Sure Strike.

[That One Guy]

The "job" of Reaping Strike is to increase your net damage to a single target. It does that.

The "job" of Sure Strike is... umm... well, its not to increase your net damage, because it decreases it. And when it wants to compete for the job of "more certain to get some damage dealt" it fails, because Reaping Strike is almost as good.

Is Cadfan's assumption. While I think it generally holds true, I think it might be a simplification of the matter.

So, if that assumption holds true, any attack that deals damage is strictly comparable to Reaping Strike and one can be calculated to be better than the other. But, I would argue that some of the things discussed entail alterations to how the attack is made and damage dealt. While it is an attack and damage is being dealt, I am not sure if Reaping Strike or one of these variations will be consistently superior numerically. I think we're trying to define the shtick of Sure Strike better and give it some way to achieve that shtick. In this case, the "more certain to get some damage" is really not what we're (or I'm not, at least) going for. While that is how sure strike is right now, what I want is "a greater chance of getting a successful hit". This is different in that getting a hit can have rider effects that a miss may not get (such as a leader bonus).

I'm trying to get the most responses possible to try and consider which one might be numerically similar to Reaping Strike (and possibly worse, but not as awful as Sure Strike), but also succeed in the greater chance of a successful hit. Then test which ones work in play situations (if I somehow have time). Whichever one succeeds the most in the desired fashion will become my house rule Sure Strike for whenever I pick up my old game, or if I DM over here.

(And while I was typing Cadfan posted!)

Thanks for weighing in with that problem w/ the WIS bonus getting too powerful at higher levels. For the purpose I mentioned above, is there any idea that works the best? I do like Nifft's setup attack thing. A lot. I'm just trying to find whatever might be the best option for my purposes and create a discussion to exchange and compare solutions to a generally shared problem.

 

[Cadfan]

That One Guy- its not that any power that only deals damage is directly comparable. Its that any power that "does the same job" is directly comparable. "Deal damage to a single target" is a job. Cleave is separate because it deals damage to multiple targets.

What it basically comes down to is this: there are a million different mathematical equations we could invent for attack and damage rolls. If two powers are identical in all ways except that they use different equations to create their final result, then they're directly comparable. They need to create genuinely different outcomes, or else there's no point in having both of them.

In this case, the "more certain to get some damage" is really not what we're (or I'm not, at least) going for. While that is how sure strike is right now, what I want is "a greater chance of getting a successful hit". This is different in that getting a hit can have rider effects that a miss may not get (such as a leader bonus).

You're correct in realizing that "greater chance of a successful hit" is exactly the same as "more certain to get some damage" unless some other rider exists. The problem is, no other rider exists for the Fighter. He marks whether he hits or misses.

 

[keterys]

Well, Reaping Strike can be how two-handed increases damage while sure strike can be how one-handed increases damage.

Especially since sure strike will still be better for dealing with minions.

 

[Nifft]

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

See, I told you Cadfan could explain it better than me.

Cleave and Reaping Strike vary damage distribution, though both have very similar expected total damage expressions. Because they vary in distribution, one cannot be regarded as strictly better than the other: their uses are situational.

Reaping Strike and Sure Strike, however, do the exact same thing: promise better expected damage against a single foe than a Basic attack. (Of course, Sure Strike is actually worse than a Basic Attack most of the time, so ... er ...)

The only case where Sure Strike could be said to be better than a Basic attack is when facing exactly one minion, and honestly, by the time you're in that position, the fight is won.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Khaalis]

So, ok... with all of that said then, what we basically need to do is give Sure Strike a niche rider that will set it apart yet equal to the existing At-Will powers.

The question is... what? What are some of the the Fighter's major shticks?

- Push
- Pull
- Shift
- Cause Ally(ies) to Shift
- Knock Prone
- Slow / Immobilize
- Ongoing Damage
- AC Debuff

Thematically, the one that makes the most sense would be an AC Debuff.

What about...?

SURE STRIKE
Attack: STR +2 vs. AC
Hit: 1[W] damage, and the target takes a –2 penalty to AC until the end of your next turn.
-- Increase damage to 2[W] and -4 AC at 21st level.

Technically, mathematically, I think this is the same as Nift's idea of the +2 carried over bonus to attack, but sticks to an existing "mechanic" for the fighter's other powers.

PS: Does this follow as a needed fix for Precise Strike (Fighter 3)?

 

[keterys]

That would be far too powerful, actually. You're a _lot_ better off having a useless power than one that is overpowered, so I'd really suggest people not overdo it on "fixing" sure strike.

Anyhow, another idea. Add 'Effect: You gain +1 to all defenses until the start of your next turn.' to the power (as is)

 

[That One Guy]

You're correct in realizing that "greater chance of a successful hit" is exactly the same as "more certain to get some damage" unless some other rider exists. The problem is, no other rider exists for the Fighter. He marks whether he hits or misses.

I think I misphrased something. My assumption is as follows:

Sure strike is theoretically for getting an important hit. While in most cases this renders the two "" phrases equal. The difference is when a buff is in play (such as from a Power, Paragon Path, or Feats). In these situations simply dealing damage is not as important as getting a successful hit (For instance, cold sword w/ Lasting Frost to set up the party w/ combat advantage (Assuming Wintertouched, etc.), or landing a Furious Smashing Power Attack hit, or taking advantage of an enemy's temporary vulnerability). These things do all involve damage, but they involve damage in a greater context of limited timing - setting up, helping, or finishing tactical combinations. While sure strike as is does a lame job of fulfilling this task, I want it to do better. Also, Reaping Strike on a miss will not succeed at this job of being a team-player-combo-maker.

Thus, to me Nifft's proposal of giving a +2 for the next round's combination of attacks is really brilliant. It works better than any of my proposals, which pretty much were just throwing out ideas for opinions.

The weapon favored stat idea was a guilty pleasure, but the dropping STR damage and adding WIS mod to hit was actually aiming at this goal. I'm pretty sure you're infinitely better at number crunching than I am. Is there any way to make Sure Strike (or a hypothetical power that we'll call Sure Strike) function in this job?