DEX bonus/penalty to Spell and Dragon Breath saves.

[ScottyG]

Wisdom gives the magical attack adjustment, Dex gives you this. I've been using it for as long as I can remember. I;ve been using some homemade character sheets for just as long, and there's a saving throw modifiers section I put on there on there that includes this, so it's kind of tough to forget.

[Jeffery St. Clair]

Dexterity bonuses apply to saves vs. spells like fireballs and lightning bolts and other similar effects that could be reasonably dodged. That's from the PHB and what I was thinking about when I read the OP.

Right. I do rule that if you're at a dead end in a 10' wide x 10' tall dungeon corridor, and an evil magic-user drops a fireball right on top of you, you get no save, as it fills the entire area and creates a backblast, and you soak up full damage.

Both of these.

[Philotomy Jurament]

Right. I do rule that if you're at a dead end in a 10' wide x 10' tall dungeon corridor, and an evil magic-user drops a fireball right on top of you, you get no save, as it fills the entire area and creates a backblast, and you soak up full damage.

I've always ruled that way, too, but lately I've been re-thinking it. Mostly because of this:

Could a man chained to a rock, they asked, save himself from the blast of a red dragon's breath? Why not?, I replied...why doubt the chance to reduce the damage sustained from such a creature's attack? Imagine that the figure, at the last moment, of course, manages to drop beneath the licking flames, or finds a crevice in which to shield his or her body, or succeeds in finding a way to be free of the fetters.

I have already been viewing saving throws less as "resistance rolls" where you measure you ability against a defined threat, and more like "oh shit" last chance rolls (which is one reason I view "save or die" as generous: you should be dead, but you get a saving throw as a last chance). The passage, above, reinforces that. Consider the above quotation. It implies that a successful saving throw can actually change the situation to give the PC that "last chance." Finding a previously undescribed crevice in the rock? Actually getting free from the fetters because of a successful saving throw? Wow. When viewed in this light, the saving throw is similar to how "hero points" often work in other games. And the higher your level (i.e., the more heroic your PC), the more likely you are to benefit from such "character protection."

If taking this approach to the saving throw, I'd be inclined to be generous and allow for one even if the situation seems to dictate otherwise. And if the saving throw succeeds, well, then I'll even go so far as to alter the situation, just like the PC chained to the rock who finds a way to be free of his fetters in the nick of time. The PC at the dead-end corridor triggers a pit beneath his feet, or notices a dust-covered pool of stagnant water to throw himself into. Something.

[Matthew]

It is the "inescapable death" rule. Sometimes it is appropriate, and sometimes not, all depending on whether a saving throw is allowed. Once all the variables are accounted for, there is no room for a saving throw, but as long as the hazard remains abstract then there is a chance of escape!

[grodog]

Modifiers To Dexterity Armor Class Adjustment: Neither penalty nor
bonus due to dexterity (the Defensive Adjustment) is considered when
the character is subjected to the following attack forms:

Attacks from the rear flank, rear, or strikes from behind (where the
character is virtually unable to see the attack coming).

Large missiles such as those hurled by a giant or some form of engine
(where the trajectory and speed and size of the missile negate dexterity
considerations).

Magical attacks by spell, device, breath weapon, gaze, etc. (note that
Defensive Adjustments do apply to saving throws for these attack forms).

Note the bolded green section.

Am I the only one who habitually forgets this?

So going back to the original quotation that Rich brought up, I'm now thinking that I might not have been doing this properly. For years So, let's try to clarify how these bonuses are supposed to work, in light of the emphasized green text, shall we?:

Situation: Evil MU casts lightning bolt at the PC. The PC in question has an 18 Dex (+3 reaction bonus/-4 defensive bonus to AC). He has no other magical or situational bonuses to his saving throw. So, does he receive a:

1. +3 reaction bonus to avoiding the lightning bolt, which is the way I've always played it*, and was what I thought you were all talking about all along in this thread until I re-read Rich's post again tonight; OR,
2. +4 defensive bonus to avoiding the lightning bolt, which is the way I'm currently reading the DMG and PHB passages (i.e., the the AC bonus is turned into a save bonus instead of an AC bonus); OR,
3. gain a +7 bonus to avoiding the lightning bolt, which is definitely not any way that I read this (+3 for reaction AND +4 for defensive)

My first guess was that the DMG was an editing error, and that it should in fact be referring to the Reaction Adjustment bonus, which I naturally also though supported my reading, and was what James' comment above alluded to:

Defensive Adjustment refers to the penalty or bonus applicable to a character’s saving throws against certain forms of attack (such as fire ball, lightning bolts, etc.) due to dodging ability.

But no, it say "Defensive Adjustment" applies to saves for dodging, and not the Reaction Bonus. So, have I learned something new today, or have you all confused me a lot

* if the DMG/PHB/Rich emphasized reading turns out to the case, this'll be the first 6+ Richter Rules moment I've had since learning that it wasn't BTB to make MUs learn reversed versions of spells separately from standard versions....

Now, onward to some more interesting tidbits:

Could a man chained to a rock, they asked, save himself from the blast of a red dragon's breath? Why not?, I replied...why doubt the chance to reduce the damage sustained from such a creature's attack? Imagine that the figure, at the last moment, of course, manages to drop beneath the licking flames, or finds a crevice in which to shield his or her body, or succeeds in finding a way to be free of the fetters.

Consider the above quotation. It implies that a successful saving throw can actually change the situation to give the PC that "last chance." Finding a previously undescribed crevice in the rock? Actually getting free from the fetters because of a successful saving throw? Wow. When viewed in this light, the saving throw is similar to how "hero points" often work in other games. And the higher your level (i.e., the
more heroic your PC), the more likely you are to benefit from such "character protection."

If taking this approach to the saving throw, I'd be inclined to be generous and allow for one even if the situation seems to dictate otherwise. And if the saving throw succeeds, well, then I'll even go so far as to alter the situation, just like the PC chained to the rock who finds a way to be free of his fetters in the nick of time. The PC at the dead-end corridor triggers a pit beneath his feet, or notices a dust-covered pool of stagnant water to throw himself into. Something.

A very interesting take on saves, Jason! This makes no-save type attacks/effects (like power words, or the cloak of poisonousness) even more malign and nasty, then, which is a nice implication to your interpretation.

[genghisdon]

We always used dex bonus to (some) saves. It's part of the reason it is (arguably) the best attribute.

One gets a save even if stuck in a 10x10 hall with a fireball. Feel free to asign an ad hoc -4 penalty however.

It does indeed change how the game runs. At high levels the host of save bonuses combined with low base numbers results in failure only on a 1, which is quite undesirable. VHL AD&D needs some house rules to create save penalties.

[EOTB]

Situation: Evil MU casts lightning bolt at the PC. The PC in question has an 18 Dex (+3 reaction bonus/-4 defensive bonus to AC). He has no other magical or situational bonuses to his saving throw. So, does he receive a:

1. +3 reaction bonus to avoiding the lightning bolt, which is the way I've always played it*, and was what I thought you were all talking about all along in this thread until I re-read Rich's post again tonight; OR,
2. +4 defensive bonus to avoiding the lightning bolt, which is the way I'm currently reading the DMG and PHB passages (i.e., the the AC bonus is turned into a save bonus instead of an AC bonus); OR,
3. gain a +7 bonus to avoiding the lightning bolt, which is definitely not any way that I read this (+3 for reaction AND +4 for defensive)

My first guess was that the DMG was an editing error, and that it should in fact be referring to the Reaction Adjustment bonus, which I naturally also though supported my reading, and was what James' comment above alluded to:

Defensive Adjustment refers to the penalty or bonus applicable to a character’s saving throws against certain forms of attack (such as fire ball, lightning bolts, etc.) due to dodging ability.

But no, it say "Defensive Adjustment" applies to saves for dodging, and not the Reaction Bonus. So, have I learned something new today, or have you all confused me a lot

I was taught using option 2; the saving throw vs lightning bolt would be improved by 4. Defensive Adjustment effects saves and AC, Reaction/Attacking Adjustment effects the chance you are surprised at all, the number of segments duration if surprised, and modifies your attack roll if using missiles.

[geezerdm]

Let's have another DMG quote :

"A character under magical attack is in a stress situation, and his or her own will force reacts instinctively to protect the character by slightly altering the effects of the magical assalut. This protection takes a slightly different form for each class of character. Magic-users understand spells, even on an unconscious level, and are able to slightly tamper with one so as to render it ineffective. fighters withstand them through sheer defiance, while clerics create a small island of faith. Thieves find they are able to avoid a spell's full effects by quickness. "

This is my problem with introducing any sort of blanket ability score bonus. AD&D saves are purposely open to interpretation.

I really, really dislike the 3e/d20 saving throw system for that reason alone! Too limiting.

[Philotomy Jurament]

The more I think about it, the more I favor separating saving throws from ability score modifiers. As more modifiers get applied, saving throws become less a "last chance heroic event" and more of a "model the situation" kind of mechanic. I think AD&D is kind of straddling the middle of those two poles, giving nods to both approaches without fully embracing either one. Over time, I think the "model the situation" approach took over, though. The 3e saving throw scheme fully embraces that approach, which is probably why so many people consider it superior to the way AD&D does saving throws. C&C also takes that approach, making ability scores *very* important for saving throws. I favor the more abstract "last chance/heroic event" spin on saving throws.

[geezerdm]

The more I think about it, the more I favor separating saving throws from ability score modifiers. As more modifiers get applied, saving throws become less a "last chance heroic event" and more of a "model the situation" kind of mechanic. I think AD&D is kind of straddling the middle of those two poles, giving nods to both approaches without fully embracing either one. Over time, I think the "model the situation" approach took over, though. The 3e saving throw scheme fully embraces that approach, which is probably why so many people consider it superior to the way AD&D does saving throws. C&C also takes that approach, making ability scores *very* important for saving throws. I favor the more abstract "last chance/heroic event" spin on saving throws.

Yup! This time, I'll quote myself from the S&W Forum:

I Can't stand 3e saving throws. Way too limited. If a pc saves vs. spider poison, I don't want it to always be because of Con. Maybe he snatched his hand away just in time, or the spider's fangs never penetrated his armor. Maybe he's a Cleric and got by on sheer faith, like St. Paul at Patmos. Maybe the PC's an MU and just as his consciousness was starting to fade, he remembered a passage from a tome read long ago and half subconsciously, hastily scribbled the sigil of the Demon Lord of Spiders into the dirt, calling upon that entity to respect a pact made long ago, with sorcerer's from the MU's lineage.

[EOTB]

I like the middle line 1E's approach is taking. I think it's reasonable that someone with a dex of 18 is better at dodging lightning bolts than someone with a dex of 12, or even 15.

The base saving throw as determined by class and level is the "last chance/heroic event". Then it can get better or worse from there. God helps those who help themselves, and the quick and the dead.

To put the last sentence another way, If saving throws are divorced from modifiers to ability scores to increase elasticity in describing action during the game, then for consistency shouldn't they also be divorced from modifiers arising from smart play? (To be clear, I prefer to include both types of modifiers.) I don't think that because the last chance event of someone finding a crease in a rock exists, should mean that, overall, people chained to rocks have the same same survivability rate as someone of exceptional agility that wears thoroughly soaked natural fibers, when facing a M-U who likes fire spells.

[Philotomy Jurament]

Well, we've veering pretty wildly out of "By the Book AD&D" territory, but I'm tempted to answer that instead of the "neither here nor there" middle ground, perhaps cleanly separating the concepts would be worthwhile. That is, use saving throws only in those "the shit has already hit the fan" situations where being more agile isn't really significant ("you just got stuck by lightning...but hey, you're really agile..." seems kinda weak, to me, anyway). Use another kind of check for situations where you *do* want to model the "reality" of the situation and test the PC's attributes and such against a specified threat level.

[grodog]

Well, we've veering pretty wildly out of "By the Book AD&D" territory, but I'm tempted to answer that instead of the "neither here nor there" middle ground, perhaps cleanly separating the concepts would be worthwhile. That is, use saving throws only in those "the shit has already hit the fan" situations where being more agile isn't really significant ("you just got stuck by lightning...but hey, you're really agile..." seems kinda weak, to me, anyway). Use another kind of check for situations where you *do* want to model the "reality" of the situation and test the PC's attributes and such against a specified threat level.

Sounds like a new Musing is brewing?

[EOTB]

Use another kind of check for situations where you *do* want to model the "reality" of the situation and test the PC's attributes and such against a specified threat level.

Isn't that going down the road towards Dex checks and the like, though? Or were you thinking of a different type of mechanic than that?

[grodog]

Use another kind of check for situations where you *do* want to model the "reality" of the situation and test the PC's attributes and such against a specified threat level.

Isn't that going down the road towards Dex checks and the like, though? Or were you thinking of a different type of mechanic than that?

Hmmm, that's an interesting-ish thought, perhaps: saving throw and ability checks in the same continuum?:

• Saving Throws - as the last-ditch attempt to avert death as caused by magic, fate, doom, and other supernatural forces (assuming a save is even permitted, of course)
• Something between a Saving Throw and an Ability Check - to speak to what PJ was alluding to??
• Abillity/Skill Checks for mundane but trying/difficult tasks where success/failure is really only influenced by luck and personal skill, rather than supernatural forces

I have no idea if something like this is even worth putting into practice (or at least, not in D&D), since it seems like adding quite a bit of complexity (you'd have to classify powers against which "save type" they'd be defended against, which sounds like a matrixed nightmare to me) without a lot of payback.