Targeting Fortitude, not as dumb as it sounds.

[Belphanior]

The verdict is pretty much that Fortitude is the strongest NAD, Reflex is about a point or so lower, and Will is the weakest. For that reason powers that target Fortitude are sometimes seen as inaccurate.

But that was based on an analysis of MM1. D&D is not a static game, and WotC can learn from its mistakes. So I've spent some time checking the 322 stat blocks of the MM2 and came up with the following results:
* 39 monsters have a Fort and Ref that are equally high.
* 134 monsters have a Ref that is higher than their Fort.

Which leaves 149 monsters where the traditional mantra holds true. Still, only 46%. For the other 54% targeting Fortitude is not a poor choice.

Just some food for thought.

 

[Cadfan]

Its also worth noting that counting up the total number of monsters in the monster manual is not actually a representative sample of monsters at the table, or more importantly, of rounds spent attacking specific monsters at the table.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Its also worth noting that counting up the total number of monsters in the monster manual is not actually a representative sample of monsters at the table, or more importantly, of rounds spent attacking specific monsters at the table.

So, how do we use the Monster Builder or the Compendium to make a more decent estimation?

We will probably need some "weighting" mechanic, maybe:
Minions count double. (You use multiple Minions in each encounter.)
Elites count 3/4, Solos 1/2. (You use elites and solos less often over multiple encounters.)
Leaders count 3/4. (It's unlikely you use multiple Leaders in the same encounter.)

 

[wedgeski]

Hmm. I'm not sure analyzing the creature catalogue in 4ed for which Defense is statistically most likely to be the weakest is going to do much to assuage the "4E is an MMO" crowd.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Hmm. I'm not sure analyzing the creature catalogue in 4ed for which Defense is statistically most likely to be the weakest is going to do much to assuage the "4E is an MMO" crowd.

But who cares about that crowd?

 

[roguerouge]

Does the fact that powers that aren't off a weapon don't get the proficiency bonus count in this analysis?

 

[Crothian]

Hmm. I'm not sure analyzing the creature catalogue in 4ed for which Defense is statistically most likely to be the weakest is going to do much to assuage the "4E is an MMO" crowd.

No different then targeting the weakest saving throw of a monster back in 1e.

 

[Fifth Element]

Hmm. I'm not sure analyzing the creature catalogue in 4ed for which Defense is statistically most likely to be the weakest is going to do much to assuage the "4E is an MMO" crowd.

1. There's no assuaging them.

2. What Mustrum_Ridcully said.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I don't think it's a good idea to load up on too much of any one type of thing. In a campaign you never know what kind of challenges will be faced and it seems wiser to spread the wealth around rather than gamble on what would be most "common".

 

[tyrlaan]

I don't think it's a good idea to load up on too much of any one type of thing. In a campaign you never know what kind of challenges will be faced and it seems wiser to spread the wealth around rather than gamble on what would be most "common".

Not to mention it would be easy for a DM to change things up such that loading up on specific types of attacks suddenly becomes a detriment instead of an advantage.