Why is Firestorm the best 19th level control spell?

[Mongolia Jones]

Sure. Allow me to make amendments:

2 Encounters. 1 Daily Each, all Encounter powers; cannot be the same Daily unless the class features provide for it. Nondamaging Dailies can be used between Encounters

50% miss rate
Damage only, status effects not in evidence
Bolstering Blood used max but only 4 times an encounter (compromise)
Bolstering Blood works as written, triggering once for each instance of damage
Round effects counted, damage only
Extended damage counted for 3 rounds, +20% for Wizard Spell Focus
Minor action extension must be accounted for, can be done until all powers expended (but cannot artificially prolong rounds to increase damage)
Basic Items only.


In truth, I'm already ceding a lot here, but let's run with this. You sure about this, though? These are the rules as they are, but they heavily favor Wizard damage to the tune of 1 Orcus, nearly.

2x Encounters each, check
1x Dailies each, check
Non-damage dailies between, check

So that there's less confusion let's do damage in encounter 1 (choosing whatever dailies you want), rest, use non-damaging dailies, then do damage in encounter 2 (choosing the remaining dailies).

Bolstering Blood
My feeling about this power is that it would apply damage once, per opponent, per casting of power.

"When the power you use damages the target, you deal extra psychic damage equal to the damage you dealt to yourself"

It doesn't matter if you damage an opponent with just fire, or fire and poison. It just matters that you damage the opponent. Considering how quarry, sneak attack, and curse work, I'm pretty sure the devs meant for this to work just once per casting of power.

We can always start a new thread and ask the community, alas, you may be right and I may be wrong.

Extended (or "Save or else" damage)
You said: "Extended damage counted for 3 rounds, +20% for Wizard Spell Focus"

btw, Spell Focus: +2 on d20 is +10%, not +20%

I'll do one better, for your Wizard (save on 12+ d20) lets say you affect opponent for 3 rounds, and my cleric (save on 10+ on d20) affects them for 2 rounds.

Math: Cleric casts a save or damage spell, assume 100 opponents, (55% save per round)
Round 1: cleric damages 100 opponents (55% make save, they will not be damaged next round)
Round 2: cleric damages 45 (55% of them save)
Round 3: cleric damages 20 (55% of them save)
Round 4: cleric damages 9 (55% of them save)
Round 6: cleric damages 4 (55% of them save)
Round 7: cleric damages 2 (55% of them save)
Round 8: cleric damages 1 (end)
Total rounds of damage: 181 rounds of damage per 100 opponents
For Cleric, thats 1.81 rounds per opponent (so we round up to 2 rounds)

Doing the same math for the Wizard, (45% save per round), yields 222 rounds of damage per 100.
For Wizard, thats 2.22 rounds per opponent (so we round up to 3 rounds)

Better deal for wizard.. bigger round-up...

Minor action extension
You said: "Minor action extension must be accounted for, can be done until all powers expended"

Agreed, but lets account for all our actions (standard, move, minor) per round. That way no one will be able to run 3+ minors in any given round.

Still, I'd like to limit minor extended AoE powers to a set number of rounds (maybe 5?) as combat is movement fluid and combatants may move to a different area than where the damaging AoE is located.

Also, another argument for limiting for extended minors to a set number of rounds; in combat, you may very well get hit by a power that dazes you (1 action only that round), or even stuns you (no actions that turn). Obviously, those would be detrimental for keeping extended minors.

What do you think?


You said: "In truth, I'm already ceding a lot here"
I don't want you to feel like your giving up stuff thats due a wizard of 30 levels.

If there's something that you want on the table then just suggest it. After all, we want to see what a War Wizard really can do, otherwise what's the point of the contest.

If it's Bolstering Blood that's bothering you, it is difficult for me to think a wizard will damage himself for more that 50 points in any given combat, considering he has about 150+/- hit points max with all the other damage that he can potentially take during combat.

 

[Goumindong]

It doesn't matter if you damage an opponent with just fire, or fire and poison. It just matters that you damage the opponent. Considering how quarry, sneak attack, and curse work, I'm pretty sure the devs meant for this to work just once per casting of power

And then on the next round the power deals damage again....

I mean how are you going to deal with the wizard that does 4d6+2d10 damage per round for 50 rounds?[or hell, 4d6/round for 50 rounds]. Necrotic web is no action. It just continues.

The two encounter powers are likely to be Blood Pulse, and then Wall of Ice as an Encounter power(hello archmage).

Necrotic Web will be used twice(archmage again, otherwise if you end up with the power left you aren't really considered using it). And since its damage and not damage over time from the same source, you are looking at 8d6+4d10 per round, automatic, with no save, and no sustain necessary.

Blood pulse will be used then the wizard will thunder wave them into the wall of ice so that they start their turn there. The blood pulse will do 2d6+8d6(plus any other movement), and the wall of ice will do 2d6+2d10+8+6 damage/round about 90% of the time(Its tough to figure when the save ends on the immob they take while in the two necrotic webs by the chance they will get thunderwaved back to the ice wall.

So for a rough estimate you are looking at 82 damage/round before considering anything else the wizard does[another 35 damage on blood pulse, taking the second wind will deal another 10 damage or so with 5 damage ongoing, so 3 rounds is 15 damage].

So 88 damage/round +2d6+int+6 round from your at will. Plus 35 from the blood pulse plus 45 from your second wind. Ignoring the 4d6+2d10 for the initial necrotic webs, but adding in the int and implement bonus that is 109 damage/round plus 114 damage.

Over 10 rounds that averages 120 damage/round per enemy.

ed: The above is in error, you only get 1 necrotic web since the zone overlaps(wall are a conjuration and does not, and you could use wall of fire/wall of ice with necrotic as your daily to get what i am listing above minus 3.5 average and about 20 damage from the extra necrotic web hit). Which means while you can do this 2 encounters/day, you only get 84 damage/round total and some 900 damage to all enemies over 10 rounds.

 

[Mongolia Jones]

Goumindong:

I was gonna to deal with you tomorrow, but you just rub me the wrong way. *Sex with wife will have to wait*


1) As far as stunned opponents go, you cannot coup de grace them!!

2) Post #170, you said: "You need to hit with firestorm to do damage" - No you don't!!

3) Post #170, you said: "ewar" and "ECM" - I get the analogy, but this is not EvE-Online, others are reading our posts, stick with DnD terminology.

4) Post #174, you said: "What damage from enemy fire? We are going to be stunning them every other round, what are they going to do, drool on the wizard?" - Unless you can hit 100% of the time (i.e. roll 11+ on d20 all the time), you will not stun everyone.

5) Post #174, you said: "That is not the way [Bolstering Blood] works. It triggers each time the effect does damage" - Wrong again, it only works on the initial cast of the power. This has been answered and demonstrated numerous times in wizard builds on the WoTC boards. http://forums.gleemax.com/forumdisplay.php?f=889

6) Post #174, you said: "...as evidenced by my two round combo that lays to waste your 4 round combo" - Please point to said two round combo. I never posted a 4 round combo... showing what Fire Storm can do on it's own for 4 rounds, a combo does not make.

7) Post #179, you said: "...lots of AoE damage is not all that valuable so long as you do 1 damage" - This is a joke, right?

8) Post #183, Zurai said: "AoE, it adds up to a significant portion of all the damage dealt in an encounter" - to which you answered: "Not really, no." - Your so misguided. In a few days, both Roxlimn and I will demonstrate what AoE warriors can really do. I'll deal with your and DemonLord57's striker soon enough.

9) Post #197, you said: "You have to figure that nearly each and every hit by a wizard power at later levels is going to result in a coup-de-grace..." - Wrong, see answer to #1 above.

10) Post #200, you said: "People do not complain that Bigby's crushing hand is overpowered because it grants combat advantage" - Firstly there is no Bigby's Crushing Hand, only Icy Grasp and Grasping Hands. And they do not grant CA.

11) Post #218, you said: "90 damage to a single target is ~twice as strong than 90 damage spread amongst three targets." - I will agree with you here

12) Post #220, you said: "Did you even bother to read the post above the one you just let off?" - yes, believe it or not, I read most of your posts, I just don't usually agree, as I will demonstrate in the next points coming up.

13) Post #220, you said: "11 average damage/round to a bunch of enemies is not spectacular as a daily." - You are referring to Fire Storm I assume, it's damage per round (after the big initial blast) at 19th is 18.5, not 11.

14) Post #220, you said: "[Rangers vs. clerics/wizards hitting opponent's] is easier to get due to proficiency (+3)" - No!! AC is typically higher than the other defenses. Cleric AoE typically hits Ref Def, which is usually much lower than AC. (Examples: Ice Devil ac36 ref31, Fire Giant ac34 ref28, Human Mage ac17 ref14, Tarrasque ac43 ref38, Orcus ac48 ref46)

Advice: Just stick with the 50/50 hit/miss rule, it works.

15) Post #220, you said: "So, lets assume [the ranger] gets an average of 1 opportunity attack every round..." - For over a year of our DnD 3.0/3.5 gaming we did not have more than 1 or 2 OA per member per encounter, if any. OA are harder to come by in 4e than 3e, they toned them way down. Secondly, the typical 19th level encounter offers many large+ sized opponents. That means reach 2+. You will be the one more likely getting OA'd not them. Plus with all the slides, pushes, and teleports, at 19th level, it's easy for opponents to get around. Thirdly, enemy fighters and brutes (many with reach 2+) aren't going to run away from you (which usually triggers OA), they will run at you.

Note: Don't count on getting OA in any large frequency in 4e, it's not going to happen.

16) Post #220, you said: "[Twin Strike] will land 95% of the time each round" - Using the 50/50 rule, Twin Strike will land at least 75% (25% two attacks hit, 50% one attack hits, 25% all miss)

17) Post #220, you said: "[Slasher's Mark] gives us a single attack and then a secondary attack each round until the end of the encounter" - No it it doesn't. Marking makes it so the Marker gets an AO on the Markee only if the Markee targets someone other than the Marker. Fighters who mark get aggro, hence the defender role. If a ranger wants aggro, mark away, but I wouldn't recommend it, your a striker, not a defender. Use this power if the defender is down and you want to keep aggro off the wizard.

18) Post #220, you said: "Criticals happen 1/20 attacks" - Leave crits out of the math, everyone crits, not just rangers, and it just complicates the math. Besides, AoE warriors roll more to-hits than strikers, you don't wanna go down that road.

In conclusion:
I have no problem comparing damage potential with your 19th level ranger or wizard, once we fix all your custom house rules, like the OA's-r-us, Coup de Grace on demand, and the Bolstering Blood exploits.

I could have picked on you more, maybe 25 points in all, but it's late, and I'm feeling merciful.

If I misunderstood any of your previous points, forgive me as it's late.

g-nite.

 

[Puggins]

Goumindong:

I was gonna to deal with you tomorrow, but you just rub me the wrong way. *Sex with wife will have to wait*

Well, I'm not Goumindong, but I'll respond, mostly because this is a bizarre argument. Fire Storm is indeed one of the best AE spells in the game at 19th. It is replaced by Elemental Maw at 25th, which keeps the mantle even once you take 29th level spells into account.

Still, I agree with you- Firestorm is the single most damaging AE spell in the game at 19th. How it translates into the best control spell, is what I disagree about. You and a couple of your allies are harping on WotC's mention of AE damage as the definition of control. People recognized that definition as fallacious even before 4e was released, and there was a good deal of fear that 4e would remove what truly made wizards into the control specialists they were in 3.x: the ability to take away actions from the enemy.

Thankfully, it turned out that the definition released by that specific designer was inaccurate and incomplete- Wizards did indeed keep the control elements that made them so powerful in the hands of a knowledgeable player in 3.5e.

So wizards can be out-damaged by clerics in AE. This is nothing new- high level clerics had better AE damage that wizards in 3.5e using spells like... well, look at that-fire storm! Clerics, however, couldn't out-control the wizard, who could use the old force cage, Otto's Dance and similar spells to incapacitate powerful monsters. Thus, there was legitimate argument over whether the Batman Wizard or CODzilla really ruled the roost.

You are trying to narrow the definition to a specific type of control and then claiming that Clerics are better controllers than wizards because clerics excel at the particular brand of control. You can't lose this argument if you are at all competent, because you are rigging the entire comparison. If you disregard the fact that Elemental Maw leaves melee specialists virtually worthless for one round and everyone else virtually immobilized and rearranged to your taste, then Astral Storm is only marginally- if at all- worse. Once you
factor the fact that it leaves opponents prone, dazed and teleported virutally anywhere on the battlefield, though, Elemental Maw becomes much, much better than a Cleric spell that is four levels above it.

You cannot ignore the other control elements, mostly because none of us truly know just how the "typical" high level battle will play out- we simply don't have enough evidence. Discounting pure control elements or damage may actually work in the long run, once we know how epic play works, but it's foolish to make sweeping generalizations like "control is just playing footsie." If 3.5e control is any indication of how important such spells as Evard's will be in 4e, you may wind up regretting ever posting that.

 

[DemonLord57]

...Thus, there was legitimate argument over whether the Batman Wizard or CODzilla really ruled the roost....

And that was mostly due to Divine Metamagic cheese. Or the Cheater of Mystra. Without that, clerics were still much better than any non-casting class, but didn't get as ridiculous as wizards, IMO. Druids were the most ridiculously overpowered class in 3.5, IMO, especially with Planar Shepherd.

(DM: ok, combat starts
Druid: I get 10 rounds for one, so I cast a few save or dies... anyone left? If so, I sic my pet Fighter on them. (Fleshraker Dinosaur) Then go hit them myself, because I'm already a Fleshraker. Oh, and while I'm at it, I might as well summon an Efreeti for some free Wishes.
DM: wtf...)

 

[Roxlimn]

Mongolia Jones:

2x Encounters each, check
1x Dailies each, check
Non-damage dailies between, check

Nono. That's not what I meant. I meant we expend all encounter powers and 1 daily for each of 2 Encounters. Obviously, you can't use the same daily for those two encounters. This simulates the exhaustion of dailies as the day wears on. You can use Astral Storm only once a day, after all.

It doesn't matter if you damage an opponent with just fire, or fire and poison. It just matters that you damage the opponent. Considering how quarry, sneak attack, and curse work, I'm pretty sure the devs meant for this to work just once per casting of power.

We can always start a new thread and ask the community, alas, you may be right and I may be wrong.

That's not correct at all. It says, "When you damage an opponent with a power, you deal damage to the target equal to the damage you dealt yourself."

When you hit with a power twice, you damage an opponent twice and each of those is an instance of damaging an opponent with a power. It doesn't specify that you only apply the damage once a round, which is specified in other powers that are limited in just such a fashion, such as Sneak Attack.

You said: "Extended damage counted for 3 rounds, +20% for Wizard Spell Focus"

btw, Spell Focus: +2 on d20 is +10%, not +20%

I'll do one better, for your Wizard (save on 12+ d20) lets say you affect opponent for 3 rounds, and my cleric (save on 10+ on d20) affects them for 2 rounds.

Amusingly enough, 120% of 1.81 is 2.172, which is close enough to your result of 2.22. Spell Focus extends save effects by about 20% because save effects have a 45% base chance of continuing. 10% is 22% of 45% so that's how much more effect the save ends condition gets.

Obviously, this gets better if the opponent gets better saves. A Solo has +5 to saves so save ends effects only have a 20% chance of continuing. For Solos, Spell Focus extends the possible duration by 50% (because 10% is 50% of 20%) - not that that gets noticed much because of granularity.

This is why people THINK that Orb Impedance is broken. With a Wis of 20 and Spell Focus, Orbs improve the success chances of save conditions by 35% - That's a 275% improvement over 20%

Anyways, 3 rounds is okay.

You said: "Minor action extension must be accounted for, can be done until all powers expended"

Agreed, but lets account for all our actions (standard, move, minor) per round. That way no one will be able to run 3+ minors in any given round.

Still, I'd like to limit minor extended AoE powers to a set number of rounds (maybe 5?) as combat is movement fluid and combatants may move to a different area than where the damaging AoE is located.

Also, another argument for limiting for extended minors to a set number of rounds; in combat, you may very well get hit by a power that dazes you (1 action only that round), or even stuns you (no actions that turn). Obviously, those would be detrimental for keeping extended minors.

What do you think?

That's reasonable. 5 rounds seems too many, I think, especially for a Cleric, since he'll typically have better things to do with minor actions - like use his excellent Healing Word class feature.

By my estimates, even high level combats shouldn't be lasting much longer than 6 rounds. Postulating 5 rounds is way too much.

This points to one of the weaknesses of the Laser Cleric - he's action conflicted. He wants to heal, but he also wants to maintain Firestorm. What do you do?

You do as you think is best, but I think it's bad for the Cleric to be ignoring healing - he might as well just throw away that power. Shame.

I don't want you to feel like your giving up stuff thats due a wizard of 30 levels.

If there's something that you want on the table then just suggest it. After all, we want to see what a War Wizard really can do, otherwise what's the point of the contest.

If it's Bolstering Blood that's bothering you, it is difficult for me to think a wizard will damage himself for more that 50 points in any given combat, considering he has about 150+/- hit points max with all the other damage that he can potentially take during combat.

Well, if you really want to hear the cheese, this is how it works. It's been asked of CustServ and all we got were shocked gasps of astonishment:

Blood Pulse damages an enemy every time he leaves a sqaure. A Large opponent leaves 2 squares every time he's moved horizontally, and 3 squares every time he's moved diagonally. Each instance does damage - 1d6, but gets +2d10 also when we add in Bolstering Blood.

Thus, the combination damages an opponent 14.5 points for every square it leaves. I can hear the gasp of horror already.

We can use Orcus if you like, but it's horrid enough just with a couple of Large opponents. Cause Fear is usually the power of choice to make the opponent move (Cleric ally or multi into Cleric), but you can use Thunderwave or Thunderlance if you like, then add whatever move powers the rest of your team can do.

Let's see. Diagonal is 3 squares so that's 42.5 damage for each square pushed x 4 for the push of Thunderlance = 170 damage just for the push effect + Blood Pulse + Bolstering Blood. Damage from Thunderlance is 40 on a hit, plus Blood Pulse hit damage is itself about 33. 243 damage to a Large creature on the first round.

Yes, you can kill Orcus with this. On round 1.

Puggins:

Actually, that's not strictly true. I don't think a Laser Cleric can outdamage a Wizard in AoEs. Firestorm makes up some of the advantage Wizards get in terms of Encounter Powers, but they retain advantages on the other Dailies, too.

Each one of the Wizard Paragon Paths boosts damage significantly. Battle Mage is strange because it's a Wizard who wants to be a Striker, and he can do a good semblance of it, too. Between Battle Mage Action and Action Surge, a Human can really nail a good single-target power (like Thunderclap) and then extend the duration of the status effect with Orb of Continuance (magic item, not implement mastery).

Blood Mage pimps the damage of every spell. Firestorm looks decent until you add +2d10 to each damage instance of every spell in the Wizard menu.

SpellStorm Mage gets Extra Damage Action - +10 damage at level 20, but a respectable +5 even at level 11. Warpriest matches this damage for damage, but SpellStorm Mages gets Storm Cage against Battle Cry - a poor AoE effect if you're looking for damage, and Maelstrom of Chaos vs. Battle Pyres.

You might think that Battle Pyres is a win for Warpriest until you look closer. Area is less, and the secondary effect is damage to 1 target within 5 squares. Sustaining this damage is a Standard action. In contrast, the initial impact of Maelstrom of Chaos might look less impressive until you start thinking about the truly evil things you can do by clumping all your enemies within a 21x21 square into a nice little clump.

Just look at the Encounter Powers. None of them can match a Wizard's powers for damage and status effects. Firestorm and Astral Storm are singular stars in a powers list that strike me as otherwise completely mediocre as far as AoE damage and status inflicting are concerned. You could make a Devoted Cleric that might fill in for a missing Wizard, but you're going to have to make the difference by using healing effects. In terms of completely owning enemies, the Wizard power list is extremely good.

 

[hamishspence]

Leaves a square

Large creatures take up more than one square. If they had ruled, for example, that, regardless of size, Leaves a square simply means Moves 1 square, it would be fixed: shunting Orcus a few squares gives damage for each square shunted, not for all the squares Orcus takes up.

As it stands, ruling the other way makes shunting diagonally different from shunting horizontally. Wasn't the main point of 1-1-1 that moving diagonally is no different from moving vertically?

 

[Roxlimn]

The rule is ironclad. "Leaves a square" is "leaves a square." I admit that the power combination is ridiculous and requires errata rather than clarification. For that matter, Bolstering Blood requires clarification as well. I'd hate for it to end up weaker than Extra Damage Action because you ARE taking damage to use Bolstering Blood, but I would like it to be a little clearer. Doubling up damage on Prismatic Burst or multiplying it multiple times through Evard's or even Bigby's isn't a real problem. Blood Pulse is.

 

[hamishspence]

the problem

When something large moves, they are leaving multiple squares simultaneously. And when they move diagonally, they are leaving even more squares for the same move. I'm guessing thats not the way its supposed to work, given how they have gone out of their way to make diagonals as similar as possible to straignt lines. Maybe there should be an errata for it. Or a clarification: even if you are large or larger, you can only leave one square at a time, not multiple simultaneous, for Blood Pulse purposes.

3rd ed sometimes stressed that effects that targeted multiple squares could only hit a monster once, ven if it filled multiple squares. Like Firebrand from Magic of Faerun

 

[Goumindong]

Goumindong:

I was gonna to deal with you tomorrow, but you just rub me the wrong way. *Sex with wife will have to wait*


1) As far as stunned opponents go, you cannot coup de grace them!!

yes, welcome to two pages ago.

2) Post #170, you said: "You need to hit with firestorm to do damage" - No you don't!!

No, i said you need to hit with firestorm to do significant damage. 1d10+int/round when you can't move the control area is pretty weak

3) Post #170, you said: "ewar" and "ECM" - I get the analogy, but this is not EvE-Online, others are reading our posts, stick with DnD terminology.

You get the analogy but still continue to profess how right you are? The analogy is for you, because you know you're wrong.

4) Post #174, you said: "What damage from enemy fire? We are going to be stunning them every other round, what are they going to do, drool on the wizard?" - Unless you can hit 100% of the time (i.e. roll 11+ on d20 all the time), you will not stun everyone.

And the rest get sucked up by the defenders(or get wasted by an inevitably continued destructive salutation)

6) Post #174, you said: "...as evidenced by my two round combo that lays to waste your 4 round combo" - Please point to said two round combo. I never posted a 4 round combo... showing what Fire Storm can do on it's own for 4 rounds, a combo does not make.

Please read the thread. Also you have no 4 round combos to pull off.

7) Post #179, you said: "...lots of AoE damage is not all that valuable so long as you do 1 damage" - This is a joke, right?

No, most AoE damage is only valuable to the point where it kills minions. Many minions have resistances to damage types, such a high amount of damage on those is only really valuable if its going to pierce the resistances of the minion where as a lower damage spell will not.

10) Post #200, you said: "People do not complain that Bigby's crushing hand is overpowered because it grants combat advantage" - Firstly there is no Bigby's Crushing Hand, only Icy Grasp and Grasping Hands. And they do not grant CA.

Only if you do not know how to use them.

13) Post #220, you said: "11 average damage/round to a bunch of enemies is not spectacular as a daily." - You are referring to Fire Storm I assume, it's damage per round (after the big initial blast) at 19th is 18.5, not 11.

How do you get a 13 for your wisdom modifier?

14) Post #220, you said: "[Rangers vs. clerics/wizards hitting opponent's] is easier to get due to proficiency (+3)" - No!! AC is typically higher than the other defenses. Cleric AoE typically hits Ref Def, which is usually much lower than AC. (Examples: Ice Devil ac36 ref31, Fire Giant ac34 ref28, Human Mage ac17 ref14, Tarrasque ac43 ref38, Orcus ac48 ref46)

Sometimes yes, sometimes no, more powers reduce AC than others IIRC.

15) Post #220, you said: "So, lets assume [the ranger] gets an average of 1 opportunity attack every round..." - For over a year of our DnD 3.0/3.5 gaming we did not have more than 1 or 2 OA per member per encounter, if any. OA are harder to come by in 4e than 3e, they toned them way down. Secondly, the typical 19th level encounter offers many large+ sized opponents. That means reach 2+. You will be the one more likely getting OA'd not them. Plus with all the slides, pushes, and teleports, at 19th level, it's easy for opponents to get around. Thirdly, enemy fighters and brutes (many with reach 2+) aren't going to run away from you (which usually triggers OA), they will run at you.

Its much much much easier to get OAs in 4e. You can make one per enemy per round. You don't need any dex modifier to do it. The main thing keeping OAs down in 3e were

1. People would only use one or two big monsters because no one wants to deal with multiple enemy combats.

2. Characters could only OA once per round which means that once a character had spent his anyone could keep going through it.

16) Post #220, you said: "[Twin Strike] will land 95% of the time each round" - Using the 50/50 rule, Twin Strike will land at least 75% (25% two attacks hit, 50% one attack hits, 25% all miss)

That is not what I said. I said that Hunters Quarry will land 95% of the time each round, because twin strike, landing 65% of the time for each hit, and the secondary attack from the daily the ranger used mean that at a 35% hit rate you will hit at least once 95% of the time(and quarry is handed after all rolls are made)

18) Post #220, you said: "Criticals happen 1/20 attacks" - Leave crits out of the math, everyone crits, not just rangers, and it just complicates the math. Besides, AoE warriors roll more to-hits than strikers, you don't wanna go down that road.

No AoE do no roll more to-hits than strikers, at least, not compared to rangers. You roll a bunch of to-hits once and then do nothing. Strikers keep rolling these to hits on multiple high damaging powers. Their at wills do more damage than you do with most of your powers(and even more when they crit since they get to apply their now maximized sneak/quarry/curse damage to that crit and you do not)

Blood Pulse damages an enemy every time he leaves a sqaure. A Large opponent leaves 2 squares every time he's moved horizontally, and 3 squares every time he's moved diagonally. Each instance does damage - 1d6, but gets +2d10 also when we add in Bolstering Blood.

Thus, the combination damages an opponent 14.5 points for every square it leaves. I can hear the gasp of horror already.

Not quite. Blood Pulse damages an enemy every for every square he leaves, not every time it leaves a square(though its easy to understand when custserv was answering the question of why it was worded the way it was). Since powers happen "instantaneously" It will only deal that damage at the end of each move. A bolstered blood pulse onto a diagonally pushed large monster for 8 squares of movement will only do 24d6+2d10 and NOT 24d26+16d10

Of course if you want to get really technical and pendantic you would blood pulse, then action point an Elemental Maw 2 squares from the things head, it pulls him 2 squares in[6d6], then you drop him 20 squares above and adjacent to you(or over a cliff). It leaves 4 squares each movement and so takes 76d6 on the fall, then you thunderwave him at the end for another 24d6[if you're really pendantic its 12d6 for the first movement, and 48d6 for the thunderwave(for 476 average damage.

Now, bolstering bloodpulse is not a bad idea because everyone and their mother can stack on some forced movement powers for another 2d10, and the enemies will want to move themselves and so with a 5 person party you can run upwards of 6-7 forced movements against an enemy for another 12-14d10 damage on top of the movement damage from the blood pulse.