Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5345831" data-attributes="member: 2011">That post is in error somewhat.Yes, +1 damage does typically work better for many PCs than +1 to hit. But for strikers and controllers, +1 to hit is typically superior (twin strike being an exception).Here's why:1) Let's take a striker PC that does 18 average damage and has a 50% chance to hit with a +1 damage feat. With a +1 to hit feat instead, he does 17 average damage and a 55% chance to hit.In the first case, his dpr is 9 (not including crits).In the second case, his dpr is 9.35.Overall, he will do better with 17 points of damage per attack than 18.With a 50% chance to hit, the break even case is at typically at 11 points of damage without the +1 damage feat. 11 *.55 vs. 12 * .5, but the +1 to hit gets better the higher above 11 points of damage one gets. So, this is not just applicable to strikers.2) In the case of a controller, damage is not the main goal. A few extra points of damage per encounter is nice, but not required. What is required is getting foes controlled. And obviously, getting them controlled means hitting.3) Most PCs can have their cake and eat it too. PCs don't just get a single feat. They get a lot of them. And since there are a limited number of bonus to damage feats, eventually a PC will run out. Even for a PC where a bonus to damage feat is better, once he runs out of those, it makes sense to eventually take the bonus to hit feat and increase dpr.4) Hitting is more fun than missing. A combat might extend a little bit because a player chose a +1 to hit over +1 damage, but the player will probably have more overall fun because he is hitting slightly more often.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 5345831, member: 2011"] That post is in error somewhat. Yes, +1 damage does typically work better for many PCs than +1 to hit. But for strikers and controllers, +1 to hit is typically superior (twin strike being an exception). Here's why: 1) Let's take a striker PC that does 18 average damage and has a 50% chance to hit with a +1 damage feat. With a +1 to hit feat instead, he does 17 average damage and a 55% chance to hit. In the first case, his dpr is 9 (not including crits). In the second case, his dpr is 9.35. Overall, he will do better with 17 points of damage per attack than 18. With a 50% chance to hit, the break even case is at typically at 11 points of damage without the +1 damage feat. 11 *.55 vs. 12 * .5, but the +1 to hit gets better the higher above 11 points of damage one gets. So, this is not just applicable to strikers. 2) In the case of a controller, damage is not the main goal. A few extra points of damage per encounter is nice, but not required. What is required is getting foes controlled. And obviously, getting them controlled means hitting. 3) Most PCs can have their cake and eat it too. PCs don't just get a single feat. They get a lot of them. And since there are a limited number of bonus to damage feats, eventually a PC will run out. Even for a PC where a bonus to damage feat is better, once he runs out of those, it makes sense to eventually take the bonus to hit feat and increase dpr. 4) Hitting is more fun than missing. A combat might extend a little bit because a player chose a +1 to hit over +1 damage, but the player will probably have more overall fun because he is hitting slightly more often. [/QUOTE]

Verification