Analysis of monster defenses

[kerbarian]

I just went through the MM and did a simple average of each defense type, counting each stat block once (my count was 488 stat blocks).

Compared to AC, the average defenses are:
Fortitude -1.39
Reflex -2.75
Will -3.30

So an attack that targets Reflex or Will is effectively giving you a +3 to hit, on average, compared to targeting AC. Attacks that target Fortitude aren't nearly as beneficial.

 

[Saitou]

Now do the mode difference for each defense.

EDIT: And separate for each monster role!

 

[kerbarian]

Now do the mode difference for each defense.

EDIT: And separate for each monster role!

The mode differences are easy enough, though I'm not sure how useful they are:
Fortitude -2
Reflex -2
Will -3

I've thought about doing some analysis by role, elite/solo, tier, etc., but that will take me a little longer.

 

[Khaim]

A better analysis would be a comparison of AC/Defenses to level, by role. Note that the DMG gives a formula, which may or may not be accurate: level + 12 for F/R/W, level + 16 for soldier AC, level + 12 for brute/artillery AC, level + 14 for other AC.

 

[keterys]

It felt like Fortitude is pretty swingy... like you'll have mobs that are 4 lower for Fort, and mobs that are 4 _higher_.

 

[Blackbrrd]

So, the conclusion is that using a +3 proficiency weapon like longsword and attacking AC or using a power that attacks reflex or will gives about the same to-hit chance without a weapon. Using a power that attacks fortitude without a weapon is at a -2 penalty.

The rogue is the only character with at-will weapon powers targeting reflex or will:
Piercing Strike (weapon) dex vs will

The warlord has one power but it targets fortitude:
Furious Smash (weapon) str vs fort

The rogue is probably going to be the character that hits most consistently. A typical rogue who is attacking with a dagger and has a dex of 18 gets a +8 to hit with piercing strike against reflex. A comparable fighter with str 18 gets a +8 to hit against ac.

Let say an average level 1 mob has a AC of 16 and a reflex of 13. The fighter would hit 65% of the time, while the rogue hits 80% of the time.

If you take the hobgoblin soldiers instead, you get ac 20 and reflex 16. The fighter would hit 45% of the time, while the rogue hits 65% of the time.

Looking closer at the rules from the DMG, it says that:
Brutes&Artillery have the same baseline for ac/defences
Skirmisher, Lurker & Controller have +2 ac compared to defenses
Soldier has +4 ac compared to defenses.
This is then again modified by stats.

In other words, it is important to attack the appropriate target for max to-hit chance. Under no circumstances should you attack a soldier with a power targeting AC! The same probably goes for targeting fortitude due to high str/con which enhances fortitude defence.

Using for instance piercing strike against a striker isn't necessarily a good choice, a power targeting fortitude or will would probably work better.

Questions you might want to ask before attacking:
Does it look squishy? It probably has a low fortitude defense
Does it look agile? Don't target reflex
Does it look slugish? Target reflex
etc..

It is probably just as important to protect your allies weak spots. Don't let the soldier attack your wizard! This is where the fighters mark and the paladins mark come into play.