Tenacity (Rerolling Saving Throws)

[Anomandaris]

With brevity in mind:
Most of us in the Team feel that save-or-suck abilities are fine in PnP, but that they do not translate all too well to a consistent, roleplaying world such as Arelith, where PvP is a valid narrative tool to resolve conflicts. Very personally speaking, I do not like spells to be a gamble for success every time, and in regards for PvP, a 5% fishing minigame.

In my near decade of playing Arelith and getting into a lot of pvp, much of it on mages of all types ranging from Necro/Illusion/Ench flinging Shadowmages, to Evo Sorcadins, to Caster & Blasterlocks, I practically never see people "fishing for 5%," (with one amusing exception that was more of a meme). I'm not sure where this narrative comes from, but it's just not real, and no player worth their salt playing a mage will do this. Action economy, limited spell slots, and low probability outcomes (plus you're getting wrecked while attempting it) make this strategy a theory-crafting fantasy.

The closest thing anyone would sensibly attempt these days would be something targeting a group bunched up with a timestop -> into AoE mords (remove immunities/mantles) -> into (insert AoE effect - Wail, Mass Hold, Weird, Mind Fog, Web etc). In this case you're triggering multiple rolls against a number of player characters, one of which may get unlucky, or have worse saves. This is far less reliable/effective than just throwing a WoF for a saveless blind (which almost anyone can do from a book or scroll, over, and over, and over again).

Can the team run a report over a 12 month period to see how many PCs die to instant death abilities in PVP? I'm guessing it's very low (death ward NOT breachable). I've seen it happen maybe 3-5 times. You know how many times I've seen someone get Knocked Down and deleted by 2-h Str build with 200ish damage crits? I've lost count; where's the design consistency? The fear of "save or suck" is very overblown, especially relative to what other things do in PvP.

Since when are all the things that happen to our characters supposed to be fun? Is getting evicted, Quarter broken, Pick pocketed, Exiled "fun?" Only if one's attitude in accepting them as RP opportunities and detachment from the character allow one to perceive them as such. Getting killed in one round by death spell or str build, hard CC'd, or killed by an epic character, or by a party of characters can all be either taken in stride, or railed against as "unfair/unfun." There's no way to "balance" these outcomes out of the module. But "bad things happen to good adventurers" and being able to cope with that when it (rarely) happens is part of the social compact to play in this environment. We don't need to be protected from negative things, only given some measure of counterplay/agency against them.

That said, if magic wasn't as easily resisted without thinking of the consequences we would enable stunlocking, and all we'd achieve is flip the meta in the other direction - shelf your martials, it's the era of magic again.

We do not want that.

This isn't an issue, magic is very dangerous. There are however a decent number of spells in the book that don't see much use for a few reasons. To fix this does not require a total re-work of the whole system and new mechanics, but changes to the spells themselves. Here are some examples:

• Horrid Wilting: A 8th level spell that does 25d8 AoE, friendly fire, fort-save for HALF, and necromancy completely immune. Averages 113 damage or 57 with successful save, and if not immunized completely by Shadowshield. Compare that with Empowered IGMS at the same level for 106 and no save (but shield "immunity" is possible). Why ever slot Horrid wilting when the fort save damage ratio makes Wilting act more like a cantrip?

• Weird: A 9th level spell that triggers a will save (let's say DC 40-43) or fear round/CL, then a Fort save or die, if success 3d6 damage for a whopping 11 average. The will save can be immunized by mind blank, clarity, or Fear Immune (which is everywhere now). The Fort save, if you even get through the will/fear immunity, can be passed, or immunized by death ward (not even breachable). Compare this to Wail of the Banshee, also a 9th level spell, that goes straight to Fort, can be immunized by Shadowshield and Death Ward, and does 10d6 for an average of 35 damage. For a death spell, why ever slot Weird over Wail with the double save, multiple immunities, and less damage? Why even slot Wail with death ward isn't breachable and most will pass the save anyway?

• Mass Hold Monster: A 9th level spell, that is mind effecting (mind blank/clarity immune), and paralyzes (FoM immune) on failed save for 1 Round/CL, with zero damage. Compare this with a consumable anyone can throw "Acid Bomb" which has a saveless slow in a large AoE, only immunized by FoM. Or Grease, or Web, or Incendiary Cloud, or WoF, or Cloudkill at 5th level with a saveless stacking Con Debuff, or Empowered Negative Energy Flood 7th level for 20d6 for an average of 105 damage plus 1 pt str/CL saveless debuff for -7 Str at 28 CL (immunized by Shadowshield and NEP - both breachable). If I'm looking to force a response and generate action economy advantage, CC, or debuff, the choices that offer "reliable" effect and actually give me advantage vs. people who know what they're doing are obvious.

None of these issues get resolved by the proposed changes and tenacity, but are issues with the specific spells' design. I can go on and on comparing different spells in the book and share why X spells are used, and Y are not. Tenacity and save reduction will not this, and arguably make things more complicated to balance, with more dev effort. To balance spells just requires changing A) The damage dice, B) The knock on effects, C) The damage ratios/secondary effects on a successful save, and D) Duration of effects. This doesn't need to happen all at once and even marginally improving currently "useless spells" iteratively adds some nice variety and life into the module by enhancing the diversity of options to various caster builds/schools.

Here's the kicker: You can simply reduce the "duration" of all hard CC effects substantially making the concern of getting "stunlocked" or stuck for several minutes if you've already prayed a non-issue This is an easy change compared to what is being proposed, does not require a complete overhaul of the casting system, economy/balance/meta/player disruption, and would also allow lowering saves without fear of a castergeddon mageocracy.

The ultimate goal is to make spells worthwhile to cast. Neither overwhelming nor underwhelming.
We've considered countless solutions. Smaller, surgical updates and larger overhauls. If we didn't push for either, you can be sure the reason is somewhere in the last 3 pages.
This proposed update, for reference, sits somewhere inbetween. It's additive, it's impactful, but it's nothing revolutionary - as far as where adherence to 3e is concerned, it is also entirely canonical, as many abilities feature rerolls-to-save every round.

As you well know there are already spells in the module that trigger saves over time based on a persistent effect or just by virtue of being in an area effect. As you say these are great, lore accurate, and a very useful tool to "test" saves repeatedly. Many of these spell see higher use because of this increased probability of getting a failed roll (e.g. Standing Kyrstian's Tentacles long enough and you'll eventually eat a level drain or grapple).

These spells existing do not require "tenacity" or some grand re-work of mechanics and immunities, simply a balancing of what happens when the save is failed. Blackfire is a great example; that spell has teeth, but the daze effect is easy to drink a clarity pot and get out of, plus Spell Mantles and Shadowshield immunizes. Something like Kyrstian's paralyze could have its duration reduced and viola, no Tenacity mechanic needed. Reduce saves, making these effects more reliable, but less punishing, and you leave existing immunity counterplay (pop a FoM and NEP and frolic in the tentacles). Multi-month reinvention of how casters work avoided, greater balance and spell diversity achieved.

Lastly.... None of this addresses the real culprit affecting caster viability in the module (ignoring the relative performance of martial builds especially div martials like Warpriest etc). Concentration mechanics. This is a REAL problem given damage outputs across the board, and does more to make playing a caster unfun than anything in the spellbook. Not to mention, why is a cleric/warlock/invoker still at a higher hit die than a Wiz/Sorc given the relative power of their "magical" kits?

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

To clarify -
Tenacity is part of a very, very long discussion regarding, but not limited to:
Save or suck abilities
Spell effectiveness vs Save Bloat
Magic/Mundane action economy
PvP and combat dynamism
The existence of -pray

With brevity in mind:
Most of us in the Team feel that save-or-suck abilities are fine in PnP, but that they do not translate all too well to a consistent, roleplaying world such as Arelith, where PvP is a valid narrative tool to resolve conflicts. Very personally speaking, I do not like spells to be a gamble for success every time, and in regards for PvP, a 5% fishing minigame.
I feel that magic being as easily resisted as it is now diminishes its value, it ridicules a huge aspect of the game we play, thematically and mechanically.

That said, if magic wasn't as easily resisted without thinking of the consequences we would enable stunlocking, and all we'd achieve is flip the meta in the other direction - shelf your martials, it's the era of magic again.

We do not want that.

The ultimate goal is to make spells worthwhile to cast. Neither overwhelming nor underwhelming.
We've considered countless solutions. Smaller, surgical updates and larger overhauls. If we didn't push for either, you can be sure the reason is somewhere in the last 3 pages.
This proposed update, for reference, sits somewhere inbetween. It's additive, it's impactful, but it's nothing revolutionary - as far as where adherence to 3e is concerned, it is also entirely canonical, as many abilities feature rerolls-to-save every round.

I think this is a good goal. I just wasn't sure that what was laid out was going to accomplish it when I first read it. By the time I read Scurvy's long post about it, I was convinced my doubts were not only warranted but pretty spot on. It's still going to be save or die even if you are held for a round or two instead of 30, especially in a group fight. As a result, the save disparity is ultimately going to end up in the same place it is now, because if you lower saves people who believe like you do about save or die are all going to hate it. So, ultimately a giant project for nothing.

Now, I personally disagree with the assessment of "most of the team". I don't think that giving wizards a 20% chance of success on dc spells instead of 5% changes the dynamics all that much, and melees will still rule because they will win 80% of the time still. RnG has always been a huge part of D&D, and frankly is part of most modern games that are extremely popular, and I think the finicky gimicky nature of nwn pvp is a turn off. If I were going to work at getting better at pvp in a game, it would 100% be marvel rivals at this point, not the 20 year old game I play to tell stories on. Adding a little RnG would make pvp more fun for a player like me, and I doubt I am alone in that regard. I also think that it makes for a better story, as the underdog pulling out a win is as old as storytelling itself.

Now, I have been at this for going on seven years now, and I know what it amounts to. So, it's safe to assume the crowd that wants to always win at pvp is going to prevail, and that's fine. Or, at the very least, it is what it is. But if that's where this project is going, then yeah...it's not going to work out the way you want. I will shout out Scurvy's post one more time, as it lays out pretty well why its doomed to fail.

[AstralUniverse]

"Every Character Has 40 To All Saves"

Maybe one day can we please drop this silly premise that you mages are fishing for 1s? It's a fallacy. You're not fishing for 1s. The burden of proof is on you and it would be hard to prove before the removal of hard 5s, and now it would be out of the question.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

"Every character has 40 in all saves" is a different statement than "every character could have close to 40 in all saves". If you care about winning, then you have to prepare for the worst case, not the best. Thats why everyone who likes pvp that plays a wizard is a shadow mage, since the +2 really does make a difference. Well, that and premium cornering. Shadow mages with their extra boost haven't broken the game or made melee obsolete though, which is why I think the actual fallacy is that "dcs need to be where they are, or it will be a wizard's world".

[-XXX-]

Human wizard with ESF casting a lvl 9 spell is going to have a DC of 39.*
Rolls of natural 1 are always going to fail, so we need to roll 2+ & 40 to all saves would have been overkill even for builds that can pull it off as 37 is enough.
Most builds have one weak save which caps out at 33, but getting the other two to 37 with just gear & without any extra feats or divine grace is possible.
I'd also like to point out that the vast majority of CC spells are not lvl 9 spells, meaning their DC is actually lower than 39.

So in practice, most characters have one save that can be potentially exploited** - knowing which one without having the target's character sheet literally open in front of you is pretty much impossible though. Sure, we can use the obligatory "thunderclap to check all their saves and see" argument here, but spotting save rolls in the rapidly rolling combat log can be incredibly challenging even in a 1v1 scenario & is virtually impossible in a group fight.

---

*While there are some builds that can push their spell DCs even higher, they are so niche that we can assume this to be the streamlined number.
**Let's be real here: we're still talking about a 25% fail rate instead of 5% - the odds are still overwhelmingly stacked against the spellcaster even in the best case scenario.

[But Will It Blend]

"Every Character Has 40 To All Saves"

Maybe one day can we please drop this silly premise that you mages are fishing for 1s? It's a fallacy. You're not fishing for 1s. The burden of proof is on you and it would be hard to prove before the removal of hard 5s, and now it would be out of the question.

30 spellcraft, + 12 from gear and then +3 from INT (Easy with a potion) is a nice 9 to saves. Especially with the new system getting universal saves on more or less every piece of gear will be something trivial. But let's 'limit' it to a +10. That's a +19 to saving throws. Almost the cap. Then throw in the fact that any build can add at least +2-4 to their saves from stats or downing a potion. That's +21 or +22. +5 from epics levels is +27. Let's say you're a class with bad progression on 2 saves. So we add a +6 tops. You're already looking at a +33 to your saving throw. This is assuming no saving feats. Which some builds can fit, albeit they are very specific. And also assuming that this isn't also a CHA build with divine grace.

10 (Base) + 9 (Spell level) + 15 (INT Mod) + 6 (Epic Focus) = 40 DC if you're getting a 40 INT. Which is you being a +2 race like a sun elf then gifting for +2 and taking epic INT for a total of that 40. This is more likely a 38. Or lower because you'd only get this on 9th level spells

Assuming somebody has no immunity. You're looking at a minimum 34 on a persons roll. In most cases assuming somebody did the bare minimum you've got a 20% chance that you're doing something where somebody is failing a save against you with their worst stat. Again assuming no death ward, shadow shield, freedom of movement, clarity, mind blank (Yes I know some of these are breachable but there are ways to mitigate this).

And again this is assuming the spellcaster can even get these spells off unhindered. And for every action they take or try there is an opportunity cost, timestop be damned. Meanwhile Bigsword McSmashyourface left clicks somebody has no downtime and will destroy most everything in their path not only faster and more effectively but without any real downside because it's not like they just blew spellslots on spells that might not work. I've literally watched somebody get crit for about 800 damage in two swings with a maul. So excuse me if I think that maybe there's a problem.

In PVP you don't have the luxury of sitting there thinking "Man. I sure do hope that this single spell works! "

[Darkstorn42]

tl;dr: I think its a move in the right direction, even if not perfect, and I can support it.

Proposed Save System Adjustments

1) Enable Tenacity – Ongoing Saving Throw Rolls

2) Adjusting Save-or-Die Mechanics

3) Adjusting Save & Spell DC Balance

4) Removing Absolute Immunities (Reworking Freedom of Movement)

I would like to preface my statements by saying that I am all for a reduction and normalization of saves. They are bloated by many features, while DCs are heavily limited. I would also like to state that 'save or suck' spells feel bad in PvP. I am entirely for altering systems, and anyone against that is because they abuse the current one, consciously or unconsciously.

1) This is not the way I would have solved the problem, but it is certainly a way. I could support this, though I think the numbers or frequency of the effect might need tweaking. It never feels good to lose control of your character and lose agency.

2) As long as the mechanics still feel like the original mechanic, I am all for this. I think its a great idea. Instead of FoD doing 3d6+1/lvl damage, it could do 90% of current HP. It would feel like a death effect, but would have counter play.

3) Please, at a minimum, do this. I would love to see SC only give +1 save/10 hard rank and CHA to saves be base mod only with an activation for a temporary boost. Then every 6 caster levels yields +1 DC to all spells. Maybe my numbers are off, as I have not gone through all of the math, but I really think spells need to be more dangerous then they are now.

4) Absolute immunities are pretty lame, IMO. Someone mentioned the idea of making them like 'immunity mantles' which I thought was neat, but if this is done I would be interested to see what sort of benefits the immunity spells might confer. Mind blank giving 90% psychic damage reduction and +10 to mind effecting, would be a neat change over 'immune'. Make immunities rare and save them for races and classes.

All in all, I think this is certainly an idea I can get behind. Unfortunately it is impossible to do something everyone will like, but this is certainly thinking about things the right way. There have been valid concerns raised in this thread that I believe are relevant:

A) 1-2 rounds CC'd is a death sentence in PvP. Fortunately with Tenacity, it can be tuned to even be 1 save/second. (six saves a round), with each giving a bonus that even lasts for a short time. So I think, while there will be adjustment and maybe some pain, the concepts of Tenacity can alleviate this concern in a way that feels impactful without feeling poor.

B) With the new dweomor system being just at the edge, and allowing for more save bonuses to be on items more frequently, this new system will need to be balanced with those considerations in mind, and, I really hate to say, might need to come out together.

[But Will It Blend]

If we make immunities only happen sometimes then Arelith needs to also redo a pile of mobs and rebalance almost every dungeon.

Consider how many areas more or less require:

Spell Resistance
NEP
Freedom of Movement
Death Ward

Not just once but constantly or else you're going to be dead or have an incredibly bad time or constantly be chugging restorations/permaslowed/rolling save or die constantly.

Nooooo thanks.

[Rei_Jin]

To clarify for folks looking at saves at the moment…

NWN distinguishes between HARD bonuses and SOFT bonuses

Base saves from class levels, from stats, and from feats, are all HARD bonuses. These have no cap.

Saves from items, spells, boons, and spellcraft, are all SOFT bonuses. These cap at a combined total of 20.

This means that a Rogue 25/Fighter 5 (as an example) who started with an 8 Wisdom, would have the following:

HARD SAVES:

• From level: 14 Fort, 16 Reflex, 11 Will
• From stats (assuming buffed stats of xx/38/26/xx/12/xx): +8 Fort, +14 Reflex, +1 Will
  TOTAL WITHOUT FEATS: 22 Fort, 30 Reflex, 12 Will

SOFT SAVES:

• From Gear (assuming 9 slots with +1 Universal): +9 to all three
• From Good Hope: +2 to all three
• From Spellcraft (assuming 30 Spellcraft) +6 to all three from spells
  TOTAL: 33 Fort, 41 Reflex, 23 Will
  TOTAL VS SPELLS: 39 Fort, 47 Reflex, 29 Will

Obviously, there are other combinations that can be pursued, but this gives a good feel for potential saves that can be acquired.

I would recommend that the Rogue25/Fighter 5 spend feats on Iron Will and Epic Will to get their weakest save up to 29 normally and 35 vs spells.

Note that Good Hope has a limited duration, but that Protection Vs Alignment also gives boosts that are more granular.

Even so, should they spend those two feats, at absolute best that build could get saves of 42 Fort, 50 Reflex, 38 Will, and that requires +20 Soft bonus to saves.

The outlier with this is divine builds which give Charisma to saves; these are counted as a Hard bonus and as such further inflate the base and the cap.

A three level dip in Paladin or Blackguard, if the character has a base 14 Charisma, allows them to increase their Hard saves by up to 8, which if it was done with the previous build (let’s assume they go Rogue 25/Paladin 5) would end up with potentially sheet saves of (with the same gearing and feat choices) 41 Fort, 49 Reflex, and 37 Will, adding another 6 for saves vs spells

It is worth noting that such builds usually have to make more gearing choices, and as such may not get the full Charisma bonus, more likely just going with base plus a Zoo potion for +4 instead of +8, or they drop universal saves bonuses on items for Charisma boosts due to synergy with Divine Might and Divine Shield.

[AstralUniverse]

Stuff said

"30 spellcraft" to start your post. Something that not that many melees have in first place. Let alone gearing +12 spellcraft on your gear which is laughable and no one actually does this unless they're trolling.

Next, you mention the new system. Is it live yet? Do you have an ETA on that? No? Me neither. It's irrelevant until it reaches live server. In current system the power cieling for an item is much lower than new system and it is the current system we play in.

Next, you simply pile up all these assumptions together and claim +21 or 22 to saves just from hitting the cap and downing an owl pot. But you did nothing to actually demonstrate how you got this. Also people with cha to saves, while their cap is higher than otherwise, dont actually get particularly higher saves than those without, because those with cha-saves need to gear an additional stat, which is more costly than gearing unisave. So that's another old fallacy, long dismissed by now. I wanna see an actual build, with a list of gear slots detailing exactly how you hit the cap while also affording everything else that build needs to gear. Builds always have that one save (or even 2 saves) in the low-mid 30s at best. It's a fact of life, even among div builds.

Then you say it results in like... 20% chance for the caster to manage a dc spell against your enemy's lowest save ... Well, It's a lot. If you cant understand that, then there's nothing I can do about it, but it's a lot, because those spells are insta-pray or insta-win. I argue we can add tenacity into the game without touching current saves access and it would still be balanced.

And then you talk about action time and costs and tempo and all that.
Well, it goes both ways ya know. A melee cant just slap you through premonitions and acid sheath in most cases, they need to breach you first, they need to chug another freedom pot after you breach them because otherwise they literally cant chase you at all, and they need to actually close the distance to you, and they sometimes need to get rid of your summon too. You can rest assured the action-trading game is nearly always in favor of the one haste-casting from spellbook unless the melee is only drinking potions.

And lastly... Yes, you do have the luxury to throw spells on your enemy after you've created the grounds to do so, through kiting and breaching and slowing first. "Man I sure do hope that this single spell works " except that it will actually work at least 10-15% of the time, if not 20-25% vs low save, and if it lands you insta win.

So basically, you have good DC spells. Use Them. You'd be surprised perhaps but you'll win more fights than you think, and you'll improve at kiting over time if you arent good at it just yet which is ok. There's no scenario where a mage standing in the melee's face casting spells and expecting to out-live the melee without actually demonstrating any player-skill at all, and it shouldnt be the case either.

I'm still waiting for actual proof (show me builds, and their gear) who reach 40 to all saves. Because I'm really tired for "fishing for 1s" being tossed around left and right like there's some concensus about it. There isnt and it's a fallacy. Simple.

One last thing that should be said, even tho it's not the most nice thing to say:
We should never balance the game around unskilled players. We balance the game around those who can squeeze the most juice out of their character, those who can kite well and dont panic in pvp, those who can read the combat log during combat. Mages have high skill cieling and should be treated accordingly.

[ReverentBlade]

The idea is sound, with the caveat that basically everything will need to be overhauled! I like it in theory, but...I have my doubts about the ability to complete all the associated rebalancing in a satisfactory manner. IE dweomer basin rework in perpetual limbo that is very much directly tied with saving throw balance.

[Coolguy McMagic]

We need to remember that the dweomer rework will likely give a fairly sizeable increase to saving throws for builds that rely on more than 2 stats and 2 skills. Right now, dedicated builders do not have the option to gear everything they want to gear on their more demanding builds. That will change eventually.

Yes, it isn't live yet and we don't know when it will be, but we shouldn't discuss a huge balance change like this under the assumption that the dweomer rework will never release.

[PowerWord Rage]

If the answer to balance is a total rework, i don't think that players on different page can ever agree with each other.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

Astral, that was a pretty good "speech", but like most good speeches it eschews a few key points. Let me add them for you.

Point 1: The low save you are referring too in most pvp builds is will, the easiest save to cover with consumables.

Point 2: Leaving out the new dweomer work in the equation seems disingenuous at best, since obviously it's going to be a thing sooner than later.

point 3: Despite claims from the "pvp experts" that wizards are fine, most of them won't touch them in game. Those that do tend to go shadowmage, which for as long as I have been playing here has been able to get 44 dc on their level 9 spells pretty easy. Despite that being a few dc higher than normal you don't hear "lovely that mass hold spell" when people talk about wizards in pvp. It's just a not a thing in practice.

point 4: The recent change to great ability stats means that +4 save x is going to be one of the go-to feats in lieu of maxing ab, which means all that save math now needs to add +4 to at least will.

point 5: getting lucky is not good enough on cc spells. You need to get lucky, wait for them to pray, then get lucky again. So, that means I not only have to have time to disable their protection, I have to hope for them to fail their save, then after their instant action button hit hope for them to fail their save again.

Point 6: kiting with a wizard is not the same flex it was with archers, because you have to stop and stand still to cast as opposed to being able to fire on the run with an archer. There is a reason one is nerfed and the other is not.

Now, point 1,2. and 4-6 (and probably a few I'm forgetting) can easily be dismissed by the notion that you the wizard are great at pvp and everyone you are fighting against sucks. That magical christmas land thinking is often used in these debates, and maybe if you are one of the best of the best you find this to be true most of the time. But it's no way to base balance of a game that more than you are playing.

Point three however, is the proof in the pudding. If it were as easy as is often presented in these conversations, it would show up in game. But it doesn't. And why would it? I can hit even semi high ac builds at a 50% rate with a weaponsmaster and kill them dead in less than a round, why would I muck around with praying for rng at such deficit? Now, the point that a wizard with higher dcs + a weaponsmaster would be deadly as all get up is definitely valid, but even that threat is a better game design than simply invalidating a class completely.

So, yea, it comes down to "Some folks don't want to lose to RnG", and these more recent debates on this topic make me miss garbear, because at least he was honest about it. He didn't want to die because some scrub got a lucky hold person off, or something similar. I disagree with his position, as I think it would make the game better for everyone if pvp had more rng to it, but at least I respected it more than these attempts to make it sound like dc spells are perfectly good for pvp. It's clear its not to anyone with common sense, because if it were there would be at least one pvp junkie running around using them.

Hell, I would argue that adding +3 dc to specialist spells and tweaking their abilities a little as needed both up and down would at best move wizards up to a tier three build, which is better than the bottom but still a good way from the top. You just have to make sure it doesn't stack with shadowmages, and it would simply make shadowmages "not the only option to wizard if you like pvp".

[Anomandaris]

So, playing a wizard here for the past two years as a main. Killed a lot of chars with it in pvp, but sometimes you just have to leave and you can’t deal with certain builds (that’s ok). Definitely stronger in group PVP with a good party comp (dispels do a lot for the team and if you don’t get focused, you can do a lot of damage). It can 1v1 too versus certain things . I’m certainly not using DC spells, but rather spells that do reliable damage. The spell options are pretty limited, but you can make it work. It’s not a top tier PVP class but can be dangerous combined with corner hiding, well geared/supplied, well built, and in the right hands. Results vary tremendously person to person; I have spent a lot of time dueling various caster and most people don’t particularly know what their doing on casters. Lot’s of people play martials very well though.

Not to be rude or throw shade but there is a ton of misinformation in here and it’s clear that a lot of people haven’t really played arcane casters, or at least played them enough here to understand how to get mileage out of them and what their limitations are in PvP or PvE. No one is relying on DC spells as a main stay in any PVP confrontation if they know what they’re doing. It’s still combo mage or bust. You also can’t kite reliably and cast spells because concentration checks will result in interruption when they inevitably close and get a swing on you as you’re finishing the casting animation. You can use a scroll (e.g. timestop/wof) or an epic spell because these are not interruptible, or somehow slow them with saveless cc to try to create space to actually get a spell off without getting interrupted.

If you wanna go wizard, SM is a good option, but it’s not because of the +2 to DCs lol. Divine sorc is probably mechanically stronger but less fun and way less utility. 30 Wild mage is still dangerous after all the nerfs, but not my cup of tea personally.

Divine builds are clearly over tuned, which is why you see divine dips or deep class investments everywhere when people want to PVP. High AC, high damage, high HP, high saves, and utility. Let’s not pretend war priest is balanced. Nor are divine saves, smite, or div shield at three level dips. Nor is vigilante putting out DC 40+ mundane save effects on spam with grenades . Martials are just objectively strong and have insane kill pressure with high AB and damage output as well as insane utility based on what the module provides.

Saves versus spells absolutely are getting into the high 30s or 40s for most people who are actively seeking conflict and trying to PVP. Arcane spell failure is too prolific as well in the module. Healing presents the largest challenge to actually finishing an opponent on a caster. Between pray, greater resto and other healing resources, you can quickly have nothing left in the tank if you don’t finish them with your combination.

Edit: fwiw I have helped a lot of caster players learn to play casters better over the years. One of the trends I notice, is that many are built fine, but spell selection is a whole other issue. As is knowing what spells to cast in what combinations, and actually setting up your hot keys properly to execute them. And then getting repetitions to be able to do so reliably and quickly under pressure. There is a lot more knowledge that goes into effectively using what is functionally a more diverse and complex kit. There are many permutations to using the various spells in your book at your disposal in a given fight. This means that even if the base build is “good” there is a disproportionately larger range in performance in the wild on casters.

[Subtext]

As far as this concept goes, I find that it also heavily favors short duration disables.
Assuming this is in place, I still wouldn't go for spells like Hold Person. I would go for Gedlee's Lightning Loop or Thunderclap because they only have a one round disable. Why risk the immunity when I can stunlock someone as air elementalist?

Or maybe my wizard girl would just whip out her grease and fire arrow spellbound wands instead because removal of absolute immunities would make a field of grease an absolute nightmare while a maximized fire arrow can hit for up to 168 damage.
Or be a dexers absolute nightmare because of negative energy burst.

It also doesn't take things like Harbinger with potentially insane DCs, Dirty Fighting or Vigilante into account (unless their abilities get gutted).
But in terms of just casters, it seems to massively favor spammable short term disables, therefore incredibly benefitting invokers, Warlocks, harbingers, rogues who really don't need any more goodies.

I'd much prefer a system where spell outcome depends on how well you save. Take castigation for example (numbers just made up on the spot):
Roll on the save:

1: Fking die, nerd
Simple fail: Short term stun
Succeed with 1-5 to the DC: Short duration slow + save/ab/damage malus...or feared or something akin
Succeed with 6-10 to the DC: small AB/damage males
Roll higher: no effect

[Kythana]

Leaving out the new dweomer work in the equation seems disingenuous at best, since obviously it's going to be a thing sooner than later.

Disagree. We work with what we have. There have been entire class introductions, and reworks in the time that we haven't have access to hard 5%, or new dweomer.

Trying to theorycraft what is possible with the new system is fine, but it doesn't change the fact of what is currently possible, and how it reflects current balance.

There are plenty of builds right now, namely stealth martials without SC, that do have a difficult time gearing saves.

Despite claims from the "pvp experts" that wizards are fine, most of them won't touch them in game.

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean they aren't there. Enchanter wizard is one of the strongest builds for group pvp. It isn't played because it's boring, not because it's weak.

The recent change to great ability stats means that +4 save x is going to be one of the go-to feats in lieu of maxing ab, which means all that save math now needs to add +4 to at least will.

Uh, no. This is not universally true. Many builds were not taking more than 2 great attributes prior to the update, it's not just a free slot in now.

If it were as easy as is often presented in these conversations, it would show up in game. But it doesn't.

It does show up in game. Once again, just because you aren't seeing it, doesn't mean it isn't happening.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

If you wanna go wizard, SM is a good option, but it’s not because of the +2 to DCs lol.

Just to be clear, while I did say verbatim that +2 dcs make shadowmages a better choice the overall context of my point is that the +2 to dcs with shadowmage hasn't altered the game state at all in regard to dc vs saves. Thats why I think playing around with the dc thresholds is the best way to go, because clearly there is some flexibility there. It certainly makes more sense to me than trying to remake the entire spell system at least.

Overall, though, I think you broke down the wizard experience pretty well. It can be extremely strong in group pvp in the right hands, as long as you don't mind using dispel, damage spells, and corner sneaking. And if that's what game design wants wizards to be, a decent support class where most of its things can be mimicked by consumables from other classes, then everything is fine as is. I personally believe that adding a bit more power and finding the proper balance is the way to go, but that does mean more "losses to rng".

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

[

Trying to theorycraft what is possible with the new system is fine, but it doesn't change the fact of what is currently possible, and how it reflects current balance.

I mean, this entire thread is about a project that will still be in progress when the changes are implemented, unless we are at least another six months out. And you don't have to "theorycraft" whats possible, people have been playing around with the new system on the pgcc for over a year, though i think it was removed recently so it may be too late to get on that train.

As for your "if you don't see it, it doesn't mean it didn't happen" point, while that's true, I likely would have heard about it, because someone likely saw it. I've never actually seen this blackguard build that everyone was talking about a few weeks ago, but I know it exists because it impacted pvp and people talk about it. And therein lies the truth of it all, that all these counterpoints are indeed theory crafting about the dream scenario where your opponent is rolling 1-3s on their saves all the time. It's just not a tenable way to play the game, expecting that.

[Security_Blanket]

Just to be clear, while I did say verbatim that +2 dcs make shadowmages a better choice the overall context of my point is that the +2 to dcs with shadowmage hasn't altered the game state at all in regard to dc vs saves. Thats why I think playing around with the dc thresholds is the best way to go, because clearly there is some flexibility there. It certainly makes more sense to me than trying to remake the entire spell system at least.

This right here, giving everybody a +4 weapon wasn't seen as an issue, or even adding +5 surestriking weapons for going through DR, no problem. Access to all the immunities you'll ever need on a potion or a wand for little to no investment? We got you covered. Increasing the DCs a little to compete with the save bloat? WOAH WOAH WOAH! SLOW DOWN! Let's not break the server here.

[Complex]

This right here, giving everybody a +4 weapon wasn't seen as an issue, or even adding +5 surestriking weapons for going through DR, no problem. Access to all the immunities you'll ever need on a potion or a wand for little to no investment? We got you covered. Increasing the DCs a little to compete with the save bloat? WOAH WOAH WOAH! SLOW DOWN! Let's not break the server here.

this is actually kinda true and really funny lol at this point just go full throttle what's the worst that could happen? innovation is a blessing!

[stoneheart-]

the power creep of +4 weapons and armors absolutely is an issue and should never have happened.

[Coolguy McMagic]

Stuff said

Also people with cha to saves, while their cap is higher than otherwise, dont actually get particularly higher saves than those without, because those with cha-saves need to gear an additional stat, which is more costly than gearing unisave. So that's another old fallacy, long dismissed by now. I wanna see an actual build, with a list of gear slots detailing exactly how you hit the cap while also affording everything else that build needs to gear. Builds always have that one save (or even 2 saves) in the low-mid 30s at best. It's a fact of life, even among div builds.

This is simply not true. To disprove this, I came up with gear sets for 7 different div builds that all get ridiculous saves. Please excuse the horrible formatting - I didn't want to spend too much time on this but here we are.
Note that I didn't make these builds myself and may have made some mistakes here and there. At some points you could have easily geared for even more saves or maybe geared for less if you wanted to prioritize some extra skill or something.
I also included Good Hope but not Fresh Mead or Greater Stat potions.

Edit: Also just realized that I added a slot too much for some of those boots, so feel free to subtract +1 from those saves where I made that mistake.

Paladin Cavalier:
https://imgur.com/a/sYaafbR

Sorcerer BG/Paladin:
https://imgur.com/71ydQ0l

Fighter LM BG:
https://imgur.com/wDk7WZn

Fighter BG DivChamp:
https://imgur.com/oIXYRqW

Warlock BG Blaster:
https://imgur.com/EUvpNec

Rogue Knight Liberator:
https://imgur.com/xhK0fYN

Harbinger Warlock:
https://imgur.com/foaYUmX

[Anomandaris]

The proposed changes are ostensibly framed as:
"We want to make DC casting viable again to balance casters without making them too strong."

Which....

• Almost no one is asking for. Look at the myriad of suggestions and feedback submitted from the playerbase to fix wiz/sorc.
• Does not address most of the things that actually make casters, and especially sorc/wiz, lag behind in terms of balance (d4, concentration, AB & DMG output of martials, loot matrix items, gear power creep etc.).
• But some players are evidently either willing to accept or excited about for whatever reason. For casters, perhaps some desperation for something to be done to address the obvious issues with balance for lack of any alternative proposal forthcoming from the team. For non-caster players, perhaps an understandable desire to have re-rolls and thus more outs from failing saves.

When in reality, reading between the lines the proposed changes are saying:
"We want to get rid of dreaded save or suck outcomes because we don't like them. So we're going to overhaul the entire system in an extremely complicated, labor intensive update, that adds in entirely new mechanics, resets the player learning curve, disrupts countless builds, as well as the in-game economy, and we're packaging it as a gift to casters."

Which....

• Isn't meaningfully addressing a "pervasive" or "real" problem.
• There are better, easier to implement solutions for mitigating pain around "save or suck" outcomes even if it WAS a big problem
• Doesn't address caster balance in any meaningful way relevant to the current reality on the ground in PvP or PvE

One of the premises here is that PvP is an important tool that affects storytelling agency, and thus some semblance of balance is important (which I 100% agree with). So why can I go buy a "instant win against caster Rod of Anti-Magic" for approx 60k at shops all over the island? This is the amount of gold generated from 1-2 decent dungeon runs which in an afternoon of play. Why is the build baseline for martials to alpha strike and 1-2 round most PCs? Why is this ok, but people complain about the power of a caster's multi-action combination that may at best pose a 0-25% chance of winning a fight that you can attempt maybe one time?

Take fully geared, well built and piloted Warpriest, Paladin, Vigilante, Deep BG/Cav/Fighter, Harb, Divine Rogue, Dex Blaster Lock, Caster Cleric, into PGCC and put them up against various Wiz/Sorc builds with gear and consumables from "Live's" loot matrix. Hell, even start them in "duel standoff distances," not with the axe swinger up in your face like most conflicts, so you can maybe get 1-2 spells off prior and have a "countdown for fairness" (this is not reality but further greatly advantages the caster). It's not a mystery or theory-crafting to know how it plays out for anyone who has these encounters regularly "in the wild."

[AstralUniverse]

Paladin Cavalier:
https://imgur.com/a/sYaafbR

Sorcerer BG/Paladin:
https://imgur.com/71ydQ0l

Fighter LM BG:
https://imgur.com/wDk7WZn

Fighter BG DivChamp:
https://imgur.com/oIXYRqW

Warlock BG Blaster:
https://imgur.com/EUvpNec

Rogue Knight Liberator:
https://imgur.com/xhK0fYN

Harbinger Warlock:
https://imgur.com/foaYUmX

All of these are 'ilegal', I'm afraid. Make sure all items are actually possible to be made (in the current enchanting system, if it's not obvious).
EDIT: Actually they are probably legal. I didnt know rings of hiding are deflated in value.
I will add however that I thought it kinda goes without saying that cot and sorc are exceptions here. When cha is your primary stat... also sorc is a mage. And those are rock bottom in play rates too.
I also refuse to count good hope unless it's from spellbook. It's just too short. No one is actually spamming it every 5 min while living their life. If it's in combat it becomes a matter of action time.
Some of these builds still get quite there or just about.