Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6903034" data-attributes="member: 6787650">That's not a bad move, but the cost is high and the payoff is only moderate. Against a Str 20 Paladin, he's got a 62% chance of success per contest (assuming Blur instead of Foresight). Against a Str 16 Paladin, 70% chance of success per contest (w/ Blur). If he uses both attacks to grapple/prone the paladin, he has a 49% chance of having a grappled/prone paladin at the end of his turn**, which will raise his chances of hitting at least once on his following turn from 1% up to around 10%. The Storm Giant has improved his physical attacks from "totally futile" to merely "hopelessly outclassed."If the Paladin is using Foresight as mentioned originally instead of Quickened Blur, it's even worse. Odds go down to 56%^2 = 31% against the Str 16 Paladin, or 46% = 21% against the Str 20 Paladin. That's practically back in the "totally futile" bucket.Yes, Levitate and Lightning Strike are better, but if you have to give up on physical attacks and switch to magic, that means you've already conceded the point about AC.** I'm sure you know that technically, it is illegal for a RAW Storm Giant to grapple/prone in the same turn, because it doesn't have Extra Attack. (Multiattack only specifically allows you to make two Greatsword attacks--not two grapples, or a grapple and a push, or two boulders, or anything else. Only two greatsword attacks.) I think most DMs including myself would ignore that technicality and allow the Storm Giant to grapple/prone as if it did have two attacks, but it would technically be a customization.</blockquote>

Verification