10 or better to hit period

[Sadrik]

What about this variant:

You hit AC with a '10' or better.
You hit other defenses with an '8' or better.
And '20' still crits, of course.

This simple change that changes quite a lot. It is a cut to the chase idea, what was all the math attempting to do and it does it without calculating at all.

Modifiers to hit via combat advantage, range or abilities/powers still apply. Feat bonuses would not (or if you really do like the bonus to hit feats keep them).

Why:
1. The math was worked so that players should be doing this or thereabouts in the RAW but it fails in areas and overcompensates in others.
2. It makes having maxed out stats less important.
3. Theoretically the party will always be fighting monsters in their narrow band of level (slightly below or above) so the differences are not worth the extra math consideration.
4. Defenses do not need to be calculated. Let me repeat, defenses do not need to be calculated. It solves a main concern of mine with 4e: stat polarity. Dumping one stat to maximize another in the three pairs creates so less than organic characters (smart or quick, strong or tough, wise or charismatic).
5. Simplicity and elegance. How easy is it to tell your new player that you hit on a 10+? No worries about calculating defenses or attack modifiers and it falls in line with the save system too...

Some interesting effects:
1. The biggest change is, it is as easy to hit a commoner minion as a demon prince. I don't see this as a problem because with level advancements damage should be going up and a demon prince has a couple more hit points.
2. It makes wearing armor a style thing. I am quite sure that this will be the most unpopular thing with this idea. I personally am not bothered by this.
3. Magic weapons and implement bonuses only add to damage now.
4. Proficiency weapon bonus is ignored making certain weapons that got +3 sub par. Bump the damage up by a die type or give them brutal 1 or something. Not a difficult fix.
5. Some monsters have really high defenses in certain areas. This is a simple remedy, give a penalty to hit them with Fortitude attacks or whatever the defense may be.

 

[Kingreaper]

So, there are no longer monsters that are harder or easier to hit? No longer players who are more or less accurate? No longer enemies where targeting one defense is superior to targeting another defense?

This is going to alter an awful lot of balance considerations. And honestly, to me, it loses a lot of flavour. I mean, why is that big bruisers reflex just as good as the smart, fast, little warrior?

EDIT: Oh, it seems you noted that in 5. Well, in that case, I've got less trouble with it, but I still wouldn't use it, it cuts the options down significantly IMO.


However, it does inspire me to wonder about a fix for the saves issue:

What if you based the save on the average (or the sum) of the two modifiers, not the higher of the two? How much would that affect things?

 

[Sadrik]

I still wouldn't use it, it cuts the options down significantly IMO.

Care to explain? What options are being shorn?

 

[Kingreaper]

Care to explain? What options are being shorn?

Do I go for the stat that helps me hit, or the start that grants cool effects (cool effects *duh*)

Do I go for the feat that gives me + to my defenses when I'm doing X (no, it doesn't work)

Do I try and give my character reasonable reflexes, or concentrate on my raw power and try and avoid Vs. Reflex opponents.

Stuff like that.

Oh, and, "do I go for the enemy I'm more likely to hit, or do I go for the one I'm more likely to take out if I do hit"

If that stuff doesn't appeal to your group, then the system will work fine.
It just wouldn't be for me

 

[Nifft]

I was expecting this to be a d02 joke thread.

One thing that players seem to like is meeting the same foe (or type of foe) they had trouble with two levels ago, but now they totally kick his ass because they're two levels higher. You might want some way to model that.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Sadrik]

Do I go for the stat that helps me hit, or the start that grants cool effects (cool effects *duh*)

Do I try and give my character reasonable reflexes, or concentrate on my raw power and try and avoid Vs. Reflex opponents.

The prime stat offers a damage bonus for your powers, which in my opinion is very valuable. So it is not always as simple as plugging stat points into your secondary stats over your prime. I do think that this frees up your stats from having to be an 18 or 20 in most characters to be valid.

Do I go for the feat that gives me + to my defenses when I'm doing X (no, it doesn't work)

+defense and +offense feats could theoretically stick around if you like them. I think a major concern for some is with the math and this fixes it without using those feats or forcing them if you will.

Oh, and, "do I go for the enemy I'm more likely to hit, or do I go for the one I'm more likely to take out if I do hit"

This one is a very valid concern with the idea. If it is tactically the same to attack every monster on the table with the same odds what is the point, right? I suppose it distills the tactics down to can I drop this opponent with my hit. So, how many HP a creature has is more important than if I hit or not. That can be a good thing. Less tactical complexity.

Before you were looking at two things: odds to hit and HP opponent has and then determining where your attack would have the most effect. Now you look at only one of those two things when targeting your attack.

 

[Sadrik]

One thing that players seem to like is meeting the same foe (or type of foe) they had trouble with two levels ago, but now they totally kick his ass because they're two levels higher. You might want some way to model that.

Well, they would have +1 to hit those opponents from last time (+1/2 level). More importantly they will have new powers to crush them with. They still have the new powers. The +1 to hit is a casualty of this idea. +1 to hit is really not that big a deal, anyway, is it?

 

[Sadrik]

I was expecting this to be a d02 joke thread.

What is a d02 joke thread?

 

[eriktheguy]

does the same apply for monster's attacks?

 

[eriktheguy]

I was seriously considering a variant in which ability scores did not affect hit-chances or defenses. It was kind of like 2nd ed (when only the most exterme scores affected combat, and extreme scores were rare).
I never bothered with it because it would be way too much of a pain to implement and balance.
Your idea solves the balance issue (sorta) but destroys half the options in the game (armor, shields, swords suck, some feats). Everyone may as well go with a 2-handed weapon or 2 one handed weapons.
Characters that choose shield builds (some fighters) for their specific defensive powers get penalized most heavily.