Party AC difference

[UngeheuerLich]

@using longword 2-handed...

I believe the +1 bonus, for a wasted standard action and -2 AC doesn´t justify it... maybe if it would then count as a 2handed weapon for the purpose of power attack... It is just a little bonus if your shield was not ready.

@ beeing aware of combar challenge
I don´t completely agree with the monsters not aware of combat challenge. Maybe not every monster is aware, but maybe some insightful enemies know that trying to shift while beeing next to the fighter is a bad idea.

Also you may not forget, that the fighter can hold back his combat challenge attack for the important foe. The last thing to consider is slowing and dazing enemies. Paired with a fighter monsters bevome very immobile. And fighters have such attacks from level 1.

Also combat challenge can make a real difference in bringing down a foe. While you are right, that a foe with full hp can easily ignore the attack, a nearly dead foe will not do anyting after the fighter has used his attack.

@ not engaging targets that mark
completely agree for most monsters. If you are a soldier yourself you are interested in marking the marker. If you are a brute you will usually consider the mark as a personal insult.

 

[KarinsDad]

@using longword 2-handed...

I believe the +1 bonus, for a wasted standard action and -2 AC doesn´t justify it... maybe if it would then count as a 2handed weapon for the purpose of power attack... It is just a little bonus if your shield was not ready.

Hmmm. I never noticed that before.

Equipping or stowing a shield is a Standard Action.

But there is nothing on dropping a shield. Stow is used for other items for putting them away, so the same applies to Shield.

One would think that dropping a Shield should be a Move Action (since the shield is strapped to the arm and not just held and the Shield is not being actually stowed), but there is no rule there. The only thing to go on is the Stow rule. Interesting.

@ beeing aware of combar challenge
I don´t completely agree with the monsters not aware of combat challenge. Maybe not every monster is aware, but maybe some insightful enemies know that trying to shift while beeing next to the fighter is a bad idea.

Also you may not forget, that the fighter can hold back his combat challenge attack for the important foe. The last thing to consider is slowing and dazing enemies. Paired with a fighter monsters bevome very immobile. And fighters have such attacks from level 1.

Also combat challenge can make a real difference in bringing down a foe. While you are right, that a foe with full hp can easily ignore the attack, a nearly dead foe will not do anyting after the fighter has used his attack.

The general consensus in the past has been that Combat Challenge is not a condition or effect on a foe, hence, the foe is not aware of it unless he has specific knowledge of it or has seen it in action.

NPCs do not know that a Wizard has a Shield spell prepared either. The interrupt just suddenly happens.


And as far as Combat Challenge is concerned, most enemies should not even know that it can happen more than once. Most interrupts (99% in the game system, people will be hard pressed to find many at will interrupts) can only happen once per encounter (or once per day).

Considering how the game world physics work for the vast majority of interrupts, monsters should probably assume that Combat Challenge is useable once until the smack down is done a second time. The second use of it should often be a total surprise.

But, this is in the gray area of the DM using DM knowledge instead of monster knowledge. Monsters don't actually exist, so it is sometimes difficult for a DM to play their knowledge well as if they did.

 

[Mengu]

So... beyond proposing houserules is there really anything to do there, though?

As DM, I do currently try and watch peoples attack and defenses, to try and give items in an order which favors the weak/less optimized character. So I would first give the magic armor to the low AC Warden in early half-tier, and delay the high AC fighter's armor toward the end of the half-tier. I do the same with weapons. So a 16 primary with +2 proficiency would get the magic weapon upgrade first, and the 20 primary with +3 proficiency and +1 talent would get the magic weapon upgrade last.

This probably sounds unfair and smells of favoritism, but I haven't had complaints thus far. Everyone understands they are not going to get what they want all at the same time.

I was looking for other similar options without getting into house rule/5.0 territory to keep things even. I like one of the suggestions given earlier for attacking non-AC defenses more often (40/20/20/20), but those defenses have their own problems. Actually I like this thread in general for idea mining, from both sides of the argument.

Frankly, you don't sweat it. Put in level appropriate foes, and let them figure out the rest. Some will get hit more against AC. Some will get hit more against Reflex. Some choose to sacrifice defense for more damage. Control the variables you can, and move onwards. A level 12 skirmisher is +17 vs. AC. He has to roll a 3 to hit the lowest and a 15 to hit the highest. They're still on the same die at least, even if it is a bit ridiculous. Enough so that the fighter will get in a few extra attacks just by virtue of it being worth the enemy's time to just take the hits however he can.

I try not to sweat it too much, but I also don't want sour grapes because of either system mastery (or lack there of), or coincidental over/under poweredness.

I don't like telling players how to build their characters, but in 4e, a few recommendations need to be heard I think. Asking the close blast sorcerer to consider leather armor or unarmored agility is probably not out of line.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

But, this is in the gray area of the DM using DM knowledge instead of monster knowledge. Monsters don't actually exist, so it is sometimes difficult for a DM to play their knowledge well as if they did.

I believe you didn´t intend to insult my abilitiesas a DM, so i respond in this way.

I believe it is DM knowledge that most thigs happen only once per encounter or per day. Also it is qute possible that a trained monster has actually fought a fighter before.

So a monster that has knowledge of some fighting techniques can guess hat such things can happen, as a PC knows in the second fight against goblins that they shift after you missed them.

Usually monster didn´t encounter PCs before, but it can happen. Especially after an enemy escaped and told his fellow monsters that the guy with the big sword is very fast with his sword and gets serious hits in even when you try to maneuver carefully.

So what is metagamey and what is not? Difficult as you said.

JFYI I am very bad at metagaming... i am always forgetting that elves are immune to sleep in 3e and combat challenge all the time (only taking back this action when the spellcaster is familiar with elves (i.e. an elf himself)), but i am quite good at tactics...

 

[blargney the second]

I agree. The three of these are sticky, for one foe for one round if it hits. But, just Combat Challenge and Combat Superiority by themselves are not. And, many Fighters do not have Steel Serpent Strike.

That was the combo available at first level. There are more lockdown options as you go up in levels. Combat Challenge + Combat Superiority alone are sticky enough that the monsters we fight try to get away once per combat. Once they've seen how much I punish misbehavers, they [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DfGHBO2omw]don't repeat the mistake[/ame].

Anyways, the relevance of all this is that the defenses of all the combatants make a contour on the battlemap. Sometimes there's a steep gradient from one creature to the next, sometimes less. Marking abilities allow defenders to shape the contours somewhat. If the gradient is too steep, the mark's difference is imperceptible.

Personally, I think an AC difference greater than 4-5 among melee characters is getting pretty steep. A 6-7 point spread is a cliff.
-blarg

 

[Victim]

Sorry, but this is a widely believed fallacy.

What you say is true if one doesn't look at the encounter as a whole. But, it's false if one does.

One or two or even three extra attacks in an encounter, successful or not, by the Fighter doesn't mean that much in the large scheme of things if the enemies take down a Striker or especially a Leader in the process.

The main advantage that the PCs have over the NPCs is healing. If the NPCs take out the Leader, that advantage is wiped out.

A secondary large advantage that the PCs have over the NPCs is striking. Very few NPCs have really good striking capability like Striker PCs do. If the NPCs take out the Striker, that advantage is wiped out.

When you take Combat Challenge attacks, the fighter will generally be doing more than striker damage.

By the time we include the marked penalty, the average non defender's AC is the same as the average fighter's AC. Moreover, defenders tend not to have any advantage on NAD attacks, thus going after other characters with those powers has no extra advantage (with marking, it can be less likely to hit). So the monsters aren't gaining a huge damage advantage by attacking even fairly squishy characters. So it's not exactly easy to knock someone down in a round, so the party usually has time to step in with healing. Sure, you don't usually have unlimited healing. OTOH, you have the monsters exposing themselves and suffer punishment to go after your back ranks, so they'll die faster normal too.

IME, a bigger issue with non defenders getting pummeled is less that they run out of HP/healing soon, and more that they run low on surges. They can survive the beating, but not several times a day. OTOH, the defender - especially since many of them run CON as a major stat - can take much more damage over the course of the day even though his HP within an encounter may not be much more than the rogue. Of course, the monsters inflicting the surge attrition won't live to see the benefit of it - the strategy works out real well for them.

 

[renau1g]

In my party i have still to "cheat" by your definition and i have a paladin with AC 20 and a sorcerer with AC 12 IIRC...

How does the sorcerer have such a low AC? Str-based ones get to add that instead of Dex/Int and the 2 Dex ones have high Dex. I can't imagine a sorcerer having less than 16 in those stats. Then again that's me.

If the difference between defenses is greater than 3 the monster is at worst case (with Mark of Warding) still better off moving away from the defender to attack the squishies. I love doing it to a certain Warden here in one of my PbP games, it drives him wild as at low levels they're not really able to keep enemies next to them (except the Winter's Herald Daily).

Although a lot of people make mention of stickiness and fighter and how easy it is to daze an enemy to keep them from shift+charge, don't forget how easy it is for enemies to daze/blind PC's.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

rolled stats, storm sorcerer... low AC, maybe he is at 13, whatever... he is not stupid enough to stand in the open, using chokepoints well enough and just keeping out of melee whenever possible...

 

[Mengu]

How does the sorcerer have such a low AC? Str-based ones get to add that instead of Dex/Int and the 2 Dex ones have high Dex. I can't imagine a sorcerer having less than 16 in those stats.

I can imagine a fire genasi fire sorcerer or goliath cosmic sorcerer with Cha 18, Str 15, Dex 13. It would be unusual, but not out of the realm of possibility.

 

[Nifft]

It's totally the territory of DM whim. You quoted the relevent text and still totally missed what the PHB is saying:

The Fighter doesn't decide to have the monster provoke a movement Opportunity Attack, the DM does.

If your DM plays monsters to never provoke Fighter OAs, then the Fighter is better at controlling the battlefield than he otherwise would have been.

Allowing players to perfectly predict critter actions is putting a huge chunk of power in their hands.

Your DM's decision is rather humorously ironic -- he's taking an ability that is often effective and turning it into one that is perfectly effective.

Cheers, -- N