Begging to be errata'd: Archer Ranger At-Wills

[jtrowell]

I use the following house rules for both Twin Strike and Careful Strike :

Careful Strike :

add critical on 19-20 for this attack

Twin Strike :

Target : one or two creature, one attack *per target*

This mirror the new fighter at will dual strike where you must use both attacks against the same target, make twin strike a (very) good minion killer, still increase the chance to at least use the quarry damage, provided you have at least 2 adjacents opponents, but it prevents it from overshadowing careful strike in its own niche : increased chances of hits againts one target.

 

[Stalker0]

Please read this thread to see why boosting the attack bonus of Careful Attack/Sure Strike is a bad idea.

I will agree with this. Twin Strike has both high accuracy and (through the hunter's quarry) high damage. No other at will can compete with that. If you want to save careful strike, it needs to do something other than damage. Maybe you get a secondary effect, maybe you can use it with OAs, something that twin strike does not do.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I will agree with this. Twin Strike has both high accuracy and (through the hunter's quarry) high damage. No other at will can compete with that. If you want to save careful strike, it needs to do something other than damage. Maybe you get a secondary effect, maybe you can use it with OAs, something that twin strike does not do.

Suggestion 1
Attack: Dex +2 vs AC
Hit: Deal 1[W] damage. Your next attack gains a +2 power bonus.

Maybe that is actually making it too powerful, but such a bonus would be a kind of self-buffing that will help Rangers to get their encounters and daily through.


Suggestion 2
Both the Fighter and the Ranger ones indicate some kind of care/safety, so it could also improve AC.

Attack: Dex (Str for Fighter) + 2 vs AC
Hit: Deal 1[W] damage. You gain a +2 power bonus to AC until the start of your next turn. (Or +2 power bonus to AC and Reflex Defense)

It might actually be too powerful for a Defender in this variant, since as a Defender you are fine with not dealing that much damage, as long as you can take the enemy attacks. So, if you keeping an Elite or Solo at bay, this choice might be far more interesting then Reaping Strike, Cleave or Tide of Iron.

Maybe in both cases, a reduction to a +1 bonus can make them fair.

 

[WhatGravitas]

A possible "fix" would be ignoring cover and concealment for the attack (though not total cover or concealment). It keeps the feel of being a very precise attack and can get very good (effectively a +6 if the target has cover and concealment), but only situationally.

Cheers, LT.

 

[szilard]

Careful Strike, on the other hand, is so awful nobody in our group would touch it with a 10 foot pole. It would be decent if you added your ability modifier to damage, but a measly +2 hit is not worth giving that up. I can't really think of any situation where I'd use Careful Strike over Twin Strike, or even a basic attack, for that matter!

It is good when you need to kill a minion.

It is also worthwhile for trick shots of various sorts.

-Stuart

 

[Stalker0]

It is good when you need to kill a minion.

It is also worthwhile for trick shots of various sorts.

-Stuart

Twin Strike has higher accuracy than careful shot, so its even better at killing minions.

Yep Twin Strike does indeed slice, dice, and make coleslaw!

 

[The Digger]

I really do not understand the animosity levelled at Careful Strike. I have read a lot of threads on this website - especially those dealing with various attacks and feats and the one thing which seems to be repeated ad nauseam
"4e does not give many bonuses to hit so take them when you can"
One example being the +2 to hit for Blade Opportunist.

What does it matter what damage an attack or power does if it does not hit! I would rather have +2 to hit and +0 damage than the other way - most of the time.

I must admit I have heard the same argument about the Fighter's Sure Strike and I would say the same. I have not played a ranger yet but I have played Fighters and I find I hit much more often with the +2 attack powers.

 

[Enaloindir]

Take to-hit bonuses whenever you can... *unless you give up too much for it*. Compare the following two choices: would you like to always hit for 1 point of damage, or would you prefer hitting 50% of the time for 4 damage. The second option is in fact the better one, because it amounts to 2 damage per attack.
While this comparison is very simplistic, it is the kind of analysis you need to make for Sure Strike and Careful Strike: the additional +2 attack bonus does not compensate for the loss of the ability score modifier on the damage roll once you have a halfway decent Str/Dex score.
The only redeeming factor might be some additional rider effects, such as a fighter using Sure Strike on an opportunity attack to increase his chances of stopping his foe's movement...

- Enaloindir

 

[Nifft]

I really do not understand the animosity levelled at Careful Strike. I have read a lot of threads on this website - especially those dealing with various attacks and feats and the one thing which seems to be repeated ad nauseam
"4e does not give many bonuses to hit so take them when you can"
One example being the +2 to hit for Blade Opportunist.

What does it matter what damage an attack or power does if it does not hit! I would rather have +2 to hit and +0 damage than the other way - most of the time.

I must admit I have heard the same argument about the Fighter's Sure Strike and I would say the same. I have not played a ranger yet but I have played Fighters and I find I hit much more often with the +2 attack powers.

Attack bonuses only matter if you're hitting with something cool. When looking at "uncool" (no special effect) powers like Careful Attack, all there is to consider is expected damage.

Careful Attack is worse than a Basic Attack in terms of expected damage.

Cheers, -- N

 

[mattdm]

Take to-hit bonuses whenever you can... *unless you give up too much for it*. Compare the following two choices: would you like to always hit for 1 point of damage, or would you prefer hitting 50% of the time for 4 damage. The second option is in fact the better one, because it amounts to 2 damage per attack.

If you have one round to kill a minion....

But the problem is that Twin Strike gives a better increase in your chance of hitting in all but the most extreme case, and also gives a chance of doing double damage (or hitting two foes).

The only redeeming factor might be some additional rider effects, such as a fighter using Sure Strike on an opportunity attack to increase his chances of stopping his foe's movement...

Yeah, letting it be a basic melee attack would be something.