Defenses and To Hits for Your Party ~ Averages

[TarionzCousin]

In short he will end up with missing a lot of attacks. Like 70% of them.

Another player and I saw the Dwarf PC's player tonight. We tried to convince him to change his Strength score. He wouldn't budge.

But I didn't have the ammunition of real math statistics that you cite in your post. I will email him and the rest of the group and we'll peer-pressure him into changing (and smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol and skipping school, etc.).

 

[monboesen]

Here are the statistical arguments.

At level 13 a “normal” dwarf fighter would be at +19 vs. AC.
I arrive at this number like this: +6 lvl, +3 enhancement, +2 proficiency, +1 fighter weapon talent, +5 ability (str 21), +2 feat (weapon expertise)
Your dwarf friend has +1 from ability (str 13) and no weapon expertise feat (I assume). Because of this he “lacks” 6 from his attack vs. AC making it +13 vs. AC.

Monsters have expected values for AC, Defenses and Attacks. Just like characters. They are:
AC: lvl +14
Defense: lvl +12
So a 13th level monster has an expected AC of 27. This means that a standard 13th level character (like our “normal” dwarf fighter) hits on a roll of 8+. That translates into a 65% hit chance and will stay that way from level 1 to level 30.
Whereas your dwarf friend hits the AC on a 14+, that’s a 35% chance of hitting. Doesn’t sound like much fun to me.
If he keeps the strength at 13 and doesn’t take weapon expertise his hit chance will drop to 30 % at level 20, 20% at level 25 and 15% at level 30.

So the problem is twofold.
The first part is that his primary ability is way way to low. At level 1 it really needs to be at least 16 and it absolutely needs to be increased at every chance (lvl 4, 8, 14, 18, 24, 28).
The other problem is the expertise feat. It seems to be a sort of math fix that keeps characters attack bonus at the expected value. Without it even normal characters slowly slide behind the curve (by 5% per tier). DM’s handle this in different ways. Some just gives out the expertise feats as bonus feats, some argue that as levels increase the characters have so many ways to grant attack bonuses to each other that it makes up for the deficit, and some adjust monster defenses (by -1 per tier).

Personally I do the last one.

 

[Obryn]

That's another good point. Give everyone free Expertise feats, and stick to the ones in the Essentials books. That will give everyone in the party a +2 to-hit, which should help a lot.

...or get the Dwarf to change from a two-handed weapon fighter to a Knight, maybe?

-O

 

[Neonchameleon]

For the record.

IME average L1 primary stat appears to be around 18 (with a lot of people liking 20s). That's +4 to hit vs NADs or +6 with +2 weapon vs AC.

Over 29 levels (to reach level 30) you gain +15 (level) +3 (expertise) +4 (stat bumps) + 6 (magic weapon/implement) + 1 (epic destiny stat bump or equivalent) = +29.

There are a handful of other +1s that can be picked up along the way such as swords or superior implements. Oh, and Combat Advantage. And class features (from L1). As for defences, one's going to lag (not getting the stat bumps of the other two).

But there is a lot of margin for error on those stats - my current party had at first level ACs of 19/19/19/14. (Fighter, Swordmage, Battlefront Leader Warlord, Wizard)

 

[MrMyth]

Another player and I saw the Dwarf PC's player tonight. We tried to convince him to change his Strength score. He wouldn't budge.

But I didn't have the ammunition of real math statistics that you cite in your post. I will email him and the rest of the group and we'll peer-pressure him into changing (and smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol and skipping school, etc.).

I think the best approach may be to try and find out how they generated stats. Intentionally starting the party with lower stats may be half the problem here, and an easy one to fix without forcing them to 'give up' options chosen for flavor reasons.

 

[Kerranin]

I don't think forcing your players to rebuild is a good option at all, it would likely just provoke bad-feeling.

I think the best plan here is:

• Give them a free expertise feat (the essentials versions which go up at each tier boundary) - this will reduce future effort for you, and nobody hates free stuff.
• Give them level-appropriate gear (you'll have to work out how to put this into the game) - perhaps a whole rp-heavy session where the players are 'chosen' by some power, and their existing gear enchanted?
• Don't use lower-level monsters since I think this will spoil the flavour of the game, instead just apply penalties to your monster attacks/defenses to make them match with the average penalty the players are actually operating at.

Obviously you'll have to work-out how these things fit into your own game, but my general philosophy would be to get your players buy-in for anything you're doing here.

Good luck.

 

[Herschel]

I think there's a very easy fix that doesn't involve "rebuilding": "fix" the point buy if it's only an 18. With the Dwarf, for example, simply "give" him a point of Strength or so. That will put him a lot more in to the accepted zone while not nullifying his CON fetish. No rebuilding, no feat changing, nothing else.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

On page 112 of the Players Strategy Guide, it has a sidebar that tells the "average" numbers for AC, Other Defenses, To Hit vs. AC, and To Hit vs. Other Defenses for Characters and Monsters.

Table for Player Characters
Attack vs. AC 6 + Level
Attack vs. Other Defenses 4 + Level
AC 15 + Level
Other Defenses 13 + Level[/B]

See right off the bat these average numbers are very close to the ceiling for many characters.

Take a human paladin, +7 att at level 1 requires for example +4 stat, +2 prof & +1 feat.

Assuming a generous DM handing out magic items early that happen to suit this character and this character wins the treasure divvy bid, and the character specializes with a base 18, chose the said race with advantageous bonus, and the character opts for an accurate weapon, (phew) you could have a +10 attack bonus at 1st level - but I doubt it.

But the character sacrificing feats and ability points to get a bonus ahead of the curve is not even the problem in my opinion. Given a well rounded campaign they'll pay a fair price for their advantage.

Nope, the problem I have is the legitimate character with a 16 stat using a +2 prof weapon without further augmentation. The +5 att is just too below the +7 average, the lack of accuracy is imho opinion a bigger problem than a high accuracy character hitting more easily.

I would prefer they shave a number off those averages please.

For the record my character meets those averages because I'm not naive. However I would like to spend the odd feat and ability points on things not directly related to combat.

Off the top of my head, I think one solution is in the future to have a division between combat and non-combat feats, and you get slots for each.

 

[MrMyth]

Off the top of my head, I think one solution is in the future to have a division between combat and non-combat feats, and you get slots for each.

I've toyed with the idea, but never had the chance to implement it.

But for me, I think the general balance of numbers is relatively good... the only real element that I think causes problems are the Expertise feats. Still hate them! Suddenly, 2-3 points of difference between and average vs an optimized character becomes 4-6 points. That starts to get into frustrating territory.

Is the solution to give everyone Expertise? Ban it entirely? Find some other option? I can't say for sure. I certainly think there is plenty of room in the game for specialized characters to boost certian numbers if they choose to invest in the right places. But I really prefer it when they, and other average characters, are still able to be playing the same game.

 

[Aulirophile]

I've toyed with the idea, but never had the chance to implement it.

But for me, I think the general balance of numbers is relatively good... the only real element that I think causes problems are the Expertise feats. Still hate them! Suddenly, 2-3 points of difference between and average vs an optimized character becomes 4-6 points. That starts to get into frustrating territory.

Is the solution to give everyone Expertise? Ban it entirely? Find some other option? I can't say for sure. I certainly think there is plenty of room in the game for specialized characters to boost certian numbers if they choose to invest in the right places. But I really prefer it when they, and other average characters, are still able to be playing the same game.

Well, Expertise was supposed to be a math fix... some developers give it out in their home games (the DM reduces all monster defenses by 1 per tier, same difference). I don't know how that'd work out with the new essentials expertise feats though (which in some cases you'd want to take just for the secondary benefit).

Personally I give it out for free when I DM (and I also change the scaling of racial abilities to be 3/6/9 instead of 2/4/6). I could just lower defenses on my monsters, but I find having a "big" number to add to their d20 rolls is more fun for the players.