December Rules Update Available

[Joshua Randall]

Darn it. Now my level 7 RPGA character suddenly has a level 11 item.... can I sell it for profit?

Healer's Sash was always an 11th level item that could always be sold (assuming your LFR PC was at least 7th level) for 20% of its value, just like any other item.

 

[Mengu]

Yep, found it. At static bonus 0, it gives the nod to Careful for when you need a 16-21 with Twin Strike. At static bonus 2, it's 17-21. At 6, it's 18-21. If I bump things up to 12 static, d12 base damage die, 2d8 quarry, +7 Dex, I still end up with 18-21.

So that's a _much_ better situation than it used to be, even if I still wouldn't bother

Huh, I did d10 weapon, +2 static (assumptions +1 magic weapon, +1 focus), 1d8 quarry, and I'm getting twin strike still better every time except when I would need a 19-22, and Careful Attack would hit on 17-20.

Twin strike need / DPR || Careful Attack need / DPR
23+ / 1.18875 || 21+ / 0.8
22 / 1.18875 || 20 / 1.375
21 / 1.18875 || 19 / 2.175
20 / 2.33 || 18 / 2.975
19 / 3.49625 || 17 / 3.775
18 / 4.64 || 16 / 4.575
17 / 5.75125 || 15 / 5.375

I could be doing something wrong somewhere...

It still doesn't look like Careful Attack will get much use, unless you have some condition like gain +5 damage on your next attack roll from a leader. Or maybe the target has some form of fire shield that makes you take 10 damage every time you hit it, then Careful Attack may come in handy. Or if the target is a goblin who will shift away from you if you miss, Careful Attack again may yield better results. But generally, Twin Strike still outperforms it in the more sensible hit target range.

 

[Drakhar]

Ok Footwork Lure has now become a badly written power in regards to reach weapons. They either need to change the shift to just 1 square or remove the into the space you left at the end.

 

[Elric]

Huh, I did d10 weapon, +2 static (assumptions +1 magic weapon, +1 focus), 1d8 quarry, and I'm getting twin strike still better every time except when I would need a 19-22, and Careful Attack would hit on 17-20.

Twin strike need / DPR || Careful Attack need / DPR
23+ / 1.18875 || 21+ / 0.8
22 / 1.18875 || 20 / 1.375
21 / 1.18875 || 19 / 2.175
20 / 2.33 || 18 / 2.975
19 / 3.49625 || 17 / 3.775
18/ 4.64 || 16 / 4.575
17 / 5.75125 || 15 / 5.375

I could be doing something wrong somewhere...

I get the same thing (assuming +4 Str/Dex). With a +5 Str/Dex, though, Careful comes out ahead when Twin Strike needs an 18.

Change Hunter's Quarry to 1d6 as well and they're basically equal when Twin Strike needs a 17 to hit.

It's not going to replace Twin Strike, and only rarely comes out ahead even at low levels, but at least it's not so uniformly terrible.

 

[Cadfan]

Its useful for rangers with animal companions who don't want to use two weapons.

 

[Drakhar]

Its useful for rangers with animal companions who don't want to use two weapons.

Except that you need to be using two weapons or a ranged weapon like almost every other ranger power.

 

[BobTheNob]

For very low damage bonus values, Careful Attack is actually looking an awful lot better than it was. Wonder if I still have that spreadsheet for comparing the two hanging around, hmm.

I have done som quick number crunching, and (IMO) it is still an inferior option. I am glad they fixed it though, but twin strike is just so good, there is little you could do to get it close without going over the top.

Mind you, if they had more enemies that could resist normal damage, twin strike would look alot uglier....

 

[mach1.9pants]

I noticed (didn't last time) that the Dragon mags have listed errata. Does this mean if I go and re-download those mags it will have errata incorporated or will I ave to annotate my current PDFs somehow?

 

[sfedi]

The problem is Twin Strike's duplication of static damage.

That's the root of the problem.

Get rid of that, and you fix it.

 

[SabreCat]

Ok Footwork Lure has now become a badly written power in regards to reach weapons. They either need to change the shift to just 1 square or remove the into the space you left at the end.

Yeah, that's downright strange. Would "shift 1 square and pull the enemy into the space you left" be a better wording maybe?