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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aulirophile" data-source="post: 5553553" data-attributes="member: 86312">Um,  +29 at 28 is correct but that'd be vs 42 AC for even level (level+14). You'd hit on a 13+, vs an even level solo you'd need a 17+, and versus a +4 (for an e+4 monster, which is well within guidelines) you'd need a 21+ on the die... oh wait. Hell, vs a level+3 solo you'd need a 20 on the die. Granted you'd crit... but you'd miss on a 19. You're well away from the minimum, which just proves the point. The minimum isn't maintained without Expertise. The intention to have a minimum is a fact. So.... should you keep proving my point or are we good? Also your Rogue example is just poor for a variety of reasons, up to and including the numbers are wrong. Rogues are hyper accurate strikers. That is their whole shtick. Rogues are supposed to to be, roughly, 10-15% more accurate then the average character, not accounting for all the powers that allow them to get CA trivially. So that puts the class minimum for Rogues at 65%. vs 42 AC that would be +34 at 28. At 28 that is +7 (stat)+3 (prof)+14 (1/2 level)+6 (Enh) is +30... (and these numbers are right, I'm just not sure how you got +37) that is... ohhh 12+, darn, missed the minimum by 4. Again, there is no maximum. In order for you to be right every single class needs to maintain 55% all the way to level 30 vs average even level defenses. They don't. It doesn't matter if that means Rogues are hitting on 2s and 3s, hyper-accuracy is part of their class. So, again, it doesn't matter if a character without Expertise can maintain the minimum by optimizing (and some can, though your example was incorrect and you picked a class that is actually supposed to be more accurate then the minimum, invalidating it even had your numbers been correct). It only matters if all characters can provably maintain the minimum without optimizing. They can't. Expertise fixes this gap. The gap that the designers admitted was their mistake and was not their intention. </blockquote>

Verification