Potentially controversial balance idea.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

I propose, with the current changes to timestop...

That we take a serious consideration, to hard capping all saves at a max of 36.


To justify my position I'll put forth that a wizard built specifically for DCs, with no other xonsiderations and a very specific build can only reach a maximum of 46 DC on 9th circle spells.

This proposition allows for casters to have the ability to utilize a huge range of spells they may otherwise never be able to use effectively. Without having to change any of the current protection sources we currently have.


This thread is not to rehash the timestop debate. But is to offer an alternative to a balanve issue.

[Frailman]

Isn't the root of the save-issue that a mere div dip give you the CHA saves? Without out that most classes have some weak point even with save-gear, right?

[Drowboy]

Not particularly.

If the way to 'fix' mages is to blanket nerf the entire server, maybe they don't need fixing. Also a 50/50 shot at failing any save this hypothetical DC wizard throws at you means you die. You know that.

[Dalenger]

A cap like this would be absurdly OP... a DC-built caster now has a 50% chance of beating you every round they get to cast a spell. I'm personally not a fan of save-or-die spells, and am much more in favor of save-less spells that offer a more likely but much less powerful debuff (such as what happened with Fear).

[three wolf moon]

please stop

[Shrouded Wanderer]

A cap like this would be absurdly OP... a DC-built caster now has a 50% chance of beating you every round they get to cast a spell. I'm personally not a fan of save-or-die spells, and am much more in favor of save-less spells that offer a more likely but much less powerful debuff (such as what happened with Fear).

The average DC for a well built caster on this server is 40 DC. Giving the advantage to the Defender. Regardless

please stop

This doesnt contribute at all. I'll say "No" and leave it to that.

[the grim yeeter]

what is happening to arelith

[three wolf moon]

It says all that's needed to say, honestly

What you propose is essentially to go back to 2006 Arelith where there were 2 classes: mage and divbuild. Either you were one of these or your saves weren't good enough to survive the opening salvo from the former. If saves were capped it'd be even worse, especially in a wand-less world where a lesser dispel can take away all of a mundane's self-buffs.

Just because you got a cookie taken away doesn't mean we need a pendulum-swing in the other direction where "everyone but you" is rendered worthless.

[Drowboy]

Unironically I think everyone's kind of stir crazy and jumping at digital shadows. That said, I don't think this is workable anyway.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Nobody is rendered useless by capping the top end of saves. Everyone can still take divine dip and hit that cap easily.

This is a balance concern. If you have relevant data that can make this arguement for me you can produce it.

Just a week ago people were complaining about divine dips, now they are fine as is? I dont believe that.

[Baron Saturday]

Any changes to saving throws would probably need to come alongside an overhaul of save-or-die spells. Personally, I would rather see existing spells reworked so that saving throws are not a hard counter to them, but that's a big job.

[Xerah]

This isn't really an actionable suggestion. This thread can be locked.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

Is this to be less reliant on IGMS? Is the 36 cap meaning universal save cap, or specific? Can I have 35 Fort and +6 versus spells, or does that cap out to 36? If so, suddenly Spellcraft takes a nose dive (right?) because now you might not need to make it out to reach your 36 cap. Suddenly div builds are everything. You'll see more things that try to gimp casters right out of the gate and never give them a chance.

I dunno. We gotta give things a little bit of time. Look at the original Timestop suggestion - it was made 1 day after the Lore/UMD changes, and now 6 months later we're feeling the results of not getting a proper assessment of how mechanics have shuffled around.

I also am in favour for simplifying/streamlining mechanics more than creating new obtuse rules that make things more difficult to navigate and navigate.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Is this to be less reliant on IGMS? Is the 36 cap meaning universal save cap, or specific? Can I have 35 Fort and +6 versus spells, or does that cap out to 36? If so, suddenly Spellcraft takes a nose dive (right?) because now you might not need to make it out to reach your 36 cap. Suddenly div builds are everything. You'll see more things that try to gimp casters right out of the gate and never give them a chance.

I dunno. We gotta give things a little bit of time. Look at the original Timestop suggestion - it was made 1 day after the Lore/UMD changes, and now 6 months later we're feeling the results of not getting a proper assessment of how mechanics have shuffled around.

I also am in favour for simplifying/streamlining mechanics more than creating new obtuse rules that make things more difficult to navigate and navigate.

I am suggesting this as a possible ticket to make IGMS less reliant as well as yes it would be universal.

While yes spellcraft for div builds would be less useful, spellcraft for non Div builds would become more useful along side gear. With a +20 cap already on items/Unisave it would be simply easy to hit this cap with any character that didnt have a dedicated low save throughout all classes.

[Scurvy Cur]

Not particularly.

If the way to 'fix' mages is to blanket nerf the entire server, maybe they don't need fixing. Also a 50/50 shot at failing any save this hypothetical DC wizard throws at you means you die. You know that.

Largely I agree with the above sentiment, or at least I agree to the extent that this strikes me as a knee-jerk and oddly specific nerf.

I had an essay ready to post, but I'll nutshell it. The tl;dr is that in an era of 0CL immunity buffs, saving throws are important to surviving any contact with casters, regardless of whether timestop is a thing. This is part of why mages have a broad spellbook full of things that are effective or partially effective even when a saving throw is made, and why focusing only in high-risk, high-reward spellcasting is a limiting choice. There should not be a move to cap saves across the board to make playing a WoB-spamming necrobot somewhat more attractive.

This doesnt contribute at all. I'll say "No" and leave it to that.

I mean, really neither does your suggestion, but a lot of people here have done you the courtesy of explaining why the idea is a bad one. I think it's a case of pearls before swine, but they're being exceptionally nice about it. Kudos to them.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Not particularly.

If the way to 'fix' mages is to blanket nerf the entire server, maybe they don't need fixing. Also a 50/50 shot at failing any save this hypothetical DC wizard throws at you means you die. You know that.

Largely I agree with the above sentiment, or at least I agree to the extent that this strikes me as a knee-jerk and oddly specific nerf.

I had an essay ready to post, but I'll nutshell it. The tl;dr is that in an era of 0CL immunity buffs, saving throws are important to surviving any contact with casters, regardless of whether timestop is a thing. This is part of why mages have a broad spellbook full of things that are effective or partially effective even when a saving throw is made, and why focusing only in high-risk, high-reward spellcasting is a limiting choice. There should not be a move to cap saves across the board to make playing a WoB-spamming necrobot somewhat more attractive.

This doesnt contribute at all. I'll say "No" and leave it to that.

I mean, really neither does your suggestion, but a lot of people here have done you the courtesy of explaining why the idea is a bad one. I think it's a case of pearls before swine, but they're being exceptionally nice about it. Kudos to them.

I give them kudos as well which is why I'm not tagging them and outright not responding to flippant responses.

This suggestion is, at the very least a constructive action in response to a balancing dilemma. As I said I dont want to rehash the arguement but saves have long been a contenious point of balance along with timestop. There is a mitigating factor that can, and I believe should be considered moving forward.

[Drowboy]

This isn't really an actionable suggestion. This thread can be locked.

Pack up, yall.

[Wuthering]

I think the inherent flaw in NWN is that D&D is a game about partying up to fight monsters. Spells are designed to clear rooms of a dungeon and disable bosses so the melee can whack them down, not to go toe-to-toe against PCs of equivalent level. It's very difficult to balance PVP against spells that require a save when so many of those spells either kill you outright or make you immobile for rounds-per-level which may as well be a death sentence in most cases.

If something is to change I think *many* spells ought to be reworked so they have a higher chance of succeeding (or still have some effect on a failed save) but don't kill the target immediately or take them out of commission for more than a few rounds. Which is in a very generalized sense how spellcasting works in many games designed around PVP first. That's a massive undertaking though and the resulting forum war would kill us all.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

I think the inherent flaw in NWN is that D&D is a game about partying up to fight monsters. Spells are designed to clear rooms of a dungeon and disable bosses so the melee can whack them down, not to go toe-to-toe against PCs of equivalent level. It's very difficult to balance PVP against spells that require a save when so many of those spells either kill you outright or make you immobile for rounds-per-level which may as well be a death sentence in most cases.

If something is to change I think *many* spells ought to be reworked so they have a higher chance of succeeding (or still have some effect on a failed save) but don't kill the target immediately or take them out of commission for more than a few rounds. Which is in a very generalized sense how spellcasting works in many games designed around PVP first. That's a massive undertaking though and the resulting forum war would kill us all.

I can agree with all of this, to be honest. However at some point something has to give. Either saves do or something else returns to make mages overpowered.


I have to imagine at some point some form of blanket script could be used for spells but that would also be a massive undertaking as well.

[Irongron]

Locking this at Xerah's request.

Please also remember suggestion board is still closed. Hopefully we'll eventually clear enough of the approved suggestions to open it up again.