10,196
edits
Changes
→Does it need to be an armor type bonus?
:::I don't quite have time yet, but later tonight I'll run some numbers, see what kind of AC I can get with making it a shield bonus and see if it's too much or not. You are correct that AC suffers beyond attack bonuses, so I feel less bad about buffing AC over other things. I'll run some tests tonight. -- [[User:Eiji-kun|Eiji-kun]] ([[User talk:Eiji-kun|talk]]) 00:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
:::: The thing is that you need attack rolls to outpage AC in order for iterative attacks to matter. In fact, iterative attacks make up the bulk of damage characters at high level do. I recently did [[Capped Modifiers and DCs (3.5e Variant Rule)|hard caps]] for the various numbers, and let me give an example of how fragile the RNG is there:
:::: At level 16, according to the Pathfinder Unchained table, monster (combatant) AC is 33, and our cap was set at +30. That means that you need a 3 to hit with your primary attack, an 8 to hit with your first iterative attack, a 13 to hit with your second iterative attack, and an 18 to hit with your last iterative attack.
:::: What ''this'' means is that if the target's AC increases by even two, it cuts down the chance of hitting with your last iterative attack by 66%, and your third iterative attack's chance to hit drops by 25%, both of which have an incredibly significant effect on average DPR when factoring in AC.
:::: On the other hand, if the attack roll increases by 2, then the first attack's virtually guaranteed to hit, meaning there's little point in even rolling the dice for that one.
:::: If you want iterative attacks to have any real meaning, while still at the same time have meaning in the RNG itself, then you need to be incredibly careful when messing with the RNG, and this is especially the case at higher levels. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 07:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
