Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="auburn2" data-source="post: 8253337" data-attributes="member: 6855259">You did not demonstrate why it breaks the game as is, you are arguing the rules need to be changed, tell me why it breaks the game being an attune item.Ok like I said, buy a staff of defense.  Problem solved.  Mage Armor for the Roge at all times!Not really.  Not if you can afford 1500 gold at 5th level.I have never had mithral armor in my games.  If you have it and can get it that is a great reason for a fighter to wear it.If you are optimized for one loadout, you wil not be optimized and might be downright awful for another.Well that is a lot more stupid than using grapple.  Let's be loud so everyone hears us and we never get surprise ... even when we don't need to!Yes tradeoffs, not limfacs.Yes, you would normally use this at low level if there was a wizard in the party .....which is often, not all the time but often.It does not position the enemy where you want HIM.Unless the Rogue has advantage or is a swashbuckler an enemy can always deny SA on an AOO.  If the rogue has a threatening ally, all the bad guy has to do is pivot away from the ally (drawing an AOO from the ally) before he moves away from the rogue (drawing another AOO without SA).This assumes he failed at denying it another way, most notably by attacking the Rogue and geting him to use uncanny dodge.Unless you are playing a swashbuckler there should almost never be an AOO with SA against an intelligent enemy unless there is a condition that gives the Rogue advantage.An intelligent enemy is almost never going to move where you want him to move unless you move him there.  Why would he?  To turn this around, if you can move the enemy without forcibly moving him, then he can move you without forcibly moving you.No I don't . I was tresponding to you who said I lost two attacks if the enemy tried to run (one when I grappled, one AOO). I was pointing out I lost nothing if the enemy decides to run.It was a save cantrip. He lost an atrack to do toll toll of dead and deal more damage than he would have in an attack.I can usually survive more than 3 attacks, and if I can't I can always dodge (while grapling him) while my allies kill him.I have a higher dexterity.  Also rage does not halve all damage - go read the PHB and it doesn't halve any damage at all when he is not raging, while uncanny dodge always works (on one attack).I never said he is unscathed.Alchemists fire does on average 2.5 damage per turn until the enemy wipes it off.  Oil does 5 damage on the first turn and depending on how you use it up to 5 on the second.  Most battles do not last 4 turns, which means in general oild does more damage (although you do have to light it).Well yes and if I poured the oil it is safe to say he can't safely move around me, either because I have an ally next to me or there is something else stopping him (a wizards grease, spike growth, a wall ....)Youa re stating the obvious, if the enemy can just walk around me because of the specific map and positioning then I would not use it .... instead I woudl grapple him and hold him where he is  .... and maybe use oil the next turn.No I didn't.  Read! I assumed the Rogue had advantage 30% of the time and did NOT have advantage 70% of the time. I further assumed the Rogue did not even have sneak attack 10% of the time. That is what the numbers I posted earlier assume. If you think that is wrong, tell me what numbers I should use. I figured that was roughly representative of the average melee Rogue.I do need to point out though, if a Rogue grapples successfully in round 1 she can have at will advantage every turn thereafter until the enemy breaks the grapple (wasting an action) and forces her to move to attack him.  So I assumed 30%, but if you landed a grapple on round 1 it can be a lot higher than that.  Loss of 1 attack is a small price to pay for that, especially if she won initiative and can't use SA in round 1.A 5th level fighter with an 18 strength has a +7 attack roll.  That is what I used.You are not remembering math correctly.  With a +7 against a 19 AC the fighter has:chance of two misses - 30.25%chance of one hit without critical and one miss - 44% (ave dmg 10.5)chance of one miss and one crit is - 5.5% (ave dmg 15)chance of two hits without critical is - 16% (ave dmg 21)chance of one normal hit and one crit is - 4% (ave dmg 25.5)chance of 2 crits - 0.25% (ave dmg 30)So to reword your sentence, what I put in red corrects or qualifies what you said - that is a 69.75% chance to land at least a single blow, which will average 11.0 damage per hit. Both attack hitting is 20.25%, which leaves 30.25% chance of missing entirely.This assumes the fighter only crits on a 20.  I can do the numbers if he is a champion if you want...but not until Saturday.Actually with an 18 dexterity at level 5 against a 19AC foe advantage gives him a 69.75% chance to hit and a 30.25% chance to miss.You can't make a 3rd attack as a bonus action if you have a shield ... although a Rogue with a weapon in 1 hand potentially can.As for being less likely to miss completely - if the Rogue always gets advantage that is not true.He never hits less often.  Even if the Rogue has advantage every single turn (which is not what I posted) he still does not hit less often with his action attacks, if he does not have advantage he hits less often (as I posted above).  The difference is the Rogue deals more damage when he does hit.  My original statement was that the Rogue is "probably" doing more damage than the sword and board fighter.  I think that is an accurate statement.  There are enemies and situations that is not true, but overall I think it is.I am going to be busy tomorrow, but maybe Saturday or Sunday I will post a bar graph showing the breakdown between the two.Note:  There are two small math errors/typos in the earlier post above. I did not edit the post because I did not want you to think I changed the numbers after the fact.  First against a 15 AC foe, with the assumptions made above the chance the Rogue misses is 28% (28.175% exactly) not 24%, I think I misstyped that.  Second the median damage for a Rogue against a 19 AC foe with the assumptions noted (90% SA, 30% adv) is 9 not 8.  I solved this numerically and I did not use a small enough step.</blockquote>

Verification