My friend, you are cherry-picking your examples to make the difference matter. If you had used different monsters with different hit points and, different ACs, the difference would have been far less significant.
You are also ignoring all the many non-combat things a level 2 wizard could possibly do besides the twice-a-day bladesinging (without which, getting into melee combat would be much more difficult). Arguably you'd get more mileage out of something like Charm Person at level 2, than +1 to a dex bonus for sword-stabbing.
And by the way, while you're optimizing, why are you using a rapier instead of dual-wielding? You'd get a whole extra attack with more chances to hit/kill/crit/etc.
You are taking very specific circumstances and in those circumstances, the extra +1 bonus is a huge advantage. By the way, you are also using your wonky rolled array, and comparing having a 20 to a 16, when under normal circumstances you'd be comparing an 18 to 16 or 18 to 20.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
1) One cannot look at hit probabilities in a vacuum. That is only one half of the damage equation.
2) And as for "DM's can do anything", I have seen that fallacy destroyed many many times on many a forum. If my char was the only one the DM had to deal with, sure, that logic holds. But that is not the case. Once again, it can't be looked at in a vacuum. The DM cannot say "when the Bladesinger attacks, the Hob's AC is 18, for anyone else, it is 17". The DM either designs the scenario around the lowest common denominator, where the most powerful chars carve it up, boring everyone, or the DM designs the scenario around the most powerful char, which puts everyone else at much higher risk, or the DM does something in between, which makes no one happy.
1) Clearly one can. It's what this thread does. It's not asking about the damage equation, it's asking about hit probabilities.
2) The DM can quite easily say that the hobgobling getting attacked by the Bladesinger has AC 18 and 25 hp while the other hobgoblin getting attacked by the monk has AC 15 and 17 hp, or whatever seems appropriate. Or they can give the monk an item or ability that makes up for the disparity in stats. Nothing is supposed to be set in stone from before the campaign even starts.
1) You are going to arbitrarily dictate that when a player chooses a target, you will decide then and there that particular target is tougher than the rest, or easier? I can see it now. The Bladesinger misses with a combined 15 on the attack roll, then the monk succeeds on the attack on the same target with a 15. The Bladesinger says "wait, I just missed with a 15", and you say "yeah, the target has variable AC's because I feel like it". At which, all self-respecting players pack up their stuff and leave. Good luck selling that concept to a table of experienced players.
2) And as for giving the Monk an item to compensate, two words: "Power Creep". Because my Bladesinger, with his 10 Wis, wants an item to compensate for the fact the Monk has a 14 Wisdom, and both have proficiency in Perception.
1) No, not different stats for the same target. Different targets with different stats. AC is also the only stat that really stands out to the players, unless several players all attack monsters with abilities that target the same save - the attack stat and hp of the monsters are pretty much invisible to the players, so those can easily be varied even on the fly.
2) Power creep, as I already explained, is meaningless. No power creep can beat the DM's all powerful 'I do what I want' card. Regardless, I wouldn't compensate characters for having a low stat in a secondary or tertiary ability. What's the point?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My friend, you are cherry-picking your examples to make the difference matter. If you had used different monsters with different hit points and, different ACs, the difference would have been far less significant.
You are also ignoring all the many non-combat things a level 2 wizard could possibly do besides the twice-a-day bladesinging (without which, getting into melee combat would be much more difficult). Arguably you'd get more mileage out of something like Charm Person at level 2, than +1 to a dex bonus for sword-stabbing.
And by the way, while you're optimizing, why are you using a rapier instead of dual-wielding? You'd get a whole extra attack with more chances to hit/kill/crit/etc.
You are taking very specific circumstances and in those circumstances, the extra +1 bonus is a huge advantage. By the way, you are also using your wonky rolled array, and comparing having a 20 to a 16, when under normal circumstances you'd be comparing an 18 to 16 or 18 to 20.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
1) No, not different stats for the same target. Different targets with different stats. AC is also the only stat that really stands out to the players, unless several players all attack monsters with abilities that target the same save - the attack stat and hp of the monsters are pretty much invisible to the players, so those can easily be varied even on the fly.
2) Power creep, as I already explained, is meaningless. No power creep can beat the DM's all powerful 'I do what I want' card. Regardless, I wouldn't compensate characters for having a low stat in a secondary or tertiary ability. What's the point?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].