Hit Probability is a Slippery Slope

[Benly]

A quick pass with the rules compendium turns up the following feats which can increase attack bonus:

Action Surge, Back to the Wall, Combat Reflexes, Blade Opportunist, Elven Precision, Hellfire Blood, Nimble Blade, Precise Hunter, Sweeping Flail.

Granted, they are situational (as you say) and not available to all characters. But we're not looking for feats to make up the gap entirely. Amortized over a whole encounter they might add a +0.5, which is not insignicant if you're talking about a 4 point gap.

That doesn't account for feats which increase damage, either. I'm sure you realize that attack bonus and damage bonus are two sides of the same coin. Either one impacts your average damage per attack. Sure, there are some situations where you'd prefer a bonus to one over a bonus to the other, but overall they work out to help you in very similar ways. So, humble Weapon Focus is a decent equalizer here - it even gets better in the higher tiers!

Well.. it's an equalizer if you assume characters with 20 Str aren't taking Weapon Focus, anyway.

What's your rationale for that?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Preq-less Weapon Focus isn't an equalizer, but the many weapon and other combat-related feats that take moderate-to-high preqs outside your chosen min-maxxed primary and secondary do. If you have a 20 STR at 1st level, and keep it maxxed, you don't have a lot left over for other stats. You have to service whatever your class's secondary stats are, too. Most of the time, paying for a 20 will put many desireable feats out of reach, or, at least, delay them until late in the tier they become available.

 

[Regicide]

I'm sure you realize that attack bonus and damage bonus are two sides of the same coin. Either one impacts your average damage per attack.

In 4E they're completely different coins. Hitting means a lot more than doing damage now, it means sliding things around, healing people, status effects, getting bonus attacks etc.

 

[AllisterH]

NeoNick's example was an extreme one, but it's relevant still when applied to actually balanced encounters. Against an AC of 18, which is not uncommon among level 3 creatures, +7 hits on an 11 (50%) while +8 hits on a 10 (55%.) The difference in hit rate, and hence damage output, and hence approximate rate of killing, is 5/50, which is a 10% increase - for a simple +1 advantage.

If you're using a non-optimal race (with no bonus in the primary stat) and place only a 16 in that stat, you can be up to 2 behind in attack bonus, which can translate into a 20%+ advantage to the guy with a 20, in terms of hit rate/damage output. Comparing a party of 5 with 16s, and one with 5 with 20s, the 2nd party is effectively doing the damage of a party of 6 with 16s - all approximations of course. This does not take into account the presence of attacks that do damage on misses, or that hit automatically.

Yes, but what does that actually mean at the table though?

What I mean is, if a character hits on a 11 and another hits on a 10, but after battle, BOTH characters require the same number of healing surges to get back to full (since healing surges heal at a FIXED amount), the guy who only needed a 10 to hit isn't better than the guy who needed a 11 to hit.

 

[ryryguy]

Well.. it's an equalizer if you assume characters with 20 Str aren't taking Weapon Focus, anyway.

What's your rationale for that?

I think we've crossed conversations here. I don't mean an equalizer for the 20 Str vs. 18 Str characters. I mean an equalizer for the PC expected attack bonus progression vs. monster AC progression, where the monster AC has gained about 4-5 points relative to PC attack at upper epic level.

(And not that Weapon Focus completely cancels that out, but that it's one of the things on the PC's side that is not accounted for when you are comparing raw scores as was discussed earlier in the thread.)

 

[NeoNick]

NeoNick's example was an extreme one, but it's relevant still when applied to actually balanced encounters. Against an AC of 18, which is not uncommon among level 3 creatures, +7 hits on an 11 (50%) while +8 hits on a 10 (55%.) The difference in hit rate, and hence damage output, and hence approximate rate of killing, is 5/50, which is a 10% increase - for a simple +1 advantage.

If you're using a non-optimal race (with no bonus in the primary stat) and place only a 16 in that stat, you can be up to 2 behind in attack bonus, which can translate into a 20%+ advantage to the guy with a 20, in terms of hit rate/damage output. Comparing a party of 5 with 16s, and one with 5 with 20s, the 2nd party is effectively doing the damage of a party of 6 with 16s - all approximations of course. This does not take into account the presence of attacks that do damage on misses, or that hit automatically.

Thanks for understanding my point.

As people got upset with me giving such an extreme example, please take a look at what that means in a "normal" combat exapmle with a 50% chance to hit.

The difference in relative hitrate is +10% (favouring the 20-stat-char of course) meaning the 20-char produces 10% more damage than the 18-stat.
Then there is also a difference in relative damage output. Let's assume for this example that a normal average damages at lvl 1 could be 10 damage per round. Again the 20-stat-char have an advantage over the 18-stat-char by +10% in damage.

That means the 20-stat-char produces +21% more dpr than the 18-stat-char ALL OTHER THINGS EQUAL.

Any changes in the difficulty of hitting the mob would affect the % in the following way:
- even harder than 50% to hit -> would mean bigger difference in relative dpr
- even easier than 50% to hit -> would mean smaller difference in relative dpr.

I've been deeply involved in WoW for the last three years (taking a break now) and let me say that if those kind of figures and differences would be spotted there, a big cry of NERF!!! would be heard. Of course I do NOT say there is any such need for nerfing here - but people should be aware of how painful it is dpr-wise to not opt your primary attack-value!

 

[eamon]

I think we've crossed conversations here. I don't mean an equalizer for the 20 Str vs. 18 Str characters. I mean an equalizer for the PC expected attack bonus progression vs. monster AC progression, where the monster AC has gained about 4-5 points relative to PC attack at upper epic level.

Monster damage seems to progress faster than PC damage to - for at wills. weapon focus is nice, but again doesn't come close to compensating. The level 27 sorrowsworn reaper deals 30 damage with it's melee basic attack - a fighter won't manage that, even with weapon focus. However, at 1st level, a stormclaw scorpion does 6.5 damage (with a nice special ability, though), and a kobold dragonshield (level 2) also does 6.5 damage. 6.5 is easily within reach - a strength 20 dragonborn would be dealing 12 damage with a maul, on average, before feats or other abilities, and even with a lesser weapon and str, be better than the monsters.

On the whole, damage is hard to compare because powers and effects vary so widely. How do you value mummy rot? How about ongoing damage? Slow? It's hard to say.

Anyhow, this is why I look at to-hit, preferrably.

 

[Pickles JG]

The level 27 sorrowsworn reaper deals 30 damage with it's melee basic attack - a fighter won't manage that, even with weapon focus.

Maul 4d6 +14, Focus +3, Str +8, Magic +6 = 31 (assumes demigod or 20 STR at level 1)

Rogue, 2d8 rapier +9, Focus +3, Dex +8, Cha or Str +7 Sneak 5d8 +22.5 = 49.5 for comparison.

Monster HP scales a lot faster than PC HP however so the principle is correct.

 

[brendan candries]

Maul 4d6 +14, Focus +3, Str +8, Magic +6 = 31 (assumes demigod or 20 STR at level 1)

Rogue, 2d8 rapier +9, Focus +3, Dex +8, Cha or Str +7 Sneak 5d8 +22.5 = 49.5 for comparison.

Monster HP scales a lot faster than PC HP however so the principle is correct.

You will have power attack with that maul, -2 to hit but +9 damage. That makes the damage 40.

 

[eamon]

You will have power attack with that maul, -2 to hit but +9 damage. That makes the damage 40.

Well, that's fine and all, but if you're doing that, your attack bonus falls behind even more. If being 4 behind isn't enough, then being behind 6 isn't helping. Power attack is decent if you're actually hitting frequently. Still, coming from "doing significantly more damage than creatures" the relative parity isn't great scaling.

Then again, with things like scimitar dance and hammer rhythm... who knows? Attack bonuses are easier to compare, and more meaningful in that they also determine the outcome of status effects, largely.