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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 4211247" data-attributes="member: 53980">According to the design mechanics, creatures are no longer supposed to be difficult to hit.  The dragon encounter is a bad example that the writers included in the adventure because they figured that players wouldn't care if their DDXP characters died.  DMs are not supposed to throw level 4 solo creatures against a level 1 party because such encounters are very likely to prove lethal.  I admit that a 50% accuracy was somewhat low; I used it simply for the sake of simplicity.  In truth, it slightly screwed the ranger's total damage value (because my assumption was that everyone needed to hit an AC 10 and the Ranger's Careful Strike attack bonus is +10, he actually loses out on 5% accuracy (because we have to account for the possibility of the automatic miss on a natural 1).I wanted to give the paladin the benefit of the doubt because I was arguing against it.  This might seem backwards, but if I could prove the paladin's "striker tactic" wasn't all that amazing under optimal conditions, then, IMO, it would be even less useful at the actual table.I think that it was clear from my analysis that while the paladin, under OPTIMAL conditions, could match the damage of the ranger at-will abilities, it couldn't hold a candle to the ranger daily.  If as I showed, under optimal conditions for the paladin, the ranger's daily is both more accurate and deals almost three times as much damage, the paladin "striker" tactic is inferior to an actual striker.Apologies if my analysis was unclear.  I admit, it may have been somewhat convoluted and long winded.  One of my friends invited me out for Thai food as I was writing it up, so I was in a bit of a rush.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification