# When not to allow a reflex save?



## orion90000 (Nov 30, 2010)

I have gone round and round the rules trying to find exceptions regarding reflex saves. Am I completely overlooking them? 

Here is the general question: My cleric casts sound burst on an enemy, which then failed its Fortitude save. The enemy is now stunned. The Sorcerer casts fireball. I couldn't find anything saying that the stunned enemy couldn't roll a reflex save for half damage. 

I'm thinking that a stunned character (momentarily unconscious) wouldn't be able to react to the fireball. Then I got to wondering if at any point you become flat-footed or simply denied your dex modifier to armor if you should also lose your dex modifier to Reflex saves. 

Help me out.


----------



## Dandu (Nov 30, 2010)

Paralyzed does not allow for reflex saves. Stunned is weaker than paralyzed, however.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Nov 30, 2010)

If you're conscious and you can move, you get a reflex save.

Stunned doesn't stop you from getting one, and flatfooted certainly does not (the whole point of *reflex* saves is how fast you react to something, including unexpected things!).


----------



## Sekhmet (Dec 1, 2010)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> If you're conscious and you can move, you get a reflex save.
> 
> Stunned doesn't stop you from getting one, and flatfooted certainly does not (the whole point of *reflex* saves is how fast you react to something, including unexpected things!).




I would argue against this ruling.
If you've ever had a concussive grenade explode near you, you'd understand that temporary stunning effects throw you off so badly that your reflexes are shot until you recover at least partially (usually takes 4-6 seconds, almost a full round).

Sound Burst is basically a concussive blast without the blinding light attached, so I would rule that Sound Burst's stunning effect would also prevent a Reflex save.

SRD says: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).


----------



## Dandu (Dec 1, 2010)

It helps if you think of it as luck combined with ability to dodge. You still get a bit of luck even when stunned.

(Interesting. As written, few (if any) conditions specifically rule out  making reflex saves, though certain conditions that set your Dex to zero  would definitely penalize it.

Doesn't make a lot of sense, but hey you can make a reflex save vs a  Fireball in a 5x5 closet and a natural 20 always succeeds no matter what  the situation...)


----------



## Ahnehnois (Dec 1, 2010)

It is an oddity of the rules that a character who loses his Dex bonus to AC still has his Dex applied to reflex saves. You could certainly argue that a stunned character _should_ lose his Dex bonus to ref saves as well.

The rules though, allow you a save at your full bonuss unless explicitly stated otherwise (e.g. helpless).


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Dec 1, 2010)

No, it's not an oddity.  Reflex save is not the same thing as armor class.  Just because you're flatfooted doesn't mean you're less able to suddenly react to something.  They represent completely different things.

And stunned in D&D is less severe overall than what we'd take it to mean in real life.  It's a semi common status effect that can be inflicted and is already pretty viscious considering how much a D&D creature can do in the span of seconds, it really does not need any help adding to the explicit negative effects laid out in game terms, nor should it gain any "realism" buffs.


----------



## Dandu (Dec 1, 2010)

"You're stunned! You can't make a reflex save against my Fireball, it's physically impossible!"

"What's a Fireball?"

"It's a magical spell conjured into existence with nonsense words, hand gestures, and bat poo."


----------



## Jhaelen (Dec 1, 2010)

Ahnehnois said:


> The rules though, allow you a save at your full bonuss unless explicitly stated otherwise (e.g. helpless).



Indeed. This is not a question of realism, it's a question of game balance. Ignore the rules at your own peril!


----------



## irdeggman (Dec 1, 2010)

Ahnehnois said:


> It is an oddity of the rules that a character who loses his Dex bonus to AC still has his Dex applied to reflex saves. You could certainly argue that a stunned character _should_ lose his Dex bonus to ref saves as well.
> 
> The rules though, allow you a save at your full bonuss unless explicitly stated otherwise (e.g. helpless).




No they don't.

They allow you to make the save with your Dex mod applied - if your Dex is modified you use your modified score to determine the modifier to apply (whether posistive or negative).



> Reflex Saving Throw: 1d20 + base save bonus + Dexterity
> modifier




Flat-footed does not remove the Dex mod it only prevents you from applying it to your AC. In fact it only prevents you from applying the "bonus" to AC - there is a whole argument about suddening increasing your AC by being flat-footed and losing the "penalty" to AC.



> You can’t use your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) while flat-footed.


----------



## orion90000 (Dec 1, 2010)

Stunned
A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a -2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).

"can't take actions" 

The rules don't state it, but what kind of actions are saving throws? free actions? immediate actions? Obviously you would have to move to make a reflex save so some kind of action is implied.


----------



## Dandu (Dec 1, 2010)

> Nauseated  	Experiencing stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are unable to  attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else  requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a  single move action per turn.



Can a nauseated character make saving throws?



> Panicked  	A panicked creature must drop anything it holds and flee at top speed from the source of its fear,  as well as any other dangers it encounters, along a random path. It  can’t take any other actions.



Can a panicked creature make saving throws?


----------



## steeldragons (Dec 1, 2010)

*Originally posted by Dandu:*

Quote:
Nauseated  	Experiencing stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are  unable to  attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything  else  requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a   single move action per turn.  			 		 
>Can a nauseated character make saving throws?

  Quote:
Panicked  	A panicked creature must drop anything it holds and flee at top speed from the source of its fear,  as well as any other dangers it encounters, along a random path. It  can’t take any other actions. 			 		 
>Can a panicked creature make saving throws?
--------------------------------

No. On all counts. The creature has already failed their required save to end up in the Nauseated, Panicked..AND (since it's the relevant question to the thread) I'll include Stunned state. You failed that save  so now you are in these conditions that prohibit other action.

Your mind is not concentrating on anything to form a Will save. Your body is not really enough under your control to make an attempt at a Reflex save...only thing you MIGHT be capable of doing would be a Fort save vs. a poison or some other biological agent that your body would handle internally. But I would say, in a Stunned, Nauseated or Panicked state, I would probably not allow Fort saves that require some outward attention or action (whatever those might be).

The entire purpose of having these sort of "incapacitated" states in the game is to _use_ them and take advantage of your foe while they _are _incapacitated. It's not so you can say "Ok. You're stunned. You can do no action for the following round. But sure you can leap out of the way of the incoming fireball. G'head roll the dice."

Sorry. I'm ruling no. The character gets no Reflex save while stunned from the Sound Burst (even if you want to use the "includes luck" definition of saving throws). The character is stunned and just happens to trip and fall out of the way of the fireball, taking half damage...?...mm. Doesn't really fly for me. 

Just my 2 coppers.
--Steel Dragons


----------



## Aran Thule (Dec 1, 2010)

My two coppers would allow a saving throw.
I would not term a saving throw as an 'action' it is just something that happens in response to someone elses action.

Also it would completely unbalance the game if one of these 'no action' effects stopped you from making saving throws.

Makes colour spray very over powered and stinking cloud would cause tpk.


----------



## Dandu (Dec 1, 2010)

Here's the thing: saving throws are not actions. You can still make them even when your actions are restricted.

I encourage you to think of it in 4e terms, where you have to attack vs someone's Dex defense. Or whatever the specific terminology that 4e uses is.


----------



## steeldragons (Dec 1, 2010)

I'm a total advocate for the goose/gander scenario.

If it can happen to you, it can happen to your foes.

How is that unbalancing? 

Re: stinking cloud and color spray...if someone launches a "follow up" attack on you while you are incapacitated (from already failing the save vs. the spell)...I fail to see how that makes them "too powerful." Kinda the point of the spells as they exist: incapacitate your opponent.

And how "it'll make the spell too powerful" means/translates to "you should be able to make saving throws while incapacitated by these (or any) spell/effect", I simply don't follow.

But your coppers, your call. Everyone's entitled. 
--SD


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Dec 1, 2010)

steeldragons said:


> And how "it'll make the spell too powerful" means/translates to "you should be able to make saving throws while incapacitated by these (or any) spell/effect", I simply don't follow.




Ok, I'll spell it out for you: Incapacitating spells and effects are *already* the most powerful things in the game, even playing them the "unrealistic" (god it's funny to argue realism about magic) way strict RAW dicatates.  If you make any incapacitating effect completely, truly, utterly icapacitating to the point where the person can't even make saving throws and is effectively helpless (hell, even HELPLESS people get fortitude saves and arguably will saves!), then you're turning every single one of those spells into a save or die.  At much cheaper cost / more targets than actual save or dies.  And there is no longer any reason to cast any other offensive spell.  Ever.



steeldragons said:


> But your coppers, your call. Everyone's entitled.




*Let's start here. Disagreeing with someone does not give you the right to insult them. We expect you to discuss, not take cheap shots. Don't post if you can't do that. ~ Piratecat*

Yup, every DM's entitled to horrible houserules and every player's entitled to avoid a game with terrible houserules like the plague.  I just feel bad for newbie players that barely no the rules, let alone have the ability to identify extremely bad rules at first glance.


----------



## steeldragons (Dec 1, 2010)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> Ok, I'll spell it out for you: Incapacitating spells and effects are *already* the most powerful things in the game, even playing them the "unrealistic" (god it's funny to argue realism about magic) way strict RAW dicatates.




It is odd to argue "realism" in any area of a fantasy game...but magic in particular. 

That said, I (and pretty much everyone I have played with) have had enough common sense to know when to throw out the RAW in exchange for a RAI as makes..well..."common sense." Ergo, far as I can see, Stun=no action. NOT "Stun=No action except in the event you have to dodge a fireball."

Also take into account the "RAW" are not, nor have ever been meant to be, set in stone...especially when they contradict the "realism of the game world" (the "verisimilitude" I see used here all of the time) or "common sense."  



StreamOfTheSky said:


> If you make any incapacitating effect completely, truly, utterly icapacitating to the point where the person can't even make saving throws and is effectively helpless (hell, even HELPLESS people get fortitude saves and arguably will saves!), then you're turning every single one of those spells into a save or die.




Pff! That sounds a bit exaggerated/melodramatic. It's not like they're being turned to stone! They're stunned...for a limited period of time. Again, the leap to "save or die" seems...extreme.

Besides the fact I don't agree with "save vs. die" rulings either...even in the RAW...with, perhaps the exception of Power Word, Kill. 

But hey, to your point, if you are helpless and someone hits you the following round...maybe you will die...whether I allow you a reflex save or not. 

Different scenario (more like the OPs situation). Color spray. ZAP! You fail your save, you're up but dazed...Dazed="loses next action." Here comes the fireball...You get a reflex save...how? 

"Unrealistic" RAW are meant to be amended in play.

OTOH, someone who is Prone is thought of to be helpless, yes? I would see no reason that they should lose any type of save (well, as long as they're conscious, I suppose).



StreamOfTheSky said:


> At much cheaper cost / more targets than actual save or dies.  And there is no longer any reason to cast any other offensive spell.  Ever.




Hm. Well, that would be one way to play it, I suppose. Be boring as all get out. But I suppose if all you care about is how numbers and crunch and I made this ruling, then sure. Cast Stinking Cloud everywhere you...especially since the lack of a reflex save the following round doesn't necessarily mean the opponent is going down. 



StreamOfTheSky said:


> Yup, every DM's entitled to horrible houserules and every player's entitled to avoid a game with terrible houserules like the plague.  I just feel bad for newbie players that barely no the rules, let alone have the ability to identify extremely bad rules at first glance.




Wow. That doesn't sound too accusatory, now does it.

I'm sure I must be misinterpreting what you mean by this. I'm sure someone wouldn't be bothering to pick a fight on this board with someone they don't know nor have ever played with over a hypothetical DM ruling.

Well, no one over the age of 12 anyway.

*And we'll continue here. If someone insults you, report the post; you do this with the little "!" at the bottom left of every post. You don't insult them back. - PCat*

Have fun and happy gaming.
--Steel Dragons


----------



## Dandu (Dec 1, 2010)

3.5 FAQ said:
			
		

> *Exactly when can a character make a Reflex saving
> throw? The saving throw section on the PH says Reflex
> saves depend on a character’s ability to dodge out of the
> way. Does that mean you can’t make Reflex saves if you
> ...




You're welcome.


----------



## BinkyBo (Dec 1, 2010)

*Ergo, far as I can see, Stun=no action. NOT "Stun=No action except in the event you have to dodge a fireball."....

Different scenario (more like the OPs situation). Color spray. ZAP! You fail your save, you're up but dazed...Dazed="loses next action." Here comes the fireball...You get a reflex save...how?* 


  I think you are lumping together the game term action and the broader definition of action...not the same thing


----------



## irdeggman (Dec 1, 2010)

steeldragons said:


> That said, I (and pretty much everyone I have played with) have had enough common sense to know when to throw out the RAW in exchange for a RAI as makes..well..."common sense." Ergo, far as I can see, Stun=no action. NOT "Stun=No action except in the event you have to dodge a fireball."




Well in this case it is clearly not RAI but maybe rules as I intend  (the FAQ quoted earlier)




> Also take into account the "RAW" are not, nor have ever been meant to be, set in stone...especially when they contradict the "realism of the game world" (the "verisimilitude" I see used here all of the time) or "common sense."




True but not relevent to this issue since you are now classifying almost all conditions as being the same, i.e., not allowing any actions which is clearly not the RAW nor RAI.  






> OTOH, someone who is Prone is thought of to be helpless, yes? I would see no reason that they should lose any type of save (well, as long as they're conscious, I suppose).




Nope prone is not "helpless".  Can someone delvier a coup de grace on someone who is prone?  No way in any common sense world.


Heck you can be prone for "defensive purposes" to help against ranged attacks.



Note that saving throws are not "actions" as defined in D&D.  IF you consider them actions what type are they?

Swift
immediate
move
standard
full round?

Can you make more than 1 saving throw a round?

If they are actions then you are making more actions than allowed per the RAW.


----------



## steeldragons (Dec 2, 2010)

Holy gods.

*And we'll finish here. This is the sort of rant you don't want to make. Well, you may want to make it, but it's inappropriate here. Whether you agree or disagree with someone, becoming condescending and insulting because they disagree with you is never okay. It's fine for people to disagree with you, seriously - just report the post if they're jerks about it, and use the Ignore function judiciously. Replying in kind only makes the situation worse. 

Please ping me with any questions. We'd prefer not to see a reoccurrance of this sort of argument. - Piratecat*

Ok. Look kiddles, I am not interested in arguing with anyone on these boards about, frankly, anything. Particularly what's "written" or "intended" or "I intend" or what "Prone" isn't or "Helpless" is, what action means versus action  or that save doesn't count as an action (which, believe it or not, I knew)...and which action is it? There's already 5, why not one more? Hell, make it 10! Nice round number.

...Seriously?!    

I was responding to the Original Poster's scenario and question...



orion90000 said:


> Here is the general question: My cleric casts sound burst on an enemy, which then failed its Fortitude save. The enemy is now stunned. The Sorcerer casts fireball. I couldn't find anything saying that the stunned enemy couldn't roll a reflex save for half damage.
> 
> I'm thinking that a stunned character (momentarily unconscious) wouldn't be able to react to the fireball. etc...etc...




...which I agree with. A stunned character "wouldn't be able to react..." That is what makes sense...regardless of what page XYZ of the QRS says or who's RAI is another person's RAII.

Given the situation presented, that would be my call...and the OP seems to have enough common sense/gut reaction to make what, to my opinion, would be a correct determination, initially.

He wants to look it up or find some relevant RAW, then maybe he'll change his call/the way he runs his game. That's up to him. 

I, probably, would not. I'd make the call, play through the round, probably lose my BBEG to some successful tactics by my players, curse my luck of the dice for failing the save on the Sound Burst, and we'd move on.

Now, I'll leave you to your RAW-lawyering, munchki-teering and RAI-ghteous indignation. 

Enjoy.
--SD


----------



## irdeggman (Dec 2, 2010)

steeldragons said:


> I was responding to the Original Poster's scenario and question...
> 
> 
> 
> ...which I agree with. A stunned character "wouldn't be able to react..." That is what makes sense...regardless of what page XYZ of the QRS says or who's RAI is another person's RAII.






The problem then is saying that stunned = unconsious.

It is not. Because of the presumption a lot of confusion has resulted.



> Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).
> 
> 
> Unconscious: Knocked out and helpless. Unconsciousness can result from having current hit points between –1 and –9, or from nonlethal damage in excess of current hit points.




Now saying an unconsious person (aka helpless) can't make a reflex save is entirely reasonable but not a stunned one.

They are not the same thing nor obviously were they ever intended to be.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 2, 2010)

steeldragons said:


> Holy gods.
> 
> Ok. Look kiddles...





Folks,

One of the major tenets of EN World is that you are supposed to treat your fellow posters with respect.

The people around you are not "kiddles".  They're your fellow posters - your peers.  So, unless you want to declare yourself to be childish and immature, don't treat them like they are.  Golden Rule, Wheaton's Law, call it what you like.  It's called being polite, and we expect it of everyone, all the time.

I hope that's clear.  Any questions, please take it to a mod in e-mail or PM.  Thank you.


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 2, 2010)

Simul-mod!


----------



## Eldritch_Lord (Dec 2, 2010)

steeldragons said:


> Ok. Look kiddles, I am not interested in arguing with anyone on these boards about, frankly, anything. Particularly what's "written" or "intended" or "I intend" or what "Prone" isn't or "Helpless" is, what action means versus action  or that save doesn't count as an action (which, believe it or not, I knew)...and which action is it? There's already 5, why not one more? Hell, make it 10! Nice round number.
> 
> ...Seriously?!
> 
> ...




1) Most of the responses to you have been to clarify what seemed to be a misunderstanding on your part--namely, that stunned and nauseated and such don't mean helpless.  If you are bashed upside the head with something and are too dizzy to hit someone with your own weapon, that doesn't prevent you from ducking out of the way of their next blow.  You'll be slower, of course, but that's what that -2 to AC is for.  If you're nauseated to the point that any time you try to speak magic words you feel like puking, that doesn't mean you can't leap out of the way of a fireball, stomach cramps and all.

2) Once again, "cannot take actions" is very specific in game terms, despite your seeming disdain of the actual rules as displayed above.  There are standard actions, full-round actions, move actions, swift actions, immediate actions, free actions...and there are also not-an-actions, those things that don't require any appreciable effort on your part and can be done even during other actions.  That is what saving throws fall under, as do most other reactive things that don't consume immediate actions.  So when you "can't take actions," you can only do things that don't require actions, and saving throws don't.



> Given the situation presented, that would be my call...and the OP seems to have enough common sense/gut reaction to make what, to my opinion, would be a correct determination, initially.




Valuing common sense or a gut reaction to give you the "correct" ruling in a rules-heavy and occasionally counterintuitive game is probably not the best approach.



> Now, I'll leave you to your RAW-lawyering, munchki-teering and RAI-ghteous indignation.




1) You may call it righteous indignation, but no on thus far aside from you has brought that level of emotion into things.  Called your rulings bad ones, attempted to point out the correct rules, yes, but not started ranting at anyone.

2) If they were really munchkins, they'd be _agreeing_ with you!  Your ruling turns any spell inflicting one of six or so conditions into an instant-win spell; what munchkin wouldn't like that?  RAW-lawyering would be exploiting loopholes or vague rules to gain an advantage; pointing out "This condition does not deny you a Reflex save, thus it does not deny you a Reflex save" is not rules-lawyering, it is merely, as you said before, common sense.


----------



## Dandu (Dec 2, 2010)

> Valuing common sense or a gut reaction to give you the "correct" ruling  in a rules-heavy and occasionally counterintuitive game is probably not  the best approach.



Elitist. Don't you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than in your brain?


----------



## lordxaviar (Dec 10, 2010)

orion90000 said:


> I have gone round and round the rules trying to find exceptions regarding reflex saves. Am I completely overlooking them?
> 
> Here is the general question: My cleric casts sound burst on an enemy, which then failed its Fortitude save. The enemy is now stunned. The Sorcerer casts fireball. I couldn't find anything saying that the stunned enemy couldn't roll a reflex save for half damage.
> 
> I'm thinking that a stunned character (momentarily unconscious) wouldn't be able to react to the fireball. Then I got to wondering if at any point you become flat-footed or simply denied your dex modifier to armor if you should also lose your dex modifier to Reflex saves. Help me out.





Boy did you start a hot one. Many points have been brought up the best being the FAQ (my opinion)  How about a little reality- I have been stunned by a flash bang and yet was able to notice that I was about to be shot and dove for  cover. I don't think I was actually thinking so much as a instinctive move of self preservation.  Back to game mechanics, you could give them a DC based on how badly they missed their save on the stun. This will add to the penalty of how badly they rolled.. I mean a 1 is a 1 after all.  But they still get the save.  you might increase the percent of damage from 1/2 too.  Remember this is all moot if it interferes with the smooth play-- Fun!  Dm's flub (on occasion - vary rarely- me im from the  GG. school on that one having played once with him,,, he was tough...very) to not totally discourage players,  besides being an evil Dm.. its more fun to keep them alive and make them pay over and over  (insert diabolical laugh here)      Biggest rule of them all....    Its the Dm's Call.    there is my rant.. whew thanx love to get those out...


----------



## lordxaviar (Dec 10, 2010)

Mod edit:  We appreciate your feedback - but please don't use the XP system to give it.  Thanks.

What the hell did i write that really needed to be addressed?

it actually annoys me that I have to write something to give xp...


----------



## TheHypnoDragonToad (Feb 8, 2021)

Ok, so this thread is quite dated but in case anyone comes looking here in the future as I did:

While we can all appreciate that "stunned" does not mean "completely helpless", I think we can also all agree that* if you are stunned, you are NOT going to be able to fully react to a threat!!!*. Anyone who has any experience in combat or even any gamer who has experienced a flashbang-type effect in a game - for the non-combatants out there - should intuitively understand that, despite a lack of rules covering this case, *it doesn't make sense that a stunned or similarly incapacitated creature would get their full reflex save. *So at the very least, depending on the exact state (stunned/dazed/etc.) there should be a more of less steep penalty to Reflex saves (e.g.: -1 or -2 for dazed, -3 or -4 for stunned, etc.).


When considering other saves however, things are different: Fortitude saves can be understood as simply your body's natural resilience. Even a _*helpless *_creature is entitled to a Fort save (against a Coup de Grace, for example). Therefore, it should be obvious that in the OP's scenario, casts of a subsequent spell with a Fort based save would not be affected at all.


Will is an interesting case. While a *stunned *creature should probably have a penalty to Will saves (have you ever been knocked into a dizzied state? Any activity that is concentration based would be severely hampered), a creature incapacitated by a *Hold Person *or other similar effect would technically be fully in control of their will, although their body is not responding (as is described in the the *Hold Person* spell description).

Therefore, I personally would rule that a *stunned *creature would get a penalty to both *Reflex*  and *Will* saves while a character under an effect such as *Hold Person/Monster* or any other effect that *fully restricts movement* would only have their *reflex* saves diminished while leaving the rest untouched.

Hopefully a happy medium for everyone.


----------



## TwoSix (Feb 8, 2021)

Nothing gets a reflex save against thread necromancy.


----------



## TheHypnoDragonToad (Feb 8, 2021)

TwoSix said:


> Nothing gets a reflex save against thread necromancy.



Fear the Thread Necromancers, NOTHING can save you from them!


----------



## thom_likes_gaming (Feb 8, 2021)

What system was this about anyway? Too old for 5e (which gives a clear "stunned = failed DEX save" anyway), so PF or 3e?


----------



## glass (Feb 8, 2021)

thom_likes_gaming said:


> What system was this about anyway? Too old for 5e (which gives a clear "stunned = failed DEX save" anyway), so PF or 3e?



From the start date, presumably PF1, although the answer (which for the record is "never") would be the same for 3.0 and 3.5.

_
glass.


----------

