Community

Feb 4, 2013 -- 6:31AM, jonathan_sicari wrote:

It occurs to me rereading this that people seem fixated on feat based accuracy bonuses and forget that in 4th Ed (at least) I had other dials and switches to use (although I did always take expertise). Point buy could give me the same stat range as die rolling (DDN's current point buy does not). I could choose a +3 proficiency to hit bonus weapon as opposed to a +2 (or none for improvised). Most of my prefered characters had an inherent +1 to hit with their normal attack modes (Fighter (Slayer, Knight), Scouts, Rogues) or targeted NADs (Hexblades) and many had powers such as Beserker's Charge, Poised Assault, and all had the charge option for a +1.

Having a class that is innately more accurate is fine with me as it a feature of the class and is balanced against everything else the class has to offer.  Having +x to hit mixed in with other choices I dislike because other choices end up being inferior in most cases. Feats just stand out more because the large number of feats that are not +x that you don't get to take.

I'm actually particularly happy that they got rid of the +2/+3 weapon proficiency and hope that it doesn't return as part of the basic or standard rules.

Feb 4, 2013 -- 10:28AM, Mand12 wrote:

Feb 4, 2013 -- 12:14AM, jonathan_sicari wrote:

What I remember is how often I was whiffing. DDN, alledgedly due to the Bounded Accuracy, does not allow me to take options to mitigate bad die rolls and I hate it.

BA is not the cause of this.

Also, +1 on accuracy +1 being an illusion of choice.

How is the current implementation of BA not the cause of my being incapable of making relevent choices concerning my PC's accuracy.

Also, not understanding your final statement, is there an extra +1 in there?

Feb 4, 2013 -- 10:54AM, jonathan_sicari wrote:

Feb 4, 2013 -- 10:28AM, Mand12 wrote:

Feb 4, 2013 -- 12:14AM, jonathan_sicari wrote:

What I remember is how often I was whiffing. DDN, alledgedly due to the Bounded Accuracy, does not allow me to take options to mitigate bad die rolls and I hate it.

BA is not the cause of this.

Also, +1 on accuracy +1 being an illusion of choice.

How is the current implementation of BA not the cause of my being incapable of making relevent choices concerning my PC's accuracy.

Also, not understanding your final statement, is there an extra +1 in there?

BA does not limit PCs.

I was +1ing the post saying that a +1 to accuracy is an illusion of choice, and trying to be clever about it.

The bottom line is that accuracy boosters are nearly impossible to balance.  That's what's driving their removal, not the BA concept.  BA lets the PCs increase in accuracy - it just removes the assumption that PCs will increase in accuracy, on the part of the DM side of the system.  DCs, monster AC and attacks, that sort of thing.  It's a subtle point, but it is important.

Feb 4, 2013 -- 11:07AM, Saelorn wrote:

I find that 50% accuracy is not much fun, (as a PC at least; the DM at least has multiple characters to control). If I have to wait five or ten minutes to get a turn, and all I want to do is hit something, and then there's an even chance that nothing will happen whatsoever... it feels as though I have no control over anything. And of course, 50% per round means there's a 1 in 4 chance that nothing will happen over two rounds, and a 1 in 8 chance that an entire three-round combat could pass without any of my attacks landing. Why was I even pretending to participate?

If they could work out something like the old console RPGs, where some classes would have higher accuracy but reduced damage, then that feels like a real choice at the character level. If fighters had 60% accuracy and did 2d6 + 7 damage, while rogues had 80% accuracy for 1d8 + 5 damage, then that would be more interesting.

Problem with this argument is that it quickly escalates. 60% is no fun 70% is no fun. Rolling lower then average damage is no fun.  It's bad game design where your only meaningful choice each round is a single attack.