Should Implements have their own proficiency bonus?

[Black Knight Irios]

I see no reason to give a proficiency bonus to implement users. As others said, NADs are usually 2-3 points lower than AC and if you pick your powers wisely you can target all 3 NADs as you need it. And sometimes the difference between AC and a single NAD is more than 5. That is roughly the same as a weapon attack with prof. vs a NAD.

Well, this is easy... no, implements should not get a proficiency bonus because they target defenses that are lower than AC.

Other powers getting an effective bonus to attack because they get proficiency bonus and target other defenses isn't particularly material, anymore than it is for powers to get bonuses to attack (Sure Strike, Mesmeric Hold, etc)

Ie, it's okay for Piercing Strike to attack Reflex with a prof bonus in the same way that it's okay for Mesmeric Hold to attack Will with a +4 bonus.

Nothing more to add.

 

[keterys]

By the same token, implement attacks against AC should be getting a +2 bonus to hit, shouldn't them?

Yes, they should. It's one of my primary objections about Curse of the Bloody Fangs - great idea, but they missed giving it at least a +2.

I will say that the issue is somewhat muddied by the bungling of Fortitude defense in the Monster Manual, such that it's often preferable not to attack it. That screws people on both sides of the Implement/Weapon gap.

I have been wondering if it would be a reasonable rules change if defenses were generally in line with AC and attacks just hit whichever was appropriate, and both had proficiency bonuses... though whether you'd want to have all implements be +2 prof, or whether you'd want to rejigger to doing, like, '2I' for double implement dice, like 2W is now... dunno. It's too big a change to do without major system changes, though, so I don't worry about it much

 

[Obryn]

Let me clarify - I don't think Implements should have proficiency bonuses built in. I do, however, think there should be a wider array of powers which give bonuses to the attack.

I also find Implement vs. AC powers to be ... poor. I mean, they're basically traps - "Here, take this awesome power! Now, NEVER HIT WITH IT!" I think it would be fairer to spell it out specifically, like Intelligence -3 vs Reflex, or what have you.

-O

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Piercing Strike really is the main weapon vs NAD power to consider. The others are all encounter or daily powers and thus have different balance points. Furious Smash has already been addressed...

The thing with Piercing Strike is it is a very nice at-will, but when you compare it to the other rogue at-will powers for balance, you find that it isn't out of line. It does the least damage of any of them and lacks any other benefit besides damage. Deft Strike does equal damage but has its own big advantage and fills an entirely different niche. Riposte Strike obviously has its additional attack benefit. And Sly Flourish simply does more damage.

I think in general Piercing Strike is the most useful at-will for the majority of rogues, and seems to be pretty close to a default choice, but it isn't overpowered. Riposte Strike OTOH seems to me to be kind of iffy. Monsters are likely to just go after someone else and so the benefit overall to the party isn't usually that significant. You could argue it gives a Brutal Scoundrel with not so good AC defense a way to either do extra damage or discourage attacks on your weak AC, but I'm never a real fan of powers that give monsters an escape clause.

Anyway, no, I don't see why implements need a proficiency bonus. There are some implement Stat vs AC powers that are nerfed by the lack, but not too many and usually they are ones that can be buffed with a feat or something like that if you really want to make them a mainstay of your character.

 

[Bolongo]

I also find Implement vs. AC powers to be ... poor. I mean, they're basically traps

Implement vs. Fort attacks are not much better...

My Warlock player had a very rough time in the Heroic tier trying to connect with Diabolic Grasp and Howl of Doom. Some of that was down to suboptimal tactics, of course, but not all of it. The Wizard, constantly targeting Ref, did a whole lot more damage.

 

[WalterKovacs]

In general implements don't get proficiency because they target non-AC defenses while weapons target AC.

There are powers that allow a weapon to attack non-AC defenses ... then again there are also weapon attacks that give bonuses to hit over and above proficiency against AC. Basically ... there are some attacks that have 'added accuracy' as part of it's effect ... this is traded off by the attack doing less damage and/or having a lesser rider effect.

Similarly, there are implement attacks against AC (admitedly few). There are also weapon attacks with a penalty to the attack roll (again, admitedly few). They trade this decreased accuracy for dealing more damage, or having better rider effects.

Just because there are exceptions to the general rule, it shouldn't be a reason to completely change the general rule. Likely a power isn't going to target the "wrong" defense without that being factored into balancing the power, just like damage, number of targets, range, etc.

The ability+x powers are often lacking the weapon/implement keyword (which means they not only lack proficiency, they also lack magical enhancement), or they are for a stat that may not necesarily be the primary attack stat, or it may be meant to be very accurate.

 

[Mr. Wilson]

I'm on the fence about it personally. On one hand, Will/Reflex are usually lower. OTOH, Fort is usually about equal to AC.

I guess it means something that I hardly even look at my warlock powers that target Fort. unless I've done something to reduce the subject's Fort defense before hand. I prefer to attack will/reflex in 95% of all situations.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

At first it was said that Implement powers never benefitted of the proficiency bonus that Weapon powers do because they target defenses other than AC, which tend to be 2-3 points lower than AC.

But we have tons of Weapon powers that target other defenses (like Piercing Strike, Shadow Wasp Strike, etc), and we have a few Implement powers that target AC (like Curse of the Bloody Fangs).

So, is the original reasoning obsolete? Should implements get their own proficiency bonus?

Most weapon attacks still target AC. Those that don't basically have an "extra accuracy" bonus built in.

But a far more interesting thing is: Implements with proficiency bonus would have introduced an entirely new design space.

Implements could be balanced similar like weapons, with proficiency bonus balancing damage dice, range, implement properties and maybe even area effects. I wouldn't be surprised if a 4.5 or 5E of D&D would have this.

Staff: Damage 1d8, proficiency +2; Property - Extended Radius (+1 sq to burst or blast size)
Wand: Damage 1d6, proficiency +3; Property - Extended Range (+5 squares to range)
Orb: Damage 1d8, proficiency +3
Rod: Damage 1d10, proficiency +2
Holy Symbol: d8, proficiency +2; Property: Worn
Totem: d6, proficiency +3
Weapon: 1d8, proficiency +3

Of course, this also closes another design space: Implement powers can be balanced far more "precise" if you don't have to deal with [ I ] powers, and instead can be fine tuned by the damage dice used.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Of course, this also closes another design space: Implement powers can be balanced far more "precise" if you don't have to deal with [ I ] powers, and instead can be fine tuned by the damage dice used.

Not necessarily - you should be able to get a variety of implements by different proficiency bonus and properties alone - no need to touch the damage dice. For example, in your list, the rod could have "high crit" as property, the orb could have "brutal 1" and so on (of course, you would need to take this into account for the power design, but that was done for the weapon powers already).

However, such a model has a "flaw" - implements are class-specific, weapons are freely accessible (with feats), which means that each class would need its own implement set to give choice.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Kzach]

Add to that the fact that when Fighters, for instance, attack with a non-weapon "implement" (namely, a shield), the attack is at Str+2 vs. AC, making up for the lack of proficiency bonus.

That's not making up for the lack of a proficiency bonus. It's making up for a lack of magical bonus.