When a rolled "1" isn't an automatic failure?

[DracoSuave]

ur doin it wrong. If you aim for maximum attack bonus and your leader hands out more attack bonus, it's not that hard to hit on a two. If you're a high-wisdom fighter, OAs can be very close to auto-hit territory, especially with one of the recent "basic melee vs reflex" feats.

I didn't use the word 'impossible.'

But can you give me a practical example not involving Combat Supremacy?

By practical example, I mean not starting with the 50/50 assumption.

 

[chitzk0i]

My friend's fighter had an attack bonus of +19 at level 12. My Infernal Strategist was almost always flanking with him, so combat advantage makes +21. Glancing at the MM1, most stuff we'd fight had AC of 28-30. So hitting on 7-9, or 6-8 when I used Commander's Strike. My Lead the Attack was for +7, so yeah. If the bard|paladin/war chanter used an action point, he'd hit on 2-4, or 2-2 with the double-boosted MBA from the PP encounter power. Plus the bard/paladin had a Versatile Master'd Magic Weapon, for another +1 to hit when he used that.

Upon reflection, I realize that this is a somewhat niche party (2 leaders in a group of 4), so I guess uncommon circumstances breed uncommon results.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

My friend's fighter had an attack bonus of +19 at level 12. [...]

Upon reflection, I realize that this is a somewhat niche party (2 leaders in a group of 4), so I guess uncommon circumstances breed uncommon results.

Let's take a look at the +21 to hit:
1/2 lvl: +6
STR (starting 18 +2 racial + 3 for levels = 23): +6
Weapon Prof: +3
Weapon Enchantment: +3
Expertise: +1
Fighter Weapon Talent: +1
attack bonus = 20
So I'm still missing a +1 but it shows that this guy worked hard to gain a really high attack bonus. Maybe not everyone is as dedicated as he is towards attack bonuses. Therefore, I don't see that as a problem. On the contrary, the very existence of Expertise proves the whole debate regarding attack bonuses being auto-hits somewhat moot.