Alzrius said:
Firstly, the fact that you don't have access to a product isn't my fault.
You really can't understand why its not appropriate to demand that I track down some obscure book to check if it does indeed say what you claim that it does and check it's math? How about this: I don't think you're telling the truth about "what the book says".
Alzrius said:
Secondly, the flaw in your little "rule of thumb" is one that is inherently disproving; you don't need the book for that. Quite simply, you're saying that a +1 on a to hit roll is worth 2 hit points of damage: utter claptrap. By that standard, someone casting true strike on a fighter should have him dealing an extra 40 hit points of damage! Likewise, if he's under the effects of a bestow curse, that's going to make the attacks he lands do less damage.
"A rule of thumb is an easily learned and easily applied procedure for approximately calculating or recalling some value, or for making some determination." -
Wikipedia
"As a rule of thumb, men are stronger than women". Buy hey - I'm sure you can find some woman, somewhere, that's stronger than some man, somewhere, and thus
disprove my rule of thumb, Alzrius-style.
Alzrius said:
It boils down to you somehow applying the rule for a two-handed Power Attack to everything that adds to or subtracts from to hit rolls, and that makes me think you you don't know what you're talking about.
Why do you think the Power Attack feat works as it does? Do you think the ratio was selected randomly?
Alzrius said:
And if you'd been more familiar with my previous posts, you'd know I said "Power Attack is a viable option." But it's not the be-all end-all you seem to think it is.
I have a simple, direct question for you:
Have you ever done the calculations to figure out if power attack is a good idea for a character or not?
Now for an example:
Character one is using your method with Small greataxes. -2 attacks, +2 damage.
Character two is using two battleaxes and -2 power attack on all attacks. -2 attacks, +4 damage.
Why is it so difficult for you to understand that character one is using a sub-optimal method?
Or is it your claim that max Power Attack will always be the better option for character two, making Power Attack some sort of uber-feat? If so, do the math, or trust those of us who have.
Alzrius said:
Only because you can't refute them.
I already did. As opposed you I posted actual numbers proving me right.
Alzrius said:
This pretty much highlights how badly you failed to understand what I was presenting. Of course the orc fighter had a Strength score 4 points higher than the human...they do get a racial Strength bonus, you know. The example thusly holds true wherever the two are likewise given an other-wise equal Strength; hence why I said "all
things being equal". Next time, read the entire post.
Her's what you said:
Overall, all things being equal, the human fighters have a slightly better chance of landing their hits, but will do less damage when they do. The orc fighter gets a greater amount of damage, with an average to hit bonus only slightly behind his human counterpart, virtually guaranteeing he'll do more damage.
This makes no sense if you intended to compare characters with equal Strength. With equal Strength, the "Orc" is way behind in attack bonus. In fact the whole Orc-Human thing is nothing but a red herring.
Alzrius said:
A superb example of trying to bury your lack of understanding through a fairly dry series of number-crunching, while not even addressing the original point.
Right. Can't let "dry number crunching" get in the way of your opinions on what the dry numbers are. :\
The "original point" was whether or nor dual-wileding two Small greatazes was a good idea. My "dry numbers" prove that it's not. For realistic 12th level characters, both a single greataxe and two short-swords makes for a more powerful character. (The numbers don't change with two handaxes.)
Alzrius said:
The fact is, your examples are utterly useless for the fact that you've completely unbalanced them by adding in various feats and changing the enhancement bonuses. You seem to lack the understanding that the examples only hold if we use the most equal comparisons possible. By changing how each character is created and the enhancement value of the weapons they're using, you've skewed the results in your favor.
I take it the "added feats" you're talking about is Power Attack? That's a must- have for all Str based melee fighters. If you get to waste three feats on two-weapon fighting feats, then you can hardly object to me giving "my" guy
one feat. Even without Power Attack, extra attack bonus can be "traded" for AC with Expertise.
The two-weapon fighters get a lower enhancement bonus because they have (gasp!) two weapons to pay for rather than one.
Why don't you explain why the version wielding two short-swords left "your" guy in the dust? You can't blame power attack and you can't blame an extra 1680 gp worth of equipment. They're identical except for the choice of weapons.
I also notice how you fail to say what you'd consider a "fair" comparison... What would that be Alzrius?
(Next: Reply to examples.)
