tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3342640173817458901.post4595264934804498486..comments2023-09-21T10:30:10.699+02:00Comments on Square Fireballs: Go, go, ranger powers!Pericohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12414348870266960204noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3342640173817458901.post-78512864329391046902012-11-06T07:28:38.835+01:002012-11-06T07:28:38.835+01:00Hi, VM. I may not have much time to post new artic...Hi, VM. I may not have much time to post new articles these days, but I still check the comments, so any feedback is appreciated.<br /><br />Anyway, about your suggested fix - it's an idea that comes up from time to time in forums, and it works fine for the most part. The main problem I have with it is that it's not all that easy to translate into rules text that works and remains readable, particularly for a verbose power like Twin Strike: though the meaning of your version is clear enough, as written you would be _adding_ damage to the attack, rather than reducing it.<br /><br />You'd need a clause like "If the two attacks hit the same target, resolve them as a single hit that deals 1[W] extra damage".<br /><br />An even better solution, and one that also comes up often in multiatack discussion, is to hardwire this non-stacking clause into the rules, so that all multiattacking powers that happen to hit more than once are resolved as a single hit. It's not a bad houserule, though it would probably feel a bit forced as an official rule.<br /><br />I have had off-turn / minor attacks on my future article list practically forever, but never got to write about it. The easiest solution is horribly inelegant, but similar to the previous one: to remove all damage bonuses normally associated with a hit from these attacks. This is easier said than done, and has the problem of also hitting fair stuff like Combat Challenge and other defender mechanics. <br /><br />For my great rules revision project (which is unfortunately on hold, for the moment), I though about these issues and came up with an idea to codify these rule changes in an acceptable manner. I would first define two keywords that could be applied to powers:<br /><br />Flurry: An attack with the flurry keyword halves all damage bonuses that would be applied to it.<br /><br />Swift: An attack with the swift keyword ignores all damage bonuses that would be applied to it.<br /><br />I would also need to define damage bonuses, which is not currently a clear rules concept. A tentative definition would be "anything that adds to damage and isn't stated in the power text". So you'd keep your ability modifier, and whatever your [W] is worth, and reduce/discard the rest.<br /><br />The next step would be to define a list of powers that would have these keywords retroactively added. Basically anything multiattacking would get flurry, while off-turn attacks would gain swift. Pericohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12414348870266960204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3342640173817458901.post-44138843836989411402012-11-05T07:00:20.822+01:002012-11-05T07:00:20.822+01:00This is way out of date, and you probably don'...This is way out of date, and you probably don't check this any more, but I've found a better fix for twin strike is keeping the attack the way it is, but making the hit line "Hit: 1[w] damage. If both attacks hit, this does 1[w] bonus damage." <br /><br />This disables the stacking modifier. <br /><br />However, another problem that rangers have is off-turn attacks and minor action attacks. Those are tougher to fix without going through on a case-by-case basis.VancianFighterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14843511174327839057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3342640173817458901.post-65753525684026785512009-04-17T00:46:00.000+02:002009-04-17T00:46:00.000+02:00That all sounds reasonable. I have never seen Blo...That all sounds reasonable. I have never seen Bloodclaw or the like in action, (and hopefully never will) so I'm not very familiar with the potential of multiattacks. Perhaps I'll have to give some thought to good universal houserules for them in the future.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3342640173817458901.post-33799023770092955632009-04-14T16:38:00.000+02:002009-04-14T16:38:00.000+02:00I think the problem with multi-attacks goes beyond...I think the problem with multi-attacks goes beyond those broken items (which I'd definitely like to tone down), as anything that improves your damage will benefit those powers more than single-attack ones of the same level.<br /><br />We're moving into science-fiction territory here, but I'd be comfortable with a system where, for a moderately optimized character with good gear, the raw damage output of multiattacks was slightly below that of single attacks. Multiattacks would still have the advantage of a greatly increased accuracy (beyond Careful Attack's wildest dreams) and flexibility, for those powers that allow choosing one or more powers. They would also be the powers of choice whenever leader bonuses to attack were available.<br /><br />Now, I haven't made extensive calculations, but I think my sweeping fix doesn't get that far: the powers listed, even with the added penalty, would probably outdamage most alternatives as soon as you applied a minimum of optimization. More so if Reckless weapons and the like are used. I just tried to reduce the difference.<br /><br />A different approach that I'd also like to take would be to restrict the best damage-enhancing effects to work only once per turn. Maybe only with main-hand attacks, too. You can see this philosophy in the recent official errata to Marked Scourge, for example. You don't need to change Weapon Focus, but Hammer Rhythm and many paragon path features would probably deserve it.Pericohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12414348870266960204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3342640173817458901.post-75046049896474721792009-04-11T20:31:00.000+02:002009-04-11T20:31:00.000+02:00Excellent blog! On topic, though, I don't think I...Excellent blog! On topic, though, I don't think I could bring myself to make such sweeping changes to the ranger (particularly since they haven't been problematic for me yet). However, I've been under the impression that most of the excessive power stemming from multi-attack powers comes from items that add large damage bonuses like Reckless, Bloodclaw, or Radiant. Do you think if such things were removed, Multi-attack powers would still need an across-the-board nerf? (Ignoring the disparity between the Ranger at-wills for the moment)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com