Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Flynn" data-source="post: 3678289" data-attributes="member: 1836">Guys,As an FYI, the damage bonus just makes up for the potential damage lost with the removal of iterative attacks. The fighter will be just as effective (or ineffective) as he was previously, within one to two average points of damage. Whether or not there's a gap, and if so, what direction it lies in, isn't really the question in regards to the damage bonus. The real question is: does the iterative combatant do the same damage with the damage bonus as he did before with iterative attacks? The answer is yes, or reasonably close. Therefore, Mr. Fighter impacts the system in pretty much the same way mathematically as he did before, and so the overall impact of the shift is negated.I guess the true answer to the original question should probably be &quot;no, this does not address the gap, but it doesn't change it either.&quot;Does that help?With Regards,Flynn</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Flynn, post: 3678289, member: 1836"] Guys, As an FYI, the damage bonus just makes up for the potential damage lost with the removal of iterative attacks. The fighter will be just as effective (or ineffective) as he was previously, within one to two average points of damage. Whether or not there's a gap, and if so, what direction it lies in, isn't really the question in regards to the damage bonus. The real question is: does the iterative combatant do the same damage with the damage bonus as he did before with iterative attacks? The answer is yes, or reasonably close. Therefore, Mr. Fighter impacts the system in pretty much the same way mathematically as he did before, and so the overall impact of the shift is negated. I guess the true answer to the original question should probably be "no, this does not address the gap, but it doesn't change it either." Does that help? With Regards, Flynn [/QUOTE]

Verification