Lead the Attack vs. solo monsters: unbalancing?

[Blackbrrd]

So, the warlord going to use his lead the attack against a solo monster. He typically has a 50% of hitting, which goes down by 20 percentage points against a solo. He will typically hit 30% of the time. Lets say he maneuvers into flanking, and has the action surge feat and a action point available. Now he has a 55% chance of hitting. He goes ahead and uses it...

So after maneuvering, using an action point he has a 45% chance of giving +1 to hit, and a 55% of giving +4 to hit. On average roughly +3 to hit. Personally I don't see the problem... He can only take the power once...

 

[Gort]

The warlord in my party has this. After three long 5-hour sessions, they haven't encountered a solo monster yet. Oh, the irony.

 

[Regicide]

If you're fighting a solo, sure, you'll dramatically speed up how fast you kill it. If you were hitting 50% of the time and your warlord has a +5 int bonus, you will get a 50% increase in your damage output as a party. That means you'll defeat the monster in 2/3rds the time it would have otherwise taken you. So maybe a 12 round fight reduces to 8. STILL not a pushover fight.

Not quite. Being able to hit means more than just damage, WotC also piled effects onto all the to hit powers so making something easier to hit has more than a linear effect. The monster will be pushed more, stunned more, the paladin will gain temporary hitpoints more quickly. A 12 round fight that would have been bloody could easily be turned into a 6 round where the party doesn't even need healing surges.

They've balanced EVERYTHING on the to-hit roll, and then they go and unbalance it.

 

[Regicide]

For instance, dropping the warlord means it no longer gives off that Aura of Awesome. Keeping the Warlord at least 5 squares away from the rest of the party, while difficult, accomplishes it as well.

Where does it say the power drops when the warlord is unconcious? Where does it say the power isn't instant? I don't see it saying it's an aura, when the power goes off, everyone within 5 gets the benefit, the warlord's job is done.

 

[Stalker0]

I do agree the lead the attack is very strong against solos.

However, people are forgetting one crucial factor in its use.

The power provides a "power" bonus to attack rolls. That means that all other powers that add "power" bonuses to attack rolls become irreverent.

For example, there are cleric powers that boost attacks....irrelevant. There are paladin powers that gives temporary attack boosts....irrelevant. The warlord powers trump those smaller bonuses, so they won't come into play.


Now, as mentioned before the warlord's power is still a cut above the rest in dealing with a solo, but it is not as extreme as people are surmising.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Not quite. Being able to hit means more than just damage, WotC also piled effects onto all the to hit powers so making something easier to hit has more than a linear effect. The monster will be pushed more, stunned more, the paladin will gain temporary hitpoints more quickly. A 12 round fight that would have been bloody could easily be turned into a 6 round where the party doesn't even need healing surges.

They've balanced EVERYTHING on the to-hit roll, and then they go and unbalance it.

This is true. Let's consider the following--at low epic (level 21), the party Warlord has still not subbed out this power. She doesn't care about the damage--the morbidly high to-hit buff is where it's at. Other party members can help her land the blow, and the Leading the Attack bonus goes up. She started with 16 Int, so now she has 24. That means everyone gets +8 to hit that solo.

Now, fighting a solo (heck, let's say a normally incredibly difficult solo like the Purple Worm, 3 levels above the party), the party Warlock/DivineOracle/Demigod is going to attack its Will defense (twice, taking the highest roll, which DivineOracle can do whenever she wants) with that fun spell Delusions of Loyalty. Now, normally with her 26 Cha and +5 implement (level 21 item, so seems reasonabke), she needs a 12 to hit. She does roll twice though, so without the Warlord, she has an 84% chance to hit. With the Warlord? Now she needs a 4. Now she has a 97.75% chance to hit. The chance of failing is less than half the chance of failing to hit with a single roll that can only fail on a 1. And the fun part of Delusions of Loyalty? Well, it's a solo, so you're not going to get it to hit any allies. But, in that case, it loses its standard action. And you can sustain as a Minor action as long as you keep hitting with the attack...which you will, 97.75% of the time. On average, the Warlock gives the entire team (including herself, since she's only using a Minor each round!) almost 50 rounds to whack on the thing unmolested. So with that one level 1 Daily and the Warlock's Encounter power (not even a daily! She can use this every fight), you can probably bring down the critter with at-wills--heck, the Warlock can probably kill it herself with Eyebite (if she's Fey) and her Curse up in that timeframe, so you really only need the Warlord and the Warlock. And if the Warlord started with an 18 Int instead of 16 due to a racial Int bonus? In that case, the Warlock now has a 99% chance to hit with her power and will grant the party 100 rounds on average. And if you throw in a few more enemies other than the solo? Well, in that case, you have to remember that Delusions of Loyalty doesn't just steal their Standard Action--it forces them to attack their allies who hit the Warlock, so the solo will actually be helping you kill its (likely much weaker) allies.

And this is against a solo 3 level higher than the party--any lower makes it even easier to kill.

It's tantamount to the +8 from Aid Another in Stalker0's Skill Challenge calculations that kept turning the Skill Challenges from impossible to incredibly easy. 4e math does not work well when a gigantic boost is allowed.

 

[phizzo]

Yes. If a battle is won or lost on the roll of whether or not the warlord's daily hits and makes the mob trivial, then a lot of players aren't going to be having much fun.

The argument that Lead the Attack is going to guarantee victory (or defeat, if it misses) against a solo monster is ridiculously flawed.

It is a very strong power, against a solo monster. It confers a meaningful advantage to the party. It is not necessary for a party to have this to defeat solo monsters, nor does it trivialize fights with solo monsters.

Is it really good in the situation where you're fighting a solo monster? Yes. Is it overpowered? No. It's certainly situationally very powerful, but in the scope of a game where very few encounters are going to be against a single powerful opponent, I would describe it as an unremarkable power that is very strong against a single foe.

It is certainly not an "I win" button, nor is it overpowered in the overall context of a game. I don't really see the problem.

 

[hong]

You still need to _hit_ with Lead the Attack for it to turn the battle. If the warlord doesn't want to whiff the power, that's going to mean a bunch of maneuvering to set up the optimal conditions for the strike: flanking, use of an AP with Action Surge, stacking other bonuses, etc. This is nowhere near "warlord shows up, solo dies, players loot the treasure".

And then, if the warlord hits, that means the _other players_ get to unload their daily powers, doing [2w] or [3w] or whatever damage. Which spreads the fun around, rather than the warlord hogging the spotlight.

 

[Destil]

In that sense, it's probably balanced. I think I have issues with balancing powers that way, but that's getting into deeply theoretical territory.

(The issues have to do with "swinginess" and the extent to which a character should be permitted/encouraged/pushed into specializing for a particular sort of encounter.)

But it's not as swingy as you may think.

Aid Another.

Flanking.

Lance of Faith

Radiant Delirium.

Teamwork, Teamwork, Teamwork.

The other guys set up the warlord, he knocks the big bad down a peg or two, then everyone goes to town. This is not about randomly screwing players over via dice flukes, it's about rewarding skill, planning and group-think.

When the rogue who was going to provide the flank gets pushed back out of melee by the dragon's tail slap when he missed his last attack do you use this and hope it hits? Or do you hold back a round and slide him back in there while using an encounter instead...?

This rewards good decision making.

I mean... how is the 'tactical inspiring combat leader' class supposed to play?

Edit: Damn you, hong. Ah, well. Ninjed by the best, at least.