Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 1349672" data-attributes="member: 9002">This rather confuses me, and goes against the numbers I ran.&nbsp; IRS is ok but not great when the AC of the enemy is rather low (from 15-20).&nbsp; That's because removing the -2 is not that important, since you hit the mooks most of the time anyway.&nbsp; There is an increase in damage, but it's on the order of 2-3 per round (total hitpoints).Where IRS, in my little sample, really shines in vs the high AC opponents.&nbsp; Removing the -2 penalty when attempting to hit AC30 or 35 is very significant, and makes a much bigger increase in damage per round (around 5 or so).So, my number indicate that IRS is best against the guys you really care about (high AC BBEG's) and only so-so vs. the mooks.(I mean, what level 10 archer is going to miss an AC15 mook even on an iterated shot, even with rapid shot up?&nbsp; +5bab +5 dex +3 bow +1 bracers - 2 rapid shot = +12 to hit, i.e. hit on a 3 or less on your worst shot.&nbsp; +13 to hit within 30', etc.).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="two, post: 1349672, member: 9002"] This rather confuses me, and goes against the numbers I ran. IRS is ok but not great when the AC of the enemy is rather low (from 15-20). That's because removing the -2 is not that important, since you hit the mooks most of the time anyway. There is an increase in damage, but it's on the order of 2-3 per round (total hitpoints). Where IRS, in my little sample, really shines in vs the high AC opponents. Removing the -2 penalty when attempting to hit AC30 or 35 is very significant, and makes a much bigger increase in damage per round (around 5 or so). So, my number indicate that IRS is best against the guys you really care about (high AC BBEG's) and only so-so vs. the mooks. (I mean, what level 10 archer is going to miss an AC15 mook even on an iterated shot, even with rapid shot up? +5bab +5 dex +3 bow +1 bracers - 2 rapid shot = +12 to hit, i.e. hit on a 3 or less on your worst shot. +13 to hit within 30', etc.). [/QUOTE]

Verification