That isn't necessarily a benefit for the fighter. Inability to attack defenses other than AC isn't an advantage.To you, and to DracoSuave, I say the same thing: your point is valid, but the overarching moral of my little tale was that the Wizard must choose between two (often) mutually-exclusive options:
1. Use an attack that hits the monster's weakest defense, or
2. Use an attack that adds an appropriate status effect.
This is a problem that the weapon-based classes do not share. The fighter never has to sacrifice his weapon proficiency bonus in order to stun, knock prone or push a creature.
So sad. It appears that sometimes the best attack, tactically, is the one with the least chance of hitting.
But I still can't wait to play a Wizard.
And if he picked up something to help with this problem (Reaping Strike or Sure Strike), he missed out on Cleave or Tide of Iron, the nicer of the at-wills.I'm sure the fighter enjoys fighting those hobgoblin soldiers with their 22 AC
That isn't necessarily a benefit for the fighter. Inability to attack defenses other than AC isn't an advantage.
We already agreed to add 1/2 level to damage and rolling a 50% retention on Dailies that miss.
We just say that if your power doesn't have a Miss: line then missing does not waste the power.
So you're effectively giving almost every power the Reliable keyword for free.
_And_ in many cases making the Miss effect a drawback.
That's a pretty big change and probably bumps up almost every class compared to fighters.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.