How do y'all feel about the concept of rocket tag in 3.5?

[archangel.arcanis]

Two feats, Martial Study (any tiger Claw maneuver) and Martial Study (Sudden Leap) can work like a pounce. Or you get a third feat, Martial Study (Pouncing Charge).

Archangel, just ignore him.

I know and I have now. I was just hoping we could avoid another Sunic incident. BB posts some things that are helpful and could be informative, but like Sunic has an attitude that just makes everyone want to fight with him.

[Basket Burner]

The one houserule that I've found to work well (for a lot of things, but it includes diminishing rocket tag) is just to switch to using 2d10 instead of d20.  It makes for a much nicer probability curve, and defenses become much more reliable.

Enemies hit on a 2. That means they go from hitting 95% to 99%. Not exactly reliable. On the defense side at least. Characters that aren't bulking up their saves need more than an 11 to resist spells. They are now even less able to do so. The ones that do bulk up their saves resist spells more but then I said that already.

It reduces autohits and misses, and even more importantly, crits (which are always better for team monster than for players).  It means that if you can get your defenses (whatever type they may be) up to point where you succeed on a 8 or better, you have a much, much higher chance of survival than when rolling a d20. 

No, it doesn't do much against monsters that hit on a 2, but if you let one of your defenses lapse that hard in a high-op game without another way of countering, you deserve to die.

Against physical attacks, you don't have much of a choice. Reducing crits is nice, but you still have to eliminate them entirely to avoid damage spikes, and since the straight up damage is more reliable I wouldn't say you're any better off overall.

Oh and hitting on a 2 means to hit = target AC -2 or higher, not to hit = target AC + 19 or higher.

For all your bitching about Sunic, you are doing an excellent job of proving him right on all counts.

Paraphrased discussion upon learning that I was on this board:
Sunic: Wait, you're dealing with those clowns? Don't waste your time, they're all mouth breathing fuckwits. Trying to educate them on high level play is like pearls before swine.
BB: It's not that I don't believe you, it's that I want to see for myself if they really are that bad.
Sunic: Suit yourself, but your faith in humanity will suffer for it.

If you were smarter, you wouldn't prove those who hate you right and turn others against you, others that initially had no problem with you. You'll respond to this by bitching some more about posters that don't care about you, and liken them to posters well on their way to ceasing to care about you instead of taking the point for what it is. I know that you will. And I know that you will not cease to nitpick about hypothetical dragon full attacks instead of focusing yourselves, because you really are that predictable.

That explains why most of the talent left though.

[Kethrian]

Oh and hitting on a 2 means to hit = target AC -2 or higher, not to hit = target AC + 19 or higher.

Sorry, my bad.  Brain fart while typing it in.  Doesn't change my point, PCs should easily have 20+ AC by level 5, and there are few, if any, CR 5 critters that have an attack bonus of +18 or higher.  And once you get to level 10+, the PCs have access to constant concealment and other defensive boosts, further increasing the likelihood that they won't be hit by most monster attacks.  Sure, monster attack bonuses do creep up faster than most PCs' AC at the higher end, but slapping on an extra 20-50% miss chance ensures that none but the most optimized enemies will hit more than 40-60% of the time.

[Basket Burner]

Even if they hit on a 6, which is doable very easily with a mere +14 to hit that means they are hitting more often, and not less. In order for AC to provide a greater benefit, you'd have to be hit on a 12 or better at the least. And that's just not happening by RAW while still keeping your character threatening enough to be worth it to attack them.

Which means that 2d10 increases rocket tag, and does not decrease it.

[Kethrian]

Even if they hit on a 6, which is doable very easily with a mere +14 to hit that means they are hitting more often, and not less. In order for AC to provide a greater benefit, you'd have to be hit on a 12 or better at the least. And that's just not happening by RAW while still keeping your character threatening enough to be worth it to attack them.

Which means that 2d10 increases rocket tag, and does not decrease it.

So you admit that "enemies hit on a 2" is false.  Good.

I'll just go through the MM and see how many CR 5s have an attack with a +14 or more.

(click to show/hide)

Achaierai... +9
Animated object, Huge... +9
Arrowhawk, adult... +12
Barghest, greater... +13
Basilisk... +8
Bearded devil... +9
Cloaker... +8
Dire Lion... +13
Djinni... +10
Elemental, Large... Air +12, Earth +12, Fire +10, Water +10
Gibbering mouther... +4
Green hag... +13
Hieracosphinx... +13
Hydra, six-headed... +8
Manticore... +10
Monstrous spider, Huge... +9
Mummy... +11
Nightmare... +9
Ochre Jelly... +5
Orca... +12
Phase spider... +7
Rast... +6
Ravid... +4
Shadow mastiff... +7
Skeleton, ettin... +10
Snake, giant constrictor... +13
Spider eater... +8
Pixie... +5
Tojanida, adult... +10
Troll... +9
Troll, scrag... +9
Werebear... Human +6, Bear +13, Hybrid +13
Weretiger... Human +6, Tiger +11, Hybrid +11
Winter wolf... +9
Wraith... +5
Yuan-ti, halfblood... +10
Zombie, umber hulk... +14

and dragons (OP for their CR, but still, for completeness)
Gold, wyrmling... +11
Copper, very young... +10
Bronze, very young... +11
Red, very young... +14
Silver, very young... +12
Black, young... +12
Green, young... +14

Huh, wouldja look at that... one creature with a +14 at CR 5, plus two dragons.  6 at +13, but of 40 regular monsters and 7 dragons, that does not suggest that it is "very doable".  Possible, certainly, but not nearly at the rate which you so firmly espouse.

[lans]

We should also work on the myth that you need heal to negate an enemies full attack.

[Basket Burner]

As opposed to what? Dying on one full attack anyways?

By the way, any to hit higher than 9 just got more dangerous. Nice try though.

[lans]

Plenty of full attacks do not kill in a single round with any sort of reliability as we have demonstrated several times.

[Mooncrow]

Even if they hit on a 6, which is doable very easily with a mere +14 to hit that means they are hitting more often, and not less. In order for AC to provide a greater benefit, you'd have to be hit on a 12 or better at the least. And that's just not happening by RAW while still keeping your character threatening enough to be worth it to attack them.

Which means that 2d10 increases rocket tag, and does not decrease it.

Putting aside your assumptions about AC, it still increases the value of the defenses that matter (it also increases the value of armor, but that takes big boy math, so we'll let that go).  If we were to accept your assumptions as a given, increasing the hit ratio from "pretty much all the time" to "all the time" still doesn't seem like a big deal, since you have to effectively treat both scenarios exactly the same.

[Kethrian]

By the way, any to hit higher than 9 just got more dangerous. Nice try though.

How, pray tell, did it just get more dangerous?  I just disproved your last few claims about attack bonuses, so now you pull some Chewbacca defense bull-crap?

[SneeR]

Pray tell, what book is LION's charge from?

[Mooncrow]

Pray tell, what book is LION's charge from?

The spell is from the Spell Compendium, the psionic power is from the Expanded Psionics Handbook.

[Basket Burner]

Even if they hit on a 6, which is doable very easily with a mere +14 to hit that means they are hitting more often, and not less. In order for AC to provide a greater benefit, you'd have to be hit on a 12 or better at the least. And that's just not happening by RAW while still keeping your character threatening enough to be worth it to attack them.

Which means that 2d10 increases rocket tag, and does not decrease it.

Putting aside your assumptions about AC, it still increases the value of the defenses that matter (it also increases the value of armor, but that takes big boy math, so we'll let that go).  If we were to accept your assumptions as a given, increasing the hit ratio from "pretty much all the time" to "all the time" still doesn't seem like a big deal, since you have to effectively treat both scenarios exactly the same.

2d10 weights dice towards 11. 11 means "you get hit". Weighting dice towards 11 means "you get hit more, armor means less". I know that takes big boy math, but try anyways.

Anything with a to hit bonus of at least 9 at level 5 is more likely to hit. That's... almost everything. AC is less useful at the lower levels. It gets worse from there.

I realize you cannot help but be stupid but you should be able to follow your own examples at least, even if you cannot follow mine.

On second thought, why the fuck am I even bothering? Even the mods endorse your trolling bullshit, so it's no wonder that the talent keeps leaving. The first BS message from them I ignored as I couldn't respond to it anyways, but the second?

Exactly like GitP. Enjoy your basket weaver haven, I have better things to do than hear people bitch about ghosts of the past.

[Zonugal]

Yay!!!!

[Kethrian]

Lemme get this straight, first you claim that monsters will get a 95% chance of success, then when I disproved that, you say that a 75% chance is average, which I disproved again, so now you're falling back on 55%, and calling it a massive threat to PCs?  And that's if they stop boosting their AC at 20 at 5th level, instead of going as high as, let's go with a reasonably optimized amount, 24?  With a 24 AC, the monsters need a +13 to hit, which I have already proven is uncommon to rare for a CR 5, to hit at 50% (55% with 2d10) frequency.

You cannot show any work to back up any of your claims and just spout insults whenever anyone challenges you, and you call everyone else trolls?

[Mooncrow]

Even if they hit on a 6, which is doable very easily with a mere +14 to hit that means they are hitting more often, and not less. In order for AC to provide a greater benefit, you'd have to be hit on a 12 or better at the least. And that's just not happening by RAW while still keeping your character threatening enough to be worth it to attack them.

Which means that 2d10 increases rocket tag, and does not decrease it.

Putting aside your assumptions about AC, it still increases the value of the defenses that matter (it also increases the value of armor, but that takes big boy math, so we'll let that go).  If we were to accept your assumptions as a given, increasing the hit ratio from "pretty much all the time" to "all the time" still doesn't seem like a big deal, since you have to effectively treat both scenarios exactly the same.

2d10 weights dice towards 11. 11 means "you get hit". Weighting dice towards 11 means "you get hit more, armor means less". I know that takes big boy math, but try anyways.

Anything with a to hit bonus of at least 9 at level 5 is more likely to hit. That's... almost everything. AC is less useful at the lower levels. It gets worse from there.

I realize you cannot help but be stupid but you should be able to follow your own examples at least, even if you cannot follow mine.

On second thought, why the fuck am I even bothering? Even the mods endorse your trolling bullshit, so it's no wonder that the talent keeps leaving. The first BS message from them I ignored as I couldn't respond to it anyways, but the second?

Exactly like GitP. Enjoy your basket weaver haven, I have better things to do than hear people bitch about ghosts of the past.

It makes dice results more predictable, with fewer outliers.  That makes planning and optimizing defenses easier.  It makes the cost of not having defenses higher, and makes the return of having decent defenses higher.  More to the point, in small words - if something hits more than 50% of the time, you have to assume that it's going to happen.  with d20, every point of AC or +hit changes that percentage by 5%.  That make optimizing defenses increasingly cost inefficient the higher you go.  With 2d10, the higher you raise your defenses, the higher the cost, yes, but also the higher the benefit. It doesn't quite scale exponentially, but it does make the marginal costs much lower.  And I'm talking actual high-op characters here, not sub-par styles, so things like high AC and saves aren't all that difficult to get.  And yes, I'll provide examples of how to do that when you feel like sharing your builds. 

But yes, you're correct, if we accept your faulty assumptions.  My assumptions don't include things like "arbitrarily high +hit" on my NPCs.  Sure, I could, but since my stated goal was reducing rocket tag, why would I?

That was a nice ad hoc at the end though, considering I'm one of the few that never cared who you may or may not be.  But go ahead, continue to tell yourself that anyone who disagrees with you and posts the math to prove it is trolling. 

[JaronK]

Perhaps we can move beyond the arbitrary stuff now that we don't have someone who's going to decide all statistics are skewed.  It seems that one important thing to get here is a good gauge of appropriate to hit numbers at given CRs.  I'd actually be more curious about the CR 10 area, since I think we've all seen that it's not too hard with normal optimization to get a sufficient AC to handle normal published CR 5ish encounters without any trouble. 

I'd honestly leave MM2 out of it though... it's a 3.0 book.  But maybe a gauge using MM1, 3, 4, and 5, as well as the NPCs with PC classes from the DMG?  And let's not assume there's a ton of buffing Bards or whatever hiding in the sidelines, or arbitrary "IT AMBUSHES YOU NO MATTER WHAT!" stuff.  But it would be nice to see what kind of AC you'd reasonably need to avoid getting full attack killed at a given level.  It would also be nice to see at what point AC becomes more expensive than miss chances as a viable defense.

JaronK

[Kethrian]

I pencilled in the 3.5 updates right into my MM2, so I can use it without needing to cross-reference the update when using it.  That should help if I compiled a list of attack bonuses for CR 10 creatures going beyond MM1.

Perma Blur (cloak of concealment) costs 24,000gp and gives a 20% miss, much like if your AC was 4 higher.  Shouldn't take much for that to quickly become cost effective.

[JaronK]

The problem is that MM2 has some REALLY wacky CR ideas.  As such, it's full of bizarre outliers that really aren't standard, even after you use the official 3.5 update.  I also think any creature that doesn't rely on AC targeting attacks should be counted (we don't care about the attack bonus of a Wizard, obviously).

And while the blur effect permanently on is certainly good, I don't imagine that alone would protect you from getting one round TKO'd without sufficient AC as well from most serious full attacks.

JaronK

[Mooncrow]

The problem is that MM2 has some REALLY wacky CR ideas.  As such, it's full of bizarre outliers that really aren't standard, even after you use the official 3.5 update.  I also think any creature that doesn't rely on AC targeting attacks should be counted (we don't care about the attack bonus of a Wizard, obviously).

And while the blur effect permanently on is certainly good, I don't imagine that alone would protect you from getting one round TKO'd without sufficient AC as well from most serious full attacks.

JaronK

Miss effects, DR and AC all tend to have a multiplicative effect on each other when looking at time to live values.