I know everyone has something to say about how they would personally fix careful attack, and this thread is for us to discuss these options and help create the best possible solution to the problem of a useless at will.
I see a lot of people suggesting fixes that involves just adding an attribute damage modifier. Personally, I think that this largely defeats the idea of the power as it is supposed to be a precision thing, although if there is no other way to balance the math, then I would consider it.
My first suggestion instead is to make the attack target reflex instead of AC. The whole idea of this power is that the Ranger has such a careful aim that he finds the weak spot in the creatures armor anyway, so fluff - wise I think this works. In function this power would be like the rogue's Piercing strike, except that it trades the attribute damage modifier for a +2 to strike and the ability to be used at range. I am terrible at math, but this would give the power a functional bonus of +3 to +5. The extent of the bonus would be dependent upon how much of the enemy's AC is based on Armor, which fits in much better with the power's fluff. The mathematicians around here all say that the only time CA is currently better than TS is when a player must role a 20 to hit, which is a very unlikely occurrence. This fix would change that to a 17-20, which is not that unusual for large solos. Against Brutes and soldier's this power would be especially more effective, which also seems to fit into the fluff a bit more because this is a power that would actually get used against heavily armored targets, against whom a hail of arrows would likely be less effective. This fix to the power involves the least amount of game play change, and does not seem like it will overbalance CA into an attack that will always hit or outshine other reflex targeting powers that have damage bonuses.
What I am looking for here is criticisms of this house rule or alternative ideas on the current problems with Careful attack.
Just to mention some other possible solutions.
2. add wisdom bonus damage to attacks
3. When you successfully hit the target with this at-will, you can designate the hit enemy as your quarry, even if he his not the closest target to you.
4. You can score critical hits with this power on a roll of 18–20.
Sticking with the reflex targeting thing and basic attack, even a two-weapon Ranger might want to consider it if running with a warlord because it will likely be the attack with the highest probably to hit and could make a fearsome commanding strike even with out any other attribute modifier to damage. Perhaps the best way to give the increased critical thing a balanced shot would be to design a feat or magic item that improves the critical opportunities of basic attacks.
EDIT: Oh, I was thinking of sure strike. I'm not as sure about careful attack because it is already a little better than sure strike (melee or ranged)
8. A successful hit with careful attack gives you combat advantage against the target until the end of your next turn.
Think of it as a a setup strike. You lay down a careful attack to force your opponent to drop his guard, and then unleash your encounter/daily power on him for extra damage.
While having careful attack as a basic attack could be helpful, it doesn't seem to fit the flavor of the power of careful attack. I always think of basic attacks as something so easy and natural, that it takes almost no time to pull one off. For wizards and warlocks, that is the case for the simplest of their spells, magic missile and eldritch blast respectively. I just don't see anything called careful attack to be in the same category.
I think an at-will that grants ranged combat advantage with a hit, and a bonus to hit is probably a bit much, even if he is only granting it to you.
I have heard an argument against giving the ranger a reflex targeting power as it rides the rogue a little too closely, but I still think it is alright because most of the spell caster classes have spells that target reflex and the fluff of the text really make it look like its ability to hit should not be related to armor. The rogue's power still gets the ability modifier and the rogue is all about ability modifier bonuses to damage with relatively weak weapons. Whereas the Ranger uses big weapons and sacrifices attribute bonuses, so the two attacks would still be far more different than careful strike and sure strike. I would be interested to hear what anyone thinks the intent behind targeting Ac +2 for this power was originally.
I think an at-will that grants ranged combat advantage with a hit, and a bonus to hit is probably a bit much, even if he is only granting it to you.
I don't think it's as powerful as you think it is, just something that opens up some strategic possibilities. You are sacrificing both damage (no ability bonus) and chance to hit (assuming you can hit on an attack lower then 19) to give yourself CA over one opponent for one round, which is an advantage that one could get multiple ways aside from this at-will, from stealth to flanking. Also, rangers can't really do anything with combat advantage except get a bonus to hit right now. It is only useful because it is a convenient setup for a combo, which is what you want. You don't want people to spam the same powers over and over, but to use their powers more tactically.
I have heard an argument against giving the ranger a reflex targeting power as it rides the rogue a little too closely, but I still think it is alright because most of the spell caster classes have spells that target reflex and the fluff of the text really make it look like its ability to hit should not be related to armor. The rogue's power still gets the ability modifier and the rogue is all about ability modifier bonuses to damage with relatively weak weapons. Whereas the Ranger uses big weapons and sacrifices attribute bonuses, so the two attacks would still be far more different than careful strike and sure strike. I would be interested to hear what anyone thinks the intent behind targeting Ac +2 for this power was originally.
Which brings me to the problem with the vs. reflex as a solution to careful attack that has nothing to do with the rogue. I think such an ability is balanced, although I would have to see some numbers run on it to see whether it really is the case. But the problem is that careful attack does damage, and twin strike does damage. Right now that is all it does. Players are likely to think is either one is more effective than another, and not know when or where to switch without alot of metagaming knowledge.
I think that the vs. reflex fix would have to be combined with being a basic attack as well for it be something I would take over the tactic advantages of nimble strike and hit and run, even though a good player could eek out more damage from having both twin strike and the modified careful attack.
Anyway, just some things to think about.
I think it is an interesting idea to make careful attack grant combat advantage but that does seem to work best for the rogue.
What if careful attack granted a +1 to defenses vs. your target for one round if you hit. That seems in line with the idea of the strike (with the ranger carefully adjusting his position to defend himself better) and might be interesting for a ranger that constantly gets in over his head.
Alternativly, it might inflict a -1 to the opponents next attack roll, but it'd have to be flavored differently (hindering strike or something like that).
Attack: Str + 1 vs Ref (melee) or Dex + 1 vs Ref (ranged) (increase to +2 at 21st level)
This way, it's like piercing strike, but you're sacrificing your ability mod to damage for a bonus to hit.
I thought about having it be +2, but that steps on the toes of some fighter powers (since Ref is usually ~2 points lower than AC, a +2 vs Ref is like a +4 vs AC).
Just my
TBP
At-Will Powers are "basic attack + something"; you always get a little more than with just a basic attack. CA and SS trade damage for their bonus, which should be handled with a feat (i.e. Power Attack, or in this case its reverse).
Personally, I think I'm going to either factor the stat back into damage, and either keep the +2 or take that away and make them vs. Ref.
The problem with both Careful Attack and Sure Strike is that they are lacking from a design perspective.
At-Will Powers are "basic attack + something"; you always get a little more than with just a basic attack. CA and SS trade damage for their bonus, which should be handled with a feat (i.e. Power Attack, or in this case its reverse).
Personally, I think I'm going to either factor the stat back into damage, and either keep the +2 or take that away and make them vs. Ref.
Y'know, you're right. I figured that they kept the ability mod off of the damage to keep them from being "must-have" powers, but all the other at-will powers are pretty coll in their own right. I just did a check, and every fighter and ranger at-will attack is just like you stated, "basic attack + something." So why not just leave in the ability mod for damage?
TBP
no +2 to hit. instead the power requires to attack rolls and you take the higher roll. it still doesnt do very much damage and now its extremely accurate.
EDIT: They come close to equal if you add the ability mod to the above (though I think Careful attack would come out ahead which is definite not good).
Also, I forgot above that TS doesn't add str/dex to damage. :Embarrass:
TS would be better a little better 19 to strike because of the ability mod.
I think I'll vote for +2 with ability mod for now.
I'd display the math (Really I haven't done it yet) but that always scares people away. What I will say is that CS modified this way would gain the equivalent ot two extra full strength hits over a basic attack (including Hunters Quarry) over 20 rounds while Twin strike doubles the hits of a basic attack but doesn't include the attribute modifiers and acts as if 1/2 of those extra 10 or so hits gain Hunters Quarry (over 20 rounds).
how about this?
no +2 to hit. instead the power requires to attack rolls and you take the higher roll. it still doesnt do very much damage and now its extremely accurate.
I like that idea, but either keep an attack bonus or make it vs. Reflex.
That would be extremely accurate.
Careful Attack
At-Will * Martial, Weapon
Standard Action / Melee or Ranged weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. Reflex (melee) or Dexterity vs. Reflex (ranged)
Special: This attack ignores cover and concealment and can score a critical hit on a 18-20.
Hit: 1[W] damage
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.
(please note at this point in time these abilities have only been evaluated at level 1 but assuming all other things in 4e scale well then these should follow suit)
Fighter
Sure Strike (although for flavor I think skillful strike might be better suited)
At-Will * Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee Weapon
Attack: Strength + Weapon Stat Modifier vs AC
Hit: 1[W] + Weapon Stat Modifier
Increase damage to 2[W] + Weapon Stat Modifier at 21st level
Special: Your Weapon Stat Modifier is the modifier bonus you have based on the primary stat other than strength that is listed in the Melee Weapon Groups and Associated Statistics Table
Example of this would be a warrior using a greatsword would get their Strength and Dexterity modifier added to the attack role and do weapon damage + dexterity modifier.
The reasoning: behind is based off of a rogues sly-flourish except rather than increasing the scaling effect of damage it's increasing scaling of chance to hit. These seems to be more in tune with hitting the target, as could be considered important to a defender trying to get "aggro" so to speak. Also comparing this to a paladins Valiant Stike, a fighter will generally have a high + to hit but the paladin will be setting str to damage rather than a secondary stat. This also works in different builds for fighters since there are many other powers that make use of a secondary stat based off of the weapon they are using.
If you like numbers behind the rules this section is for you. If you don't care about the numbers then skip this section.
Mathmatical Reasoning for Sure Strike Change
Assumptions: Target has AC: 20. Fighter has +4 from strength and + 3 from their proposed weapon modifier. We'll look at two common weapons used, Long Sword and Maul. We'll be comparing sure strike with reaping strike as that's pretty popular.
Reaping Strike w/ Long Sword: ADPR of 4.5 (weapon) + 4 (str) so 8.5 per hit
and 2 (str/2) damage on a miss.
Chance to hit is: +3 (weapon prof) +1 (fighter weapon talent 1h) + 4 (Str) so + 8 to hit vs AC 20 means 55% (1-11) to miss and (45%) (12-20) to hit
.40 * 8.5 (hit) = 3.4 ADPR
.05 * 12 (crit) = .6 ADPR
.55 * 2 (miss) = 1.1 ADPR for a total of 5.1 ADPR
Sure Strike w/ Long Sword: ADPR of 4.5 (weapon) + 3 (Dex) so 7.5 per hit
and 0 damage on a miss.
Chance to hit is: +3 (weapon prof) +1 (fighter weapon talent 1h) + 4 (Str) + 3(Dex) so + 11 to hit vs AC 20 means 40% (1-8) to miss and (60%) (9-20) to hit
.55 * 7.5 (hit) ~ 4.13 ADPR
.05 * 11 (crit) = .55 ADPR
.40 * 0 (miss) = 0 ADPR for a total of 4.68 ADPR
So reaping strike still has a higher ADPR but only around 9% higher. Stats staying the same Sure Strike increases in effectiveness as the target becomes easier to hit. This is because reaping strike benefits from miss much more than other abilities. However sure strike can benefit players who are putting stats into their weapon stat modifier which also benefits the player for other abilities as well. (okay I know I said I would rebuke and counter-rebuke, I'm sorry and will try to resist the urge for the rest of the post)
Reaping Strike w/ Maul: ADPR of 7 (weapon) + 4 (str) so 11 per hit
and 4 (str) damage on a miss.
Chance to hit is: +2 (weapon prof) +1 (fighter weapon talent 2h) + 4 (Str) so + 7 to hit vs AC 20 means 60% (1-12) to miss and (40%) (13-20) to hit
.35 * 11 (hit) = 3.85 ADPR
.05 * 16 (crit) = .8 ADPR
.6 * 4 (miss) = 2.4 ADPR for a total of 7.05 ADPR
Sure Strike w/ Maul: ADPR of 7 (weapon) + 3 (Con) so 10 per hit
and 0 damage on a miss.
Chance to hit is: +2 (weapon prof) +1 (fighter weapon talent 2h) + 4 (Str) + 3 (Con) so + 10 to hit vs AC 20 means 45% (1-9) to miss and (55%) (10-20) to hit
.5 * 10 (hit) = 5 ADPR
.05 * 15 (crit) = .75 ADPR
.45 * 0 (miss) = 0 ADPR for a total of 5.75 ADPR
So again reaping strike still has a higher ADPR by roughly 23% this time. An easier target to hit however makes the ADPR of sure strike get closer until it surpasses it around missing with a 3 or lower. Unrealistic yes, but two things to keep in mind. 1) this ability is designed for sword and board fighters, not 2h sluggers, notice how there was only a 9% difference when using a long sword. 2)The more you focus on what every your weapon stat modifier is the more benefit you not only see from this at-will but many of your encounter powers also.
This post is long enough so I'm going to continue on another post cause I don't want the forum to blow up.
Ranger
Careful Attack
At-Will * Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee or Ranged Weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength + 1 vs Ref (melee) Dexterity + 1 vs Ref (ranged)
Hit: 1[W] + Wisdom Mod
Increase damage to 2[W] + Weapon Stat Modifier at 21st level
Example: Ranger with 14 wisdom would get Str/Dex + 1 vs Ref and do 1[W] + 2 damage.
Reasoning: The idea behind this ability is two fold, 1)To hit the target. 2)To kill the target. A ranger is a striker, if he's not doing damage he's no good. It's not like he's going to mark a guy on the wizard or heal the tank. No, he's going to focus on putting a arrow/blade through the enemies head. I based this ability off of the rogue's Piercing Strike. The idea being that the ranger will have a slight better chance to hit and can use the ability with melee and ranged weapons where as the rogue should do more damage as his dex modifier should be higher than a rangers wisdom modifier. Another idea behind this is that it's important for a ranger to hit his primary target so that they can benefit from their hunter's quarry. I want to try really hard to hit my target so I can do extra damage cause of my quarry, sounds like that's right up the ranger's alley. Giving a ranger an ability to hit more often while not giving them a way to include additional damage isn't true to the class because the classes role in a party is to do damage. So where it may be more important to hit than do lots of damage as a fighter, it's almost always that case to do more ADPR as a ranger. So although the attack does less damage than other attacks, the increased chance to hit + benefit of hunter's quarry should make up the difference. I was going to do a math section on this supporting my results but it's late. If anyone would like me to post math similar to how I did with the fighter's sure strike ability, just ask and I'll happily oblige. I do however need to include my slight change for twin strike as I believe this was an unintended side effect of the developers when they made the ability. So the new twin strike.
Twin Strike
At-Will * Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee or Ranged Weapon
Target: one or two creatures
Attack: Strength vs AC (melee; main hand and off-hand weapon) Dexterity vs Dex (ranged; 2 attacks)
Hit: 1[W] per attack
Increase damage to 2[W] + Weapon Stat Modifier at 21st level
Special: A hunter can only make use of their hunter's quarry additional damage ability on their first attack roll when using this at-will power.
Everything is the same, but this makes it so that you're chance to hit your quarry to take advantage of additional damage is no higher than if you were to make a normal attack. If you like using hunter's quarry, then consider careful attack. If you like dishing out more overall ADPR then twin strike is for you. Again, if people want to see some math examples I have plenty to show but for now I am going to bed. Of course if anyone is still reading at this point I'd truly be shocked.
Here's my fix:
Careful Attack
At-Will * Martial, Weapon
Standard Action / Melee or Ranged weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. Reflex (melee) or Dexterity vs. Reflex (ranged)
Special: This attack ignores cover and concealment and can score a critical hit on a 18-20.
Hit: 1[W] damage
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.
Perfect imho.
