My main doubt concern the chance to hit on monster!
The tipical mob got AC value higher than average Temp/Refl/Will def in the order of 2/3 point.
Let assume that u're creating a party of lvl 1 char and your DM choose those 2 kind of mobs for u
Hit change is 1d20 (same for every class) + Mod main stat (same for every class) + 1/2 lvl (same for every class) + misc
now.. let talk about misc
if a mage use his wand as Implement he got +1...+6 on hit and dmg if he got a magic wand (on lvl 1 ofc it's a RICH +0 wand -.-)
so, assuming 18 on int his starting bonus is 4 (int) + 0 (1/2 lvl) + 0 (wand)
If a rogue use his dagger he got, assuming 18 on dex..
4 (dex) + 0 (1/2 lvl) + 3 (PROFICIENCY) + 1 (rogue weapon talent)
on the example, using basic atk, a Mage's Magic Missile is a Int vs Refl atk that deals 2d4 dmg + int; the Mage, to HIT, need to roll 10 on dice for the skullcleaver or 11 for the underboss; pretty fair considering the mobs lvl!
now let's talk about rogue: his Piercing strike is a Dex vs Refl atk that deal 1[w]+dex; the Rogue, to hit, need to roll 6 or 7.
Having 4 more dice faces availeble to hit on 20 faces means 20% more chance to Hit...
OFC this just an example cause i could talk about other spell (most of rogue are vs AC abilities and mage use vs Will/Fort atk) or other class (maybe comparing with warlock would work better considering their samerole in the party as nuker.
The question is.. WHY CASTERS DO NOT HAVE PROFICIENCY ON THEIR IMPLEMENT to balance melee and caster hit chance??!?!?!
tnx again for any answer
NEXT QUESTION.
and furthermore melle can get proficiency in special weapon using weap dealing 1d10 with prof +3
Your forgetting that rogue also only does a d4 damage with that extra +4 hit he has over the wizard who does 2d4 with magic missile, or the d10 of eldritch blast of the warlock.
Also note, in your examples, the underboss has a Reflex 3 points lower than AC (which is like having a d10 +3 without any special feat for eldritch), and the other has a will 4 points lower.
The rogue is also incapable of wielding a d10 weapon if it wants to sneak attack.
If it really bugs you so much, give implements a +1 hit, no more. But really what concerns me is caster damage, not hit.
Also, classes with implement attacks only (warlock and wizard) have attacks that can target 2 or more different non-AC defences. If you have two (or 3 if human) at-will powers that target different defences, you can target the weakest of the two (or three) which could be 4 or more points worse than AC.
The rogue is the only class in the PHB that has weapon attacks that can target AC or Reflex. This is not the norm for most classes. Look at the other classes and you will see that they do not have the same luxury as the rogue. If you compare the other classes with the wizard, things would appear more even.
The damage imho is balanced (what i'm not able to understand about dmg is why ranger and rogue can improve their extra dmg dice from d6 to d8 while lock can only curse 2 target -.-)
But ofc i know that magic missile/wizard is not the perfect comparision (lock would work better), but if u prefer.. let's do some theorycraft with lock vs rogue
lock hit chance is:
4 (cha) + 0 (1/2 lvl) + 0 (wand) +1 (prime shot (btw.. if none of your allies are closest than u to your enemy means that your tanking....))
On a basic goblin (Goblin Soldier (15 of refl def) or one of the example above) means that u hit with cha vs refl rolling 10 on your d20
Rogue just need to roll 7: introducing the flanking (-2 on AC and if also the lock use the ranged flanking, means that he loose the +1 from prime shot).
now.. compairing the basic dmg.. the difference is not such important cause lock deal more static dmg and rogue more burst dmg with sneak atk! the point is when u use your imba super daily spell: u're daydreaming that your best spell is going to.... and u newbishly miss ^^
(2) default proficiency is indeed +2. some weapons trade in damage for attack (+2//1d10 axe vs +3//1d8 sword). some classes have a class feature that give attack bonus. others have other class features (you don't see me complaining why fighters can't cast light at will, or exchange daily's ...)
(3) the examples you posted:
AC 18, fort 17 refl 15 will 16 --> AC 18; av. NAD* 16
AC 16, fort 15 refl 14 will 12 --> AC 16; av. NAD* 13.666
(*: NAD: not AC defence)
normal weapon attacks target AC,
normal implement attack target a NAD
... and look: AC is 2 higher then the NAD.
-> this is not coincidence
this is even stated in the DMG p 184
- the AC of a custom monster is 14+half level (16 for soldiers, 12 for brutes and artillery) + stat
- the NAD of the monster are 12 + half level + stat
... so see: AC is 2 higher then the NAD.
edit: note how I said "normal weapon attacks target AC". some weapon attacks are vs a other defence. these powers indeed hit more. these things are calculated into the damage ...
I don't think you add stat bonuses to Defenses on monsters.
possible; I'dd need to recheck my DMG. but I don't have it here, and I'll probably forget. Either way 14 <-> 12 is a 2 point difference.
Example:
If a monsters strength by level can be 20, you use the attack bonus as listed. If you decide to raise the stat to 24, it gets +2 to hit and damage to the listed value.
As long as you don't give exceptional low/high stats to a monster, it uses the listed values. Critters from the MM often have deviating stats and therefore different values than you expect.
Back to the OP...
Attacks by casters usually attack the weaker defenses instead of AC and therefore a bonus would give them more strength than the melees. In addition, they can often hit more than one target at once, which would result in an inappropriate high total damage compared to the melees.
For these reasons there is no proficiency bonus for casters, only for weapon wielders.
(In the end the casters do a lot more damage than the melees, btw, if all have an equal footing at start. It's obviously not equal if someone plays a wizard with INT 13 and all melees have STR 18. Statbonuses make a big difference at low level and fade a bit when getting higher.)