Careful Attack/Sure Strike: A mathematical analysis

[KarinsDad]

Nah. You get at least two at-will powers. Twin Strike is only one of them.

Careful Attack just needs to be able to compete against the other one.

You won't see smart Strength-based Clerics without Righteous Brand, ever, even after we get a book with more Divine at-will powers.

You missed the point.

Sure, Str based Clerics will take Righteous Brand. But, Wisdom based ones might not.

Not all Clerics take Righteous Brand. The Cleric in our group, for example, does not have it.


All Rangers take True Strike.

Out of the At Will Ranger powers, Careful Attack is the only one that does not bring an extra special ability to the table. And Careful Attack is SO bad that it needs to be rebalanced. Hence, Careful Attack should be the power to directly compete with True Strike so that all Rangers do not automatically take True Strike.


True Strike is not balanced if every Ranger takes it. There needs to be a competing power.

 

[Nifft]

Sure, Str based Clerics will take Righteous Brand. But, Wisdom based ones might not.

Right. Which of those was I talking about in my post regarding Strength-based Clerics?

All Rangers take True Strike.

Yes. And all Warlocks have Eldritch Blast. And that's okay.

True Strike is not balanced if every Ranger takes it. There needs to be a competing power.

No, there doesn't. Twin Strike (which I assume you meant) is one of the top at-will powers. It is one of the powers that defines the Ranger -- a class feature disguised as a power.

We don't need more powers designed to be balanced against the top of the tier -- that's power creep, plain & simple, and these new powers won't compete against Twin Strike, they'll just make the Ranger who takes both even stronger. Bad answer.

You miss the deeper point: if Twin Strike were the only thing standing in the way of poor li'l Careful Attack, why doesn't its twin brother Sure Strike get any love? Fighters can't have Twin Strike, and they still spurn the equivalent power.

It's not Twin Strike keeping Sure Strike down. It's the fact that Sure Strike sucks, and the same is true of Careful Attack.

- - -

My proposed fix for Sure Strike is to add this line:
Effect: You gain a +2 power bonus on attack rolls until the end of your next turn.

Cheers, -- N

 

[KarinsDad]

Yes. And all Warlocks have Eldritch Blast. And that's okay.

Apples and Oranges. Eldritch Blast is a class feature.

No, there doesn't. Twin Strike (which I assume you meant) is one of the top at-will powers. It is one of the powers that defines the Ranger -- a class feature disguised as a power.

Except that Twin Strike is not a class feature.

Some players do not want two weapon for their melee Rangers. They do not want a Drizzt.

They might want a Ranger that does not double weapon or bow. How about a Ranger with a Shield?

To get that character concept, they need a Ranger damaging power that is not two weapon or two missile attacks per round, but on par with Twin Strike.

This is not just about powers. It's also about character concept.

We don't need more powers designed to be balanced against the top of the tier -- that's power creep, plain & simple, and these new powers won't compete against Twin Strike, they'll just make the Ranger who takes both even stronger. Bad answer.

Incorrect. If Twin Strike and Careful Attack are BOTH damage only powers and reasonably balanced, then they directly compete. Nobody will take both of them because everyone will want a secondary At Will that does something more than just damage.

Ranger with Careful Strike melee that does +mod damage plus Shield is equal to Ranger with Twin Strike melee. One has a better AC and Reflex, the other averages more damage.

It's only Ranger with Careful Strike Bow that does +mod damage is slightly less able than a Ranger with Twin Strike Bow.

But, that's ok. The Careful Strike melee Ranger who can also use his Careful Strike with a Bow is a reasonable concept. He focuses on melee and shield and occassionally does bow.

You miss the deeper point: if Twin Strike were the only thing standing in the way of poor li'l Careful Attack, why doesn't its twin brother Sure Strike get any love? Fighters can't have Twin Strike, and they still spurn the equivalent power.

Deeper point? Ha. Sure Strike should also be improved. It should be + mod damage. That balances it.

Cleave = Basic Attack + damage others
Reaping Strike = Basic Attack + always damages a little (except minions)
Sure Strike = Basic Attack at +2 to hit
Tide of Iron = Basic Attack plus push/shift

Sure Strike should be put on par with the other Fighter powers. No doubt about it.

It's not Twin Strike keeping Sure Strike down. It's the fact that Sure Strike sucks, and the same is true of Careful Attack.

And both should be put on par with other At Will powers.

My proposed fix for Sure Strike is to add this line:
Effect: You gain a +2 power bonus on attack rolls until the end of your next turn.

This is terrible. Sure Strike is still weaker than the other three since OAs rarely happen in a game. zzzzzzz


So after considering the Melee Ranger with Shield, I've come to the conclusion that my original assessment of making both Sure Strike and Careful Attack basic attacks at +2 to hit is totally balanced AND it's simple. There is a definitive reason to take them as a Fighter or Ranger respectively. There is no need for a bunch of other special rules.

 

[cmbarona]

This is terrible. Sure Strike is still weaker than the other three since OAs rarely happen in a game. zzzzzzz

I think you missed the point. The proposal by Nifft doesn't add to your chance to hit until the beginning of your next turn, it adds it until the end. Some people are arguing the former to make OAs stronger, but the latter, proposed by Nifft, is a different concept entirely: while you still have that bonus to hit, you can set up an encounter or daily to be more likely to hit. Hell, you can even get twice the effect as a Ranger if you use Twin Strike or any other Ranger power that allows two attacks.

Thus, your point is moot.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don´t know if someone did the math, but how do careful attack and base attack compare, when you begin with 14 strength and 14 dexterity (using bow and sword/shield combo with 16 in wisdom an cleric multiclass?)

or with 16 dex and strength?

Maybe these 2 powers can actually be useful in unconventional builds...

 

[KarinsDad]

I think you missed the point. The proposal by Nifft doesn't add to your chance to hit until the beginning of your next turn, it adds it until the end. Some people are arguing the former to make OAs stronger, but the latter, proposed by Nifft, is a different concept entirely: while you still have that bonus to hit, you can set up an encounter or daily to be more likely to hit. Hell, you can even get twice the effect as a Ranger if you use Twin Strike or any other Ranger power that allows two attacks.

Except that Rangers do not get Sure Strike, Fighters do. Fighters have very few multi-opponent attacks.

Round one: Sure Strike D8 damage +2 to hit, +2 weapon, +1 damage Weapon Focus, average damage .55*(7.5) + .05*(11) = 4.675

Round two: Come and Get It 3 opponents, 19 Str, D8 damage +2 to hit, +2 weapon, +1 damage Weapon Focus, average damage 3 * (.55*(11.5) + .05*(15)) = 21.225

Two round total: 25.9

vs.

Round one: Reaping Strike 19 Str, D8 damage, +2 weapon, +1 damage Weapon Focus, average damage .45*(11.5) + .05*(15) + .5*(2) = 6.7

Round two: Come and Get It 3 opponents, 19 Str, D8 damage, +2 weapon, +1 damage Weapon Focus, average damage 3 * (.45*(11.5) + .05*(15)) = 17.775

Two round total: 24.475

Damage is practically the same.

There are very few multi-attack Fighter powers. One has to go to Come and Get It for 4 or more opponents for such a strategy to work well. And, then it is only slightly better and it only works once per encounter this way. Using it with other Secondary Target Fighter powers results in less average damage than the Power plus Reaping Strike.

Plus, the power bonus does not stack with other PC's abilities which give a power bonus (usually +2).

Overall, it is a suboptimal way to make Sure Strike worthwhile. Granted, it can make a Daily power slightly more worthwhile, but wasting a round with a wimpy attack in order to get a slight edge the next round is not very optimal.

 

[Benly]

The point of the +2 to hit for a round wouldn't be to add up extra DPR. It would be to increase the chance of sticking the special effect from an encounter or daily.

 

[KarinsDad]

The point of the +2 to hit for a round wouldn't be to add up extra DPR. It would be to increase the chance of sticking the special effect from an encounter or daily.

Of course.

But, how helpful is that? +2 is a 10% change in result. That means that 10% of the times that it is tried, it helps. 90% of the time, nothing changes.

So, the Fighter does less damage for 10 rounds (in the example above, that's 20.25 less average damage) in order to pull off a little extra damage from an encounter or daily power along with a special once. Most encounter and utility attacks do not do 20 points of damage more than an At Will power.

And, these numbers assume that the Fighter will actually get to use an encounter or utility attack 100% of the time after using the modified Sure Strike. There are times where the extra damage of a more potent At Will would have killed the opponent. There are times where the special of a different At Will would have helped more. There are times where the Fighter is Stunned or has some other condition on the next round where he cannot follow up.

Sure, it can help on occassion. But typically, it won't. Typically, the result is that the Fighter averages less damage in the same time frame using that option which means that the party on average uses up more resources with a Fighter using such an option.

 

[Stalker0]

Of course.

But, how helpful is that? +2 is a 10% change in result. That means that 10% of the times that it is tried, it helps. 90% of the time, nothing changes.

So, the Fighter does less damage for 10 rounds (in the example above, that's 20.25 less average damage) in order to pull off a little extra damage from an encounter or daily power along with a special once. Most encounter and utility attacks do not do 20 points of damage more than an At Will power.

Nor do they have to do as much damage. Encounter and Daily effects tend to have powerful riders that accompanies the damage.

For example, lets say your fighter has villain's menace, and is taking on a dragon. If you have a power that gives you +2 to attack rolls and +4 to damage FOR THE ENTIRE FIGHT....you want that baby to hit like no ones business. Sure Strike granting a +2 to attack rolls would be a godsend in that instance.

A fighter might not spam sure strike every chance he got, but that's why you have 2 at-wills. It would be a setup move for the fighter, which is a nice niche for a power.

 

[WhatGravitas]

For example, lets say your fighter has villain's menace, and is taking on a dragon. If you have a power that gives you +2 to attack rolls and +4 to damage FOR THE ENTIRE FIGHT....you want that baby to hit like no ones business. Sure Strike granting a +2 to attack rolls would be a godsend in that instance.

Also, it's not like you're only making one attack per round. Fighters get some area attacks, like Sweeping Blow. When you make 3-4 attacks at once, a +2 bonus gets a lot more powerful.

Cheers. LT.