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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jack99" data-source="post: 4583585" data-attributes="member: 53135">Funnily enough, that's not the typical party recommended by the PHB/DMG. I must however admit that the chances that I see that party in my campaign is slim to none, so I doubt I will have the chance to test it.I am stating an opinion. Why is it that you think I am talking about universal truths every time I do just that. Besides, I do not see one person who has supported anything in this thread.First of all, I am not denying that there is a grind problem. My groups do not have any issue (in fact, after the threads that have been posted here on the subject, I took it up with my group last night, and all I got was blank stares from them) with this alleged grind, but.. since some people do have a problem, it's definitely there.I just do not think the problem is with the to-hit. You see, my experience with 4e has showed that players will hit a lot more than they will miss. In fact, with just a few conditional modifiers that are hard to avoid, no matter the party composition, many classes will hit on just about anything above a 5 (or so), as long as the monsters met are not several levels higher. Lets take a look at my party at level 8, for example.FighterClericWizardRogueWarlockFighter has +15 to hit (+6 stat, +4 level, +2 magic, +1 class, +2 prof)Rogue has +15 to hit, (+6 stat, +4 level, +2 magic, +3 prof) +18 with CACasters all have +12 or +13 (+6 stat, +4 levels, +2 or +3 implement)At level 8, you will meet a wide variety of monsters. Probably from level 6 to level 10. That's a decent range, and I am pretty certain most DM's would use monsters from that range against said party. Sure, there might be a BBEG or a few other that fall outside the range, but the biggest majority would fall within.So what do we have in that range (non-elite, non-solo, 1 monster of each level picked at random)Skirmishers: AC from 20 to 24, defenses from 15-23Soldiers: AC 21-26, defenses from 16-24Controller: AC 19-23, defenses from 14-23Artillery: AC 20-24, defenses from 17-24Lurker: AC 21-25, defenses from 16-24Brute: AC 18-22, defenses from 14-24When I look at those numbers, I notice one thing that my game shows. Players hit a lot. They really hit a lot. Sure, they might have a bad streak once in a while (The fighter did on Tuesday, when he rolled 6 rolls below 7 in a row.. but we had a good laugh) but overall, you will hit a lot more than you will miss. Some classes hit so often, it's almost silly (hello rogue, I am looking at you), so if you start handing out more + tohit, you risk ruining the game. After all, there is not much fun in rolling a d20, if you know you will hit every time, aye?So, in case I was unclear in my explanation above. My position on this is that there is ample possibilities within the game to grant players more than enough to hit to be able to hit the monsters. So, if some players in some group are experiencing a "grind", because they do not hit very often, maybe the problem is not with the system, but elsewhere. Or maybe the problem is with the system, but elsewhere in the system. Meaning that they do not need more tohit. My suggestion would be do fiddle with the monsters' hitpoints. When asked, I usually advice people to shave off 25% of the hitpoints, while adding 25% to the monsters' average damage. Mostly because I think that if there is an issue with the system, it's with the hitpoints you have to find the fix, not with the tohit.</blockquote>

Verification