate, or die from beholders even without Deathblock slotted, then it becomes a very desirable/viable choice.
More players may consider obtaining better all-round saves rather than relying on immunity items or spell effects.
The builds which already have high saves will no longer be subject to the aggravating 5% chance of failure.
The investment in saves will provide a solid return - not one that is subject to random chance no matter how high you manage to push your save modifiers.
2. DC-centric characters' reliability increased slightly.
This portion is not as game-changing, as anything that would only make its saving throw on a 20 is very likely not a threat at all. All it does is increase the reliability of such characters, mainly casters, while running lower level content, which I think is a good thing as their resources are finite. Missing a melee swing means all you need to do is swing again, an enemy getting a lucky 20 save roll means your SP are wasted.
While anything that would only fail its save on a 1 now has a good chance of being entirely immune, I view this as a good thing. The creature is far beyond your power. Casting the same spell repeatedly at it until it happens to hit that 5% failure chance is not heroic, it is a cornered man's act of desperation and relying on an unrealistic game mechanic to win (it also promotes mass potion chugging in the attempt to force the aforementioned 1 roll). What are you doing in content where you need to do this, anyways?
3. Disruptors, Cursespewers, and similar weapons would need some reassessment.
In the case of Disruptors there would now be many enemies that it would be pointless to use them on. The style of TWF'ing pairs of these to force a barrage of saves until the enemy failed by rolling a 1 would no longer be viable. I guess the ML of the effect would need to be lowered somewhat (6 instead of 10 would give the attribute a longer active life) or the DC would need a slight increase.
Cursespewing would need Greater Cursespewing introduced with 24-26 DC and an appropriate ML.
The on-hit effects of many items would need to be reassessed. Hopefully in the same vein, their Epic upgrades would have suitably Epic DCs, such that they would be useful in the very same content it took to obtain them.