3E Saving Throws in Labyrinth Lord?

[pallidmask]

I've been running a campaign using Labyrinth Lord for about nine months now. Since I cut my teeth on B/X a quarter of a century ago, I love returning to the simplicity, elegance and openness of the system. However, it's in my nature to hack and customize the rules. We're about to end what I've been referring to as Season One, and for the next "Season" I'm thinking about adding in a few of the things I really liked from my time spent playing 3.5, such as Ascending AC, Base Attack Bonus and Reflex/Will/Fortitude saves.

What's your experience with importing the three save system into LL or B/X? At a cursory glance I was thinking about slotting the LL saves under the umbrella of the 3E saves and averaging the numbers to get the base modifiers; from there I can determine the DC of each save on the fly. I'm not a huge numbers guy, though, so before I start doing all this I figured it'd be worth checking in with everyone here for thoughts. So far every house rule I've contemplated has turned up fully fleshed-out either on here or other OSR message boards. It's one of the things I love about the OSR; lots of great minds have been messing with this stuff for so long that there's an endless wealth of information and ideas out there ready to be dropped right into your games.

[Black Wyvern]

It seems that difficulty based saves are not used very often. I dislike roll under ability on d20 ability checks so I toyed with a DC based checks but eventually gave it up as to slow and cumbersome. Where BHB speeds up the game and is a superior system to old school table based combat, DC based saves are slower, even if you are just pulling the DCs off the top of your head. They don't really add anything for the loss of time. My impression is BAB yes and DC based saves no!

[artikid]

Ascending AC is very easy to implement after all.
Regarding saves: you can use the three saves with fixed numbers (starting at 16, 14 and 12) the way Blood & Treasure does.

[petespahn]

I don't care for ascending AC at all, but I REALLY like the three save system. From a writing/publishing standpoint, it just feels so much more intuitive to call for a Reflex save to avoid a falling boulder than a saving throw vs. wands. Might just be me, though.

Pete

[Black Wyvern]

It may be more intuitive but it is generally more cumbersome and subjectivity really plays very heavily into DC based saves. Besides I would actually use a dex check on that falling boulder, now that I have my new found love of ability checks because I finally found a system I like.

Using fixed numbers like Artikid suggested works better than picking a DC based on... What? I don't know whatever you want to base it on. Which is how all situational mods work but in DC based throws that subjectivity has a lot more weight than it does with a simple +2 to -2 modifier. Plus all the work of going through everything that calls for a save and assigning it a DC, again based on what? I like wyverns so their poison sting is gonna have the same DC as a red dragon's breath weapon. It is all fine and good if you want to be a game designer while running a game but otherwise just stay away from this one, or go with Artikid's suggestion and just have set targets, or go with S&W's single save.

Base Attack Bonus combat system on the other hand is faster at the table. No table look ups, and simple quick addition, nothing subjective about the opponents AC so it all works for me. It is so simple my kindergartener could do it. I know there is that whole tradition thing but really, take a better system when it is there.

All this big blah blah aside, it really doesn't matter one bit. So just do what you feel works best around your table and know you are doing the right thing for you. I use combat tables and five saves when I play LL or D&D because they are part of those systems. I actually prefer S&W's take on both; accending AC and a single save. I am old and have trouble remembering to many rules.

[petespahn]

It may be more intuitive but it is generally more cumbersome and subjectivity really plays very heavily into DC based saves. Besides I would actually use a dex check on that falling boulder, now that I have my new found love of ability checks because I finally found a system I like.

I typically go with ability checks when the character tries to "do" something. When something "happens" to the character, I use saves.

We still use THAC0 for attacks.

[Black Wyvern]

Maybe that's part of the reason you don't like 5 category saves?

[petespahn]

I don't use three saves, I just like them. It would be too much effort to rewrite the rules since they're not built into the system, so I stick with the 5 saves and just make them work. THAC0 on the other hand is already there, just a different way of looking at the same numbers.

All this big blah blah aside, it really doesn't matter one bit. So just do what you feel works best around your table and know you are doing the right thing for you.

I think this is the key point of the discussion.

[pallidmask]

Thanks for the input, everyone! After mulling over your opinions, I've decided I probably won't add the 3-save system to my game. My goal with any rules changes is to make things simpler and smooth for my players; trying to convert to 3 saves looks like it'll be a lot of work for me without much noticeable difference on the other side of the screen.

That said, switching over to Ascending AC and BAB will definitely make combat quicker, so I'm definitely doing that!

All this big blah blah aside, it really doesn't matter one bit. So just do what you feel works best around your table and know you are doing the right thing for you.

This, for sure. I love reading discussions of the rules, but ultimately, as long as my group and I are having fun with whatever we're doing, we're coming out on top.

[dawnrazor]

We use attack bonus and ascending AC in our LL+AEC games, and it's a real time saver for the GM.

Check out "http://talesofthegrotesqueanddungeonesque.blogspot.se" (the first book, free PDF) for already made tables and armor listings. The author also has made tables for attack bonuses for PCs and monsters.

As for 3E style saves you might want to check out "Blood and Treasure" http://matt-landofnod.blogspot.se/p/blood-treasure.html that uses 3E's three saving throws, but old school target numbers instead of saving bonuses. No free PDF there, but the book is great source material for any OSR game: 500 monsters and 600 spells in the core book!

Personally, we use the tables from Tales of the Grotesque and Dungeonesque, in combination with old school saves. The next game however, will use Blood & Treasure as the base engine.