@GMforPowergamers
What will happen if there isn't a Warlord in my party?
the you eaither have a diffrent leader (other bonuses...or you are argueing the leaders are not balanced with each other???)
What if we have cleric on WIS and CHA instead Are you saying that we need some powers that give us to hit bonuses or the game will be not fun-good-playable?
no, but the fights will take longer, lucky for you your cleric is better at healing then that warlod, meaning you can stay int he fight longer.
Shouldn't the game be balanced for such a simple things like average to hit chances? All options should be just options, not reasonable choices options should make your character above average, not on average level when you take them.
that is a great idea, but it is not entirely how the system was designed (please lets not get derailed again) It assumes you have 3 magic items per party member (Neck, armor, weap/imp), and a leader. If you would like to discuse that please fork the thread...
You understand that many of powers that gives bonuses to hit are for basic or melee attacks only? (there are few that give better options, but as I said, only few powers can do that and still they are very limited)
You do realise that more then half of the classes are melee only right...in fact that is a complaint I hear regularly...
All the players that use attacks vs. NADs have hard time. They can't take benefits of combat advantage and many powers that give to hit bonuses.
but they also (normaly inless a rouge) get powers that target multi, so they can 'shop around' for a weakspot...
When you designing encounter, you make many of them hard for players, so to achive this you use higher level monsters. Now when you saw math (here you can see mine -
Wizards Community - View Single Post - Another math crunch and how fix 4E) the to hit chance will be lower than on given level (from 35% it will drop to 15% if you will use n+4 monster). And again, what with characters that hit vs. NADs? They don't have many options to achive to hit bonuses.
yes if you design harder encounters it becomes harder encounter...maybe I just don't get the problem...
For example. Orcus have AC 48. With basic +31 to hit that doesne looks so good. FOR 51 REF 46 WILL 49. To hit on that level is around 29. Of course there will be some (but still few) powers that will make numbers better, but who are we kidding, it's still not good enoungh to say, that it's ok.
avrage fighter 16 att stat +1 weapon talent, and +6 weapon...
+7 str +15 level, +6 magic, +1 talent, +3 prof...+32 Vs AC 48 needs a 16 to hit the god killing abomanation...
avrage rouge same but Vs Ref 46, Will 49, and AC 48 needs 14, 17, and 16...
that is no feats, no powers, no paragon paths, no epic destiny, no Combat Advantage, and still hitBLE
so now we come back to what is fair for "Hardest encounter you will ever face?"... should the PCs at level 30 see orcus as no more of a threat to them (God killing primordal demon lord of undead) then the Orc was 27 levels ago???
needs a 16 to hit... what is a good analogy...
well fighter and/or rouge level 1 w/ 16 att stat
+3 stat, +3 prof, +1 class...+7 on a 16 they hit AC 23...Hobgoblin commander Level 5 (normal) Soldier. MM I pg 140.
so is orcus supose to be more or less thretning then that hobgoblin???
Don't forget at level 1 you have 1 daily, and 1 encounter...so you quicky fall back on at wills...orcus on the other hand at level 30 (Where you stand back up if killed 60+% of the time) you could have infinite encounter, or any number of other ungodly things...
by the way Orcus plays right into my hand, since I know more then 1 group that beat him...with no expertise...