NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OpusLich" data-source="post: 3910673" data-attributes="member: 57596">This is some fine insanity here, Najo.No sane DM is going to have, as their 'standard' encounter, a baseline where the fighter type (the one who has the highest 'to hit' in the party) only hits 50% of the time.  If that were really true, then the Bards, Rogues, Monks, and all the other non-casty types would be missing 75% of the time, or more.  That's not how the game was intended.  Or at least any game I'm playing. <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=":)" />If your game is conducted as such, then...A) I'd wager it was in the vast minority.B) I probably wouldn't take Power Attack under those circumstances either.andC) You need to get a new DM, or relax your DMing encounters if you're running the show.Every combatant should be reasonably able to contribute to most encounters.  Granted there will be some where a finesse fighter just can't surpass the DR of a monster, or a Rogue is less able to help against undead/constructs/etc.But in the average encounter, the non-front line combatant should be able to hit 50% of the time.   Otherwise, how not fun is that?And if the non-front line combatant is hitting 50% of the time, then the real front line fighter should be hitting 75%, or more, of the time.  They have a higher BAB, usually a higher stat bonus, WF, and are usually swinging the better weapon.And, as many others have pointed out, that better to-hit range makes for optimal PA use (if used appropriately).  Especially if they're getting -1/+2.Think of it this way... at worst, PA brings a fighter's to-hit bonus down to the level of the Bards, Rogues, Monks, etc.. while giving them +5 or +10 more on their damage.   They're still a better combatant if they're hitting the same as the others, but much harder.  And I'll repeat it again, just in case, you won't be doing it all the time.  Just when appropriate.Your average damage over time doesn't apply here.  If we were leaving PA on all the time, then sure.  But, again, we're not.You're still clinging to your 50%, using it all the time, data and not listening to anything anyone else says that contradicts that baseline of yours.  Without that, you have no leg to stand upon.So, if you really play in a game where the average encounter is really that hard, then PA is probably not for you.  But for the majority who don't play in that world, PA works just fine.And once again, in case you missed it before, PA use is situational.  Charts don't apply.Just for grins, I looked in the DMG for encounter difficulty levels.  Their example shows a party of level 6 adventures (4) would be 'challenged' by 4 Ogres.  Ogres have an AC of 16.A fighter at level 6 would have +6 BAB, +1 WF,  a +1 weapon, and probably a +4 bonus from Str.  That's a total of +12 to hit.  YMMV.So that fighter will hit 85% of the time in a 'challenging' adventure.  Just a point of order, the DMG suggests that only 20% of the encounters should be more difficult than this type of encounter.  So, wrapping this all up.  Standard encounter = at least 85% hits for a fighter type in the vast majority of DMG suggested encounters.  Not 50%.  No charts needed.As others have pointed out with non-fake math, that range is prime range for PA.Let's see if I can remember the insanity anyway.So our fighter does 1d8+5 = 9.5.  9.5 x 85% = 8.075... not Power Attacking.Then he/she turns PA on and does 1d8+10 = 14.5.  14.5 x 60% = 8.7... Power Attacking.And that's only -1/+1.There's your chart.Hmm.</blockquote>

Verification