Well, no. You are just making a strawman out of the topic. The topic isn't "should I have a +1 to dex or to con", the OP stated that they "got two high roles, and four roles 13 and under" which got them to wonder which is more important, Con or Dex for a wizard. As have been shown, a high Con is more important than a high Dex.
As have been shown, a high Con is more important than a high Dex.
LOL. "My opinion can beat up your opinion"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Well, no. You are just making a strawman out of the topic. The topic isn't "should I have a +1 to dex or to con", the OP stated that they "got two high roles, and four roles 13 and under" which got them to wonder which is more important, Con or Dex for a wizard. As have been shown, a high Con is more important than a high Dex.
He's got fixed rolls. Whether we're talking about moving around a +1, a +2, a -1, it's all the same principle, the one I've been trying to get across all the.time.
What's been agreed is that Dex will be useful more often, but Con is more valuable when it is useful. The thing is, Dex is useful multiple times per session. Initiative, AC, stealth, backup weapon, and that's just in combat.
Con is mostly concentration saves, which are often served better by a higher AC anyway., and Con Save Spells, which aren't anywhere near as often as AC attacks, but are admittedly more consequential. I'd rather be hit by a sword than a Con Save Spell. However, it usually means I can't make an attack for one round or something similar. Not great, but when I'm rarely threatened by them and only 1 in 20 would be affected by the stat increase, is it really all that worth it if I have to sacrifice multiple tangible and significant benefits per session to get a benefit I can literally go through an entire module without experiencing?
Personal choice. Have a better chance of reducing damage taken and other spell effects front Dex Save Spell or have a better chance of not having to recast a spell after. Both are objectively valid choices. Personally I'd go for Dex and then get the Warcaster Feat for a +5 to my concentration saves rather than the measly +1 your Con increase will do.
Like if you go for Con, I'm not going to look down on you for it, but that doesn't mean that itnis objectively better.
Con is mostly concentration saves, which are often served better by a higher AC anyway.
Con is mostly "it's impossible to concentrate at 0 hp".
Dex is going to keep you above 0hp more than constitution will. The difference in hps from a 2-point constitution boost is very rarely going to be enough to make a difference. It is literally 1hp per level.
False equivalence on your part. If my opponent has such a high attack bonus that it will hit me on anything but a 1 regardless of if my AC is 12 or 13 then the extra point of Dex/AC is irrelevant. If I take *any* point of damage it doiesn't matter if I take 1 HP of damage or 19 points, I will still need to roll a 10 or higher which means that a higher con save is always useful.
This works both ways. If the opponent does 44 points of damage to me, whether I have a 0 or a +1 on my con save is irrelevant because it is still impossible to make the save. Meanwhile the +1 on Dexterity might have prevented the damage to start with.
I think enemies that do more than 44 points of damage are more common than enemies who will hit you on a 1.
Completely true. An enemy attacking you is not a check you make, it's the enemy attacking you. Since you will have to make concentration checks for every attack that hits you the +1 to concentration checks is relevant to ALL checks.
But fewer attacks will hit you so you will need to make fewer checks. There is no difference mathematically, as long as it is possible to make the concentration save and as long as the enemy needs to hit you is higher than a 1 or lower than a 20.
So it is exactly the same unless one of the following is true:
If it is impossible to make the save then dexterity is mathematically better.
If the enemy needs below 0 or 20+ to hit you then constitution is mathematically better.
If you have access to silvery barbs and use it dexterity is better.
If you have access to shield and use dexterity is marginally better.
If you are using blur or protection from good and evil or some other mechanic that causes disadvantage dexterity is better
This only considers concentration saves due to attacks, but it is mathematically solid.
Many Dex saves only removes half the damage which means that even if that extra +1 to dex meant a difference to the actual save you are still at a 5% disadvantage for the con save (unless we're dealing with damage rolls of 20+). Also more Con means more HP. If you're dead or unconscious it doesn't matter how good of a Dex you have.
Not true. Here is an example:
10th level wizard vs adult blue dragon breathing lightning for 66 damage:
Chance of remaining conscious (assuming unscathed):
12 con and 14 dex: 20%
14 con and 12 dex: 15%
16 con and 8 dex: 100%
Chance of maintaining concentration:
12 con and 14 dex: chance of maintaining concentration: 5% (20% chance of saving, 25% chance of making concentration save)
14 con and 12 dex: chance of maintaining concentration: 4.5% (15% chance of saving, 30% chance of making concentration save)
16 con and 8 dex: chance of maintaining concentration: 1.8% (5% chance of saving, 35% chance of making concentration save)
Well, actually a Wizard can survive pretty well with low cons and/or low dex. He has spells like false live that help him get more HP. And shield and other defensive measures.
He can also use invisibility for stealth (although I make my players roll so they don't make any noise), and several other tricks in his bag. In short, they are wizards.
In my opinion everything that is not Int, is expendable. Cons and Dex are what comes after Int, but at a great distance.
Now, between the two, in my opinion, dex is a bit more important. It is used for more things, and it is always better to avoid being hit than to save concentration (you avoid that roll if you are not hit). But they are really quite close.
Dex is going to keep you above 0hp more than constitution will. The difference in hps from a 2-point constitution boost is very rarely going to be enough to make a difference. It is literally 1hp per level.
'Effective hit points' is a metric used in games that do a lot more statistical analysis than is typical for D&D, and is equal to actual hit points/(1-mitigation), which in D&D is mostly the chance of your AC being missed.
Going from Con 12 (5 hp/level) to 14 (6 hp/level) is a 20% increase in eHP.
Going from monsters needing a 15+ to hit to a 16+ to hit is a 20% increase in eHP; the ratio gets worse as AC drops. In general the wizard needs an AC of at least 20 - (con bonus) + level/3 before AC is preferable to constitution.
Against Dex save for half effect, going from a 95% chance to save to a 100% is a 5% increase in eHP, and the ratio gets worse as save chance drops.
Against Con or Wis save effects, Dexterity is completely useless.
'Effective hit points' is a metric used in games that do a lot more statistical analysis than is typical for D&D
Gosh, I wonder why
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Dex is going to keep you above 0hp more than constitution will. The difference in hps from a 2-point constitution boost is very rarely going to be enough to make a difference. It is literally 1hp per level.
'Effective hit points' is a metric used in games that do a lot more statistical analysis than is typical for D&D, and is equal to actual hit points/(1-mitigation), which in D&D is mostly the chance of your AC being missed.
Going from Con 12 (5 hp/level) to 14 (6 hp/level) is a 20% increase in eHP.
Going from monsters needing a 15+ to hit to a 16+ to hit is a 20% increase in eHP; the ratio gets worse as AC drops. In general the wizard needs an AC of at least 20 - (con bonus) + level/3 before AC is preferable to constitution.
It is less than 20% per level because you get full hps at 1st level. So it is 12.5% at 1st level, 16% at 2nd level, 17% at 3rd level, 18% at 4th level ..... eventually getting closer and closer to 20%.
Using a Goblin at 1st level (attack bonus +4) as an example - to get a 12.5% increase in effective hps with a +1 to AC you need a 17 AC, not a 20.
While the number is factually true, it fails to consider spells like shield, silverybarbs, protection from evil and good, greater invisibility, Haste, blur and false life. Most of these are 1st and 2nd level spells. This relation to AC is correct only if you assume that wizard will never use any of these spells, but I think such a wizard is rare, ESPECIALLY one that is worried about running out of hit points. Using any of these spells will shift it in favor of the dex bonus pretty substantially.
A 1st level wizard can be at AC 20 with mage armor, the shield spell and a 14 dexterity. A wizard in medium armor can be at 22 with the shield spell. So you can be well ahead in substantial hps with a dex bonus even at 1st level. Further 1st level is when this is most important because at higher levels total hit points are less of a concern overall considering the volume of healing in the game.
To put a real example in here - Against Goblins at 1st level with 6 fights in the adventuring day, being attacked once in each fight in mage armor and with 2 shield spells (one recovered on a short rest) and not seeing the Goblins rolls. A wizard with a base AC of 14 AC will take 9.9 damage on average for the day. A wizard with a 15 AC will take 8.2 damage. That is a 17% increase in effective hit points. So you give up 12.5% of your hit points to take 17% less damage. This assumes you do not see the roll before you cast shield. If you see the roll the difference would be greater.
Against Dex save for half effect, going from a 95% chance to save to a 100% is a 5% increase in eHP, and the ratio gets worse as save chance drops.
The "effective hit points" for this are 2.5% of the full damage no matter what the target is to save (as long as both a failure and a success are possible).
If you need a 2 to save against the 66hp dragon breath I mentioned above, dropping this from a 2 to a 1 drops the average damage from 34.65 to 33. a 1.65 gain in effective hit points (2.5% of 66). Against the same breath weapon dropping the number needed to save from 12 to 11 will change it from 51.15 to 49.5 the same 1.65 gain in effective hps in either case.
Against Con or Wis save effects, Dexterity is completely useless.
Sure and constitution is useless against wisdom or dexterity save effects.
Constitution is also useless on weapon attacks, grapples and any skill or tool checks.
Well, actually a Wizard can survive pretty well with low cons and/or low dex. He has spells like false live that help him get more HP. And shield and other defensive measures.
He can also use invisibility for stealth (although I make my players roll so they don't make any noise), and several other tricks in his bag. In short, they are wizards.
In my opinion everything that is not Int, is expendable. Cons and Dex are what comes after Int, but at a great distance.
Now, between the two, in my opinion, dex is a bit more important. It is used for more things, and it is always better to avoid being hit than to save concentration (you avoid that roll if you are not hit). But they are really quite close.
I'd agree with that. The overall advantage of one over the other is pretty small, which is minimised by the fact that both are secondary stats. Int is the most important and the Wizard pretty much revolves around that. It's just that you still have a hierarchy of rolls (well, you often will), so people like to have a hierarchy of attributes. Still, giving a +1 to one over the other really isn't going to affect the campaign in significant manner.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to play D&D? Try the following resources first (each section withing vertical bars is a clickable link to find the resource).
Dex covers better skills, AC, and initiative, reflex saves. Dex is both a active and passive attribute. As in you use it for acrobatics checks, stealth, slight of hand etc. And its used in defense for AC etc. I consider active attributes better overall as I get to call when I use them as well as getting their innate defense when the GM asks for it. Con is con saves and health all passive, no active. Is failing a concentration check bad, sure. But I think people over state it. And if you get hit less, you wont have to make the check. With a good dex, mage armor and shield you will avoid a large range of the most normal attacks, basic physical ones. A 10-15% swing like the OP is suggesting is a lot of hits that become misses. With con they may be 10-15 more successful on the con save but will be making more checks.
But the real thing is the active vs passive. When I have a crap dex I sort of wall off a wide range of actions and activities as things I can't do very well, so you end up failing or just not trying on a huge range of basic activities. When I have a high dex, these checks are going to come up often as I know I'm good at it, will build to support it and make decisions that will call for these checks keeping me active in the game. Maybe by some math con is more effective overall, who knows I'm not sure that can be proven. But lets say it is for arguments sake, that's fine. But I will tell you Dex is far far more fun, because you actually get to do something with it because its an active vs passive attribute.
I would go CON, but DEX is just as important. If you know you will take a feat at level 4 that raises one of them (like resilient for CON, then that one can be 13). If you are taking an ASI at level 4, keep in mind which stats you are boosting and how much. Stat bonuses come at even #s.
You're really going to want CON, trust me, but if you do pick DEX, you're going to want to pick something like the Tough feat at level 4-8, because it'll give you plenty of hit points right off the bat, and it'll make you a better d8 hit die class for the rest of the game. If you prioritize Dex, you should get spells like Mage Armor and Shield to get high AC, or multiclass a level into Fighter for Medium Armor.
I usually don't respond to necro threads but i am kind of curious now what the OP decided to do. Its been 2 years so they are probably not looking at this though.
Probably just said forget it and went fighter lol.
I saw the post that very arrogantly said that it's been proven that con is more important than a high dex, and simply don't agree. When I have to choose between dex and con, I am almost always going to take dex. It's my belief that the AC will cause me to avoid more damage than I will get hit points from a bonus con. Then it comes to conc checks. If the dex prevents a hit, I don't have to even attempt the conc check; I only need that conc check when my dex has already failed. Now some attacks will certainly bypass my AC, but the difference in saves is generally only going to be 1. I feel like it's a safe gamble.
The initiative bonus MAY help you avoid damage by acting before the enemy and eliminating them.
Finally, dex is more FUN. Having an attack miss FEELS good. You're going to NOTICE that dex benefit by often when you're like, "nope, that attack JUST missed". Con? Minimizes the damage from failing to avoid being hit. That to me is less fun and exciting. "Well, at least I didn't lose conc, I guess that's something..." just doesn't hit you in the feels the same way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well, no. You are just making a strawman out of the topic. The topic isn't "should I have a +1 to dex or to con", the OP stated that they "got two high roles, and four roles 13 and under" which got them to wonder which is more important, Con or Dex for a wizard. As have been shown, a high Con is more important than a high Dex.
I always play standard array, and with wizard my cons and dex always starts at +2 (except with a bladesinger, which I try to start at +3 dex).
Both are equally important to a wizard. But, except for a bladesinger, all you really need is Int. Max it out as much as you can, and get +5 ASAP.
LOL. "My opinion can beat up your opinion"
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
He's got fixed rolls. Whether we're talking about moving around a +1, a +2, a -1, it's all the same principle, the one I've been trying to get across all the.time.
What's been agreed is that Dex will be useful more often, but Con is more valuable when it is useful. The thing is, Dex is useful multiple times per session. Initiative, AC, stealth, backup weapon, and that's just in combat.
Con is mostly concentration saves, which are often served better by a higher AC anyway., and Con Save Spells, which aren't anywhere near as often as AC attacks, but are admittedly more consequential. I'd rather be hit by a sword than a Con Save Spell. However, it usually means I can't make an attack for one round or something similar. Not great, but when I'm rarely threatened by them and only 1 in 20 would be affected by the stat increase, is it really all that worth it if I have to sacrifice multiple tangible and significant benefits per session to get a benefit I can literally go through an entire module without experiencing?
Personal choice. Have a better chance of reducing damage taken and other spell effects front Dex Save Spell or have a better chance of not having to recast a spell after. Both are objectively valid choices. Personally I'd go for Dex and then get the Warcaster Feat for a +5 to my concentration saves rather than the measly +1 your Con increase will do.
Like if you go for Con, I'm not going to look down on you for it, but that doesn't mean that itnis objectively better.
Want to play D&D? Try the following resources first (each section withing vertical bars is a clickable link to find the resource).
|The free Basic Rules.|
|Some free short adventures| and |some more here too.| |Here is a series of encounters, some of which link together form a mini-adventure|.
You've played a few games and now want to buy materials? |Here's my guide on what to buy next|.
That did make me laugh. I forget when I get involved in these, ah, 'discussions' that 99% of the time, it's only ever going to come down to nothing.
Want to play D&D? Try the following resources first (each section withing vertical bars is a clickable link to find the resource).
|The free Basic Rules.|
|Some free short adventures| and |some more here too.| |Here is a series of encounters, some of which link together form a mini-adventure|.
You've played a few games and now want to buy materials? |Here's my guide on what to buy next|.
Con is mostly "it's impossible to concentrate at 0 hp".
Dex is going to keep you above 0hp more than constitution will. The difference in hps from a 2-point constitution boost is very rarely going to be enough to make a difference. It is literally 1hp per level.
This works both ways. If the opponent does 44 points of damage to me, whether I have a 0 or a +1 on my con save is irrelevant because it is still impossible to make the save. Meanwhile the +1 on Dexterity might have prevented the damage to start with.
I think enemies that do more than 44 points of damage are more common than enemies who will hit you on a 1.
But fewer attacks will hit you so you will need to make fewer checks. There is no difference mathematically, as long as it is possible to make the concentration save and as long as the enemy needs to hit you is higher than a 1 or lower than a 20.
So it is exactly the same unless one of the following is true:
If it is impossible to make the save then dexterity is mathematically better.
If the enemy needs below 0 or 20+ to hit you then constitution is mathematically better.
If you have access to silvery barbs and use it dexterity is better.
If you have access to shield and use dexterity is marginally better.
If you are using blur or protection from good and evil or some other mechanic that causes disadvantage dexterity is better
This only considers concentration saves due to attacks, but it is mathematically solid.
Not true. Here is an example:
10th level wizard vs adult blue dragon breathing lightning for 66 damage:
Chance of remaining conscious (assuming unscathed):
12 con and 14 dex: 20%
14 con and 12 dex: 15%
16 con and 8 dex: 100%
Chance of maintaining concentration:
12 con and 14 dex: chance of maintaining concentration: 5% (20% chance of saving, 25% chance of making concentration save)
14 con and 12 dex: chance of maintaining concentration: 4.5% (15% chance of saving, 30% chance of making concentration save)
16 con and 8 dex: chance of maintaining concentration: 1.8% (5% chance of saving, 35% chance of making concentration save)
Well, actually a Wizard can survive pretty well with low cons and/or low dex. He has spells like false live that help him get more HP. And shield and other defensive measures.
He can also use invisibility for stealth (although I make my players roll so they don't make any noise), and several other tricks in his bag. In short, they are wizards.
In my opinion everything that is not Int, is expendable. Cons and Dex are what comes after Int, but at a great distance.
Now, between the two, in my opinion, dex is a bit more important. It is used for more things, and it is always better to avoid being hit than to save concentration (you avoid that roll if you are not hit). But they are really quite close.
'Effective hit points' is a metric used in games that do a lot more statistical analysis than is typical for D&D, and is equal to actual hit points/(1-mitigation), which in D&D is mostly the chance of your AC being missed.
Gosh, I wonder why
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It is less than 20% per level because you get full hps at 1st level. So it is 12.5% at 1st level, 16% at 2nd level, 17% at 3rd level, 18% at 4th level ..... eventually getting closer and closer to 20%.
Using a Goblin at 1st level (attack bonus +4) as an example - to get a 12.5% increase in effective hps with a +1 to AC you need a 17 AC, not a 20.
While the number is factually true, it fails to consider spells like shield, silverybarbs, protection from evil and good, greater invisibility, Haste, blur and false life. Most of these are 1st and 2nd level spells. This relation to AC is correct only if you assume that wizard will never use any of these spells, but I think such a wizard is rare, ESPECIALLY one that is worried about running out of hit points. Using any of these spells will shift it in favor of the dex bonus pretty substantially.
A 1st level wizard can be at AC 20 with mage armor, the shield spell and a 14 dexterity. A wizard in medium armor can be at 22 with the shield spell. So you can be well ahead in substantial hps with a dex bonus even at 1st level. Further 1st level is when this is most important because at higher levels total hit points are less of a concern overall considering the volume of healing in the game.
To put a real example in here - Against Goblins at 1st level with 6 fights in the adventuring day, being attacked once in each fight in mage armor and with 2 shield spells (one recovered on a short rest) and not seeing the Goblins rolls. A wizard with a base AC of 14 AC will take 9.9 damage on average for the day. A wizard with a 15 AC will take 8.2 damage. That is a 17% increase in effective hit points. So you give up 12.5% of your hit points to take 17% less damage. This assumes you do not see the roll before you cast shield. If you see the roll the difference would be greater.
The "effective hit points" for this are 2.5% of the full damage no matter what the target is to save (as long as both a failure and a success are possible).
If you need a 2 to save against the 66hp dragon breath I mentioned above, dropping this from a 2 to a 1 drops the average damage from 34.65 to 33. a 1.65 gain in effective hit points (2.5% of 66). Against the same breath weapon dropping the number needed to save from 12 to 11 will change it from 51.15 to 49.5 the same 1.65 gain in effective hps in either case.
Sure and constitution is useless against wisdom or dexterity save effects.
Constitution is also useless on weapon attacks, grapples and any skill or tool checks.
I'd agree with that. The overall advantage of one over the other is pretty small, which is minimised by the fact that both are secondary stats. Int is the most important and the Wizard pretty much revolves around that. It's just that you still have a hierarchy of rolls (well, you often will), so people like to have a hierarchy of attributes. Still, giving a +1 to one over the other really isn't going to affect the campaign in significant manner.
Want to play D&D? Try the following resources first (each section withing vertical bars is a clickable link to find the resource).
|The free Basic Rules.|
|Some free short adventures| and |some more here too.| |Here is a series of encounters, some of which link together form a mini-adventure|.
You've played a few games and now want to buy materials? |Here's my guide on what to buy next|.
Dex IMO.
Dex covers better skills, AC, and initiative, reflex saves. Dex is both a active and passive attribute. As in you use it for acrobatics checks, stealth, slight of hand etc. And its used in defense for AC etc. I consider active attributes better overall as I get to call when I use them as well as getting their innate defense when the GM asks for it. Con is con saves and health all passive, no active. Is failing a concentration check bad, sure. But I think people over state it. And if you get hit less, you wont have to make the check. With a good dex, mage armor and shield you will avoid a large range of the most normal attacks, basic physical ones. A 10-15% swing like the OP is suggesting is a lot of hits that become misses. With con they may be 10-15 more successful on the con save but will be making more checks.
But the real thing is the active vs passive. When I have a crap dex I sort of wall off a wide range of actions and activities as things I can't do very well, so you end up failing or just not trying on a huge range of basic activities. When I have a high dex, these checks are going to come up often as I know I'm good at it, will build to support it and make decisions that will call for these checks keeping me active in the game. Maybe by some math con is more effective overall, who knows I'm not sure that can be proven. But lets say it is for arguments sake, that's fine. But I will tell you Dex is far far more fun, because you actually get to do something with it because its an active vs passive attribute.
Fanum Tax
I would go CON, but DEX is just as important. If you know you will take a feat at level 4 that raises one of them (like resilient for CON, then that one can be 13). If you are taking an ASI at level 4, keep in mind which stats you are boosting and how much. Stat bonuses come at even #s.
Food, Scifi/fantasy, anime, DND 5E/RPG geek.
nm
You're really going to want CON, trust me, but if you do pick DEX, you're going to want to pick something like the Tough feat at level 4-8, because it'll give you plenty of hit points right off the bat, and it'll make you a better d8 hit die class for the rest of the game. If you prioritize Dex, you should get spells like Mage Armor and Shield to get high AC, or multiclass a level into Fighter for Medium Armor.
I usually don't respond to necro threads but i am kind of curious now what the OP decided to do. Its been 2 years so they are probably not looking at this though.
Probably just said forget it and went fighter lol.
I saw the post that very arrogantly said that it's been proven that con is more important than a high dex, and simply don't agree. When I have to choose between dex and con, I am almost always going to take dex. It's my belief that the AC will cause me to avoid more damage than I will get hit points from a bonus con. Then it comes to conc checks. If the dex prevents a hit, I don't have to even attempt the conc check; I only need that conc check when my dex has already failed. Now some attacks will certainly bypass my AC, but the difference in saves is generally only going to be 1. I feel like it's a safe gamble.
The initiative bonus MAY help you avoid damage by acting before the enemy and eliminating them.
Finally, dex is more FUN. Having an attack miss FEELS good. You're going to NOTICE that dex benefit by often when you're like, "nope, that attack JUST missed". Con? Minimizes the damage from failing to avoid being hit. That to me is less fun and exciting. "Well, at least I didn't lose conc, I guess that's something..." just doesn't hit you in the feels the same way.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha