Sure Strike.

[keterys]

I know that's how Careful Strike used to work, a few iterations back. (I assume back when twin strike was melee only, but don't know)

 

[tintagel]

What's you're take on a version of Sure Strike that just lets you roll twice and take the best result? That boosts both accuracy (by the equivalent of a bit more than +3 attack) and crit chance (generally almost doubling it).

sound a bit too strong. I'd say re-roll if you want (before success is declared).

Or just keep it simple: +Wis & Str to attack.

 

[That One Guy]

What's you're take on a version of Sure Strike that just lets you roll twice and take the best result? That boosts both accuracy (by the equivalent of a bit more than +3 attack) and crit chance (generally almost doubling it).

I think that's too strong. Would it be [w] or [w] + Str?

Keterys, fair enough about keeping it [w]. I see your point, and agree. A striker should do more damage.

So, I have ANOTHER idea. Roll a STR vs AC [w] + Str attack. After the total is given (and a failure is made) the fighter can drop STR from damage to add WIS mod to hit.

It's sort of like a mini reliable. Better or worse than the +weapon-favored stat to hit, assuming Keterys' point?

 

[Khaalis]

I think overall, the shtick of Sure Strike is to be able to hit hard-to-hit foes. The problem inherent in this, is that it is a suboptimal choice for a fighter to take when they can only choose 2 at-wills since it is by definition only useful under certain conditions, unlike say Tide of Iron which can be used all the time. However, overall, Sure Strike even fails at this simple task. At the same time, I don't think it needs to deal more damage (thats not its shtick), but it needs to perform its intended job better.

What about the following?


SURE STRIKE
Attack: STR +2 vs. Reflex
Hit: 1[W] damage
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.
Special: This power counts as a melee basic attack for the purposes of Opportunity Attacks. When you make an Opportunity Attack, you can use this power.


Or is this now too powerful?

 

[tintagel]

I think overall, the shtick of Sure Strike is to be able to hit hard-to-hit foes. The problem inherent in this, is that it is a suboptimal choice for a fighter to take when they can only choose 2 at-wills since it is by definition only useful under certain conditions, unlike say Tide of Iron which can be used all the time. However, overall, Sure Strike even fails at this simple task. At the same time, I don't think it needs to deal more damage (thats not its shtick), but it needs to perform its intended job better.

What about the following?


SURE STRIKE
Attack: STR +2 vs. Reflex
Hit: 1[W] damage
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.
Special: This power counts as a melee basic attack for the purposes of Opportunity Attacks. When you make an Opportunity Attack, you can use this power.


Or is this now too powerful?

I like:

SURE STRIKE
Attack: STR+WIS vs. AC
Hit: 1[W] damage
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.
Special: This power counts as a melee basic attack.

 

[Nifft]

Well, I was assuming you'd keep it at 1W damage.

What's you're take on a version of Sure Strike that just lets you roll twice and take the best result?

I'd say re-roll if you want (before success is declared).

Or just keep it simple: +Wis & Str to attack.

So, I have ANOTHER idea. Roll a STR vs AC [w] + Str attack. After the total is given (and a failure is made) the fighter can drop STR from damage to add WIS mod to hit.

SURE STRIKE
Attack: STR +2 vs. Reflex
Hit: 1[W] damage
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.
Special: This power counts as a melee basic attack for the purposes of Opportunity Attacks. When you make an Opportunity Attack, you can use this power.

SURE STRIKE
Attack: STR+WIS vs. AC
Hit: 1[W] damage
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.
Special: This power counts as a melee basic attack.

Guys, go back and take a look at Cadfan's first post in this thread. Sure Strike can't be just attack for damage, or else it's going to be the exact same power as Reaping Strike (... but always better or always worse, depending on the specifics). Duplicating an existing power is bad (especially if the duplicate completely overshadows the original, but bad either way).

- - -

Targeting Reflex is the most interesting of these, but even then, it's not really appropriate: the Rogue benefits from doing this precisely because he has "rider effects" which trigger on any hit -- his Sneak Attack damage is the main one, but his daily powers have others which he can trigger for the duration of the encounter. Fighters have nothing comparable.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Khaalis]

Guys, go back and take a look at Cadfan's first post in this thread. Sure Strike can't be just attack for damage, or else it's going to be the exact same power as Reaping Strike (... but always better or always worse, depending on the specifics). Duplicating an existing power is bad (especially if the duplicate completely overshadows the original, but bad either way).

- - -

Targeting Reflex is the most interesting of these, but even then, it's not really appropriate: the Rogue benefits from doing this precisely because he has "rider effects" which trigger on any hit -- his Sneak Attack damage is the main one, but his daily powers have others which he can trigger for the duration of the encounter. Fighters have nothing comparable.

Ok, I'm a little confused. How does the version with only 1[W] duplicate Reaping Strike? Am I missing something?

REAPING STRIKE
Hit: 1[W] + STR
Miss: 1/2 STR or STR if using 2H weapon

So Reaping Strike's shtick is to deal damage even if you miss. Sure Strike's shtick is to make you hit more often, which is why I suggested ATK vs. REF. This doesn't step on the rogue's toes in my opinion because all classes get some powers that target defenses other than AC. This would be a good option for the Fighter simply because they don't currently have such a low level power as many other classes do. However, a +2 ATK alone is not sufficient to make the power worthwhile.

What am I missing here?

 

[Nifft]

Ok, I'm a little confused. How does the version with only 1[W] duplicate Reaping Strike? Am I missing something?

Yes, and Cadfan explained it better (in this thread) than I can, but what it boils down to is:

If a power only deals damage, then it can be compared directly against any other power that only deals damage, and one will be better than the other. This is bad, because one power should never be strictly better than another power of the same class, same level, and same frequency.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Cadfan]

So Reaping Strike's shtick is to deal damage even if you miss. Sure Strike's shtick is to make you hit more often, which is why I suggested ATK vs. REF.

Reaping Strike's shtick is to increase damage, particularly to increase damage versus high armor class opponents. That's exactly what most people's versions of Sure Strike do. The danger is that, for some versions of Sure Strike suggested in this thread, I can crunch the numbers and tell your character whether Reaping Strike or Sure Strike is the "right" power for them. The other one then becomes a "false choice," something that it seems like you might want, but which is in fact a trap. You really only had one choice to begin with.

Which is the problem right now, and the reason Sure Strike isn't any good. It looks like an option, but secretly its not.

That's the reason I like Nifft's idea, although I'd probably power it down a little. Str v ac, 1[W], +2 power bonus on one attack roll of your choice versus this opponent until the end of your next turn. Unlike some others in this thread, I don't think it steps on the leader's toes, because its internal. You can't grant it to someone else in the group.

PS- some people have tossed out adding things like wisdom bonus to attack. Don't do this. It creates a weird scaling effect where at level 1 you might be attacking with an additional +2, but at level 30 you're attacking with an additional +6. And even if you compensate by not letting you add your strength bonus to damage, it still doesn't work right- because at level 30 you might be neglecting to add 8 points of damage, in exchange for a +6 to hit, on an attack that is doing dozens of points of damage. It turns Sure Strike into an absolute monster at higher levels, while leaving it crappy at low levels.

 

[Khaalis]

Yes, and Cadfan explained it better (in this thread) than I can, but what it boils down to is:

If a power only deals damage, then it can be compared directly against any other power that only deals damage, and one will be better than the other. This is bad, because one power should never be strictly better than another power of the same class, same level, and same frequency.

Ok, but only Tide of Iron doesn't strictly deal damage.

Cleave = Damage to 1 foe & STR damage to another
Reaping = Damage to 1 foe & damage to it even if you miss
Tide of Iron = Damage to 1 foe & Push
Sure (as-is) = Damage to 1 foe & +2 to Attack

The Sure version I proposed creates the job of doing Damage to 1 foe, and increasing the fighter's capacity to hit and his ability to use opportunity attacks (thus improves his Combat Superiority by even more than just WIS).

This is why I am not seeing it as being the same as Reaping Strike.

Reaping's Shtick is that it technically never misses. It is guaranteed damage. The new Sure Strike's shtick would be to:
a) hit harder to hit targets (even if it is just +2 vs. AC) - and -
b) can be used in place of a basic attack on Opportunity Attacks.

I'm still not certain a +2 bonus to Attack on Opportunity Attacks is worth the power without also targeting Reflex (which will in most cases make it equivalent to a +4 to Attack since REF is usually about 2 points lower than AC).