Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stalker0" data-source="post: 4856259" data-attributes="member: 5889">Overall, I think 3e actually handled this problem better than 4e. Lets take a look at what 3e did.1) Multiple attacks. In 3e, the fighter is going to hit pretty regularly on his first attack, but misses more on his iterative ones. However, overall, his chance of complete missing is pretty low. Instead he has though rare times he hits with everything (BIG DAMAGE!!!), the times he misses completely (hey it happens), and the majority of time being he hits once maybe twice (still good!)2) Big finishers. For wizards, the name of the game was often one spell and your out. Sure you are going to miss most of the time, but you know that once one of your good spells hits, well that's just game over for that guy. So in this instance, the disappointment of misses was often overshadowed by the huge thrill of getting a success and having a huge impact on the battle.3) Buffs. Buffs don't require attack rolls to activate, and they often give you and even better chance of hitting next time. Its helps in two ways....helps players who fear attack rolls still feel useful and it allows those who feel they miss too often to overcome that with their own power.</blockquote>