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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ObsidianCrane" data-source="post: 4700448" data-attributes="member: 54918">Thanks Vermilion. <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=":)" />Cool so that +1 to hit with my weapon its really going to rock my world when I'm sneaking past the guards... oh wait there's a situation it doesn't matter in. You know when factoring the opportunity cost of something you need to look beyond the proverbial end of your sword.BTW this is a problem I have with the "Math Gurus" lots of time is spent crunching numbers and comming to the conclusion that there should be an extra +1 at x-level or whatever. Many of my characters played in actual game player are needing <10 normally to hit. Rarely a 10-11. The monster's AC going up will not significantly impact the game, and frankly the DM should be looking at the typical attacks of the party and determining monsters appropriately.Hey I hate blowing that encounter power as well.. is there anyone who doesn't?But if the argument is that +1 hit is worth sacrificing all other options at x-level (lets say 5 as you can retrain a 4th level feat to Expertise when you supposedly need this pip the first time) then the trend would be that powers that give +2 attack would be premium powers and you would be taking ways to increase their damage or other effects with your feats religously.But in Char Op land that isn't the case.The rigid mindset that the "best way" is to get that +1 is why we end up with people complaining that they cannot get their defences high enough - they burnt all that resource to eek out that extra +1 to attack and damage without properly considering that it would have long term negative impacts on their character.Sure my 20 Int Wizard hits more than my 18 Int one... but my 18 Int one has far more options and the same or better defences at the same level with the same equipment. Hence the opportunity cost of that extra +1 to hit and damage from my 20 Int was higher than it might appear on the surface.I actually gave examples of 2 characters it interests me for, so you are barking up the wrong tree.My point is that the feat is not absolutely a must have feat. Its a good feat worth using a slot up on to improve the hit chance of your character if needed.The feat is clearly better than a conditional +1 to hit that does nothing else - duh.Its not clearly better at first level than a feat that gives +1 to hit and damage with an at-will, your encounter and daily. (Tieflings only)Its not clearly better than feats that have nothing to do with combat that I need for my character to develop as I see them.Its not clearly better than Muti-class feats that add additional options and give skill training.Yes its better than conditional attack bonuses, and I understand the basic math crunch of why its better than damage bonuses (you hit more so you damage more), but I suspect that isn't as absolutely true as the maths gurus want us to believe in actual game play (if only for fun factor - its hard to say as its moving into subjective realms). When talking "opportunity cost" one needs to look at the whole picture, not just a little part of it.</blockquote>

Verification