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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 5023820" data-attributes="member: 2525">Hypothetically, if I already have a +20 to attack at first level, making it +21 to attack isn't really increasing the damage at all.  In that hypothetical, you're going to hit against virtually anything, almost all the time.  Obviously I am demonstrating using an unrealistic example, but it clearly shows one flaw with always analyzing based on a 50-50 chance.Let's take a 4th level dwarven guardian fighter with Dwarven Weapon Training, Weapon Expertise, and Plate Armor Proficiency, that started with 16 str, 16 con, and 16 wis.  You attack with brash strike (which grants +2 attack).  So you attack with a +3 (str) +2 (craghammer proficiency) +1 (weapon expertise) +2 (brash strike) +2 (level) +1 (magic weapon) +1 (weapon talent) for a total of +12 vs. AC.The difference between a +12 and a +13 at 4th level isn't as much as your hypothetical average example.  Most foes have an AC of about "level + 14".  So I am hitting on an average roll, regardless of whether it is a +12 or +13 attack bonus.  The additional +1 will make a difference sometimes, but not as often as the "I hit exactly half the time" analysis.So while I agree it's OK to start from a 50-50 hit probability and 10% change from a +1 attack bonus, that's not where it ends.  When you get into actual likely builds, it's sometimes not a particularly accurate method of computing the impact of an additional +1 to attack.</blockquote>

Verification