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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4692541" data-attributes="member: 2011">That was hyperbole. I assumed you would get it. My bad.5 attacks will not often happen. But, 2 attacks can. It's easy in the game system. Even a Dragon can attack a Wizard 2 or more times in a single round without having other NPCs around to help it.I know our DM will send 2 or more attackers against the Wizard if he gets the chance, especially once the Wizard starts laying the smack down.Shield is an auto success if the DM uses 2e above. Once per encounter when it can be successful, it will be successful if the player wants to use it.You appear to be arguing to argue and stating that I am either purposely being obtuse or not capable of rational discourse is attacking just to attack. The last recourse of irrational discourse.Look at the math behind my numbers 1 and 2a through 2e above and explain any flaws you find in them.They illustrate how Shield is considerably better than Second Chance if the DM gives out too much information.As an example of how your math is irrelevant, your 25% Second Chance calcuation is totally accurate. It's just mostly meaningless."The halfling can therefore impact 50% of 50% of attacks. This is a 25% overall effectiveness for the halfling power."Who cares? The halfling does not get hit on 50% of attacks, so Second Chance is not used. It is only relevant when it is used. It is only used when an attack hits. So your math here, although accurate, doesn't say anything important.What is important is that 54.5% of the time when Second Wind is used, it decreases the amount of damage, 4.5% of the time it increases the amount of damage, and 41% of the time it does nothing (assuming a 50% to hit chance).Your math might be accurate, but if it doesn't address the real issues, what good is it?One more point you forgot in your discourse. Shield either stops the damage or it does not. 4.5% of the time, Second Wind increases the damage (upping normal damage to a critical, you mentioned this, but blew it off). 4.5% of the time, Second Wind decreases the damage but does not stop it completely (i.e. dropping a critical down to normal damage, you did not mention this).Unlike Shield, Second Wind does not always cut out the damage completely. It only does that 44.5% of the time.Yet another reason why Shield is usually better.Average damage if Second Wind changes the result ~12%.Average damage if Shield changes the result 0%.</blockquote>

Verification