so... can we make a monster knowledge check?
Yes you can...
Do we guess which skill to use? or do you tell us?
Also, are we still using the map on roll20?
I'm making those rolls assuming that I can shift into a position of flanking from angelic alacrity- 5 squares should give me enough room to get opposite Tavar, but if I can't, take 2 off the rolls.
Yes we are still on the map. everyone can move their tokens if they want to. For those who can't just let me know.
@Carver What skills do you think you need? I am leaving it open for you guys that way.
when i play at tabletop, the DM lets us know which skills are needed in order to make the monster knowledge check.
over pbp, what i see done sometimes is just to make a d20 roll and indicate what are the mods for all the relevant skills: religion, nature, arcana, dungeoneering. the DM (who knows what type of skill is applicable), then relates the info based on whether the DC is met.
the first approach tends to be faster, the second approach more 'realistic' since the PCs may or may not know what type of creature (fey, aberration, undead etc) they are up against.
which do you prefer to do?
Do the second Carver..do a acrana/nature check
Hey Mia, those numbers seem really low to me, assuming you`re attacking with a bow, you should be attacking at a +5- +3 from dex and +2 from the bow`s proficiency bonus, and even that`s a pretty low bonus to be attacking AC at, usually +6-+7 is the typically the 1st standard that you want to be attacking against AC at in order to be able to hit on a 9 or 10, 7 or 8 with Combat Advantage.
You should be also doing 1d8+3 damage on the damage rolls, with a bonus 2 if both hit.
Your right, I forgot the proficiency bonus, woops, Her Dex is only a 15 so it would be only a +2 to damage.. Unless I'm missing something.
Dex is reading at a 16 on the alias.
Your right, I switched my Dex with Con when creating her, silly me.
How did you make characters like that; they seem...OP even for 4e assumptions , just observing some crazy flat bases, that's all.
Nah, it's actually pretty standard optimization. 16 wis and 16 dex base, elf gives +2 bonus to each, so already we're at +4 to both dex and wis based skills. Train both of them, and you get an additional +5, so we're looking at +9 to each trained dex or wisdom skill. Elf gets +2 bonus to perception, bringing perception up to 11, power of skill brings all trained skills up by +1 and makes Overwhelming strike a basic melee attack (considered a feat tax for most Avengers.), and the Detective background raises perception and insight by 1, and adds them to the class skill list.
So after all that, we have 13 perception, 11 insight and 10 stealth. Not too hard to do. Now, I also have sense threat, which allows me to make a perception check in place of my initiative rolls. This replaces my standard elven reroll, as I already get a bunch of double rolls. So that's how I got my +13 initiative that one combat.
It really isn't OP for 4e assumptions. Typically the standard assumption for MM3 math is that you have an 18 or 20 in your attack stat after racial bonuses, with 16, 14 or 13 in your secondary stats. It's also why the <weapon/implement> expertise feats are considered required by 5th level in order for a lot of the math to work, and why I questioned your low attack values. Like I said, +7 is about what's required to hit AC 50% of the time at level 1, while +5 is the standard against Non-Armor Defenses (NADs). Having your stats at those points is also considered somewhat standard for having a pair of stronger defenses as well.
Also, as a striker, you definitely want to be looking at minor-action and off-action attacks, which sadly the rangers gets few of without multiclassing, but then again, the ranger is typically one of the highest hitting attackers in the game because the way multiattacks end up double dipping from almost every bonus that you get, meaning that you can throw out a lot of damage once you can start hitting with five to ten attacks on a nova round. I've seen a well opped ranger kill off an elite with full health on a really good nova round. He managed to get about four or five crits, but the bonus damage was enough to take out the remaining health out of it.
Personally, I chose a lower damaging class, as the Avenger does not get anywhere near as much burst damage, but is a hell of a lot more accurate. Assuming that we hit on a 11, that means that I have about a +5 bonus to hit on my oath of emnity, due to the rerolls. That means that my standard DPR (damage per round) is a lot higher than most, as I'm hitting more frequently (75% of the time rather than 50% of the time), but for less amounts of damage.
If you want to check out the optimization handbook for rangers, it's here
But no, I might be a bit higher than baseline, as I've been opping for perception, but 9-10 is sort of the standard baseline for first level trained skills. Sort of as a guideline, easy/medium/hard skill checks for a lot of encounters for us are 9-10/13-15/21-23 for our encounters. Easy skill checks should be auto-successes if you're trained in the skill, medium skill checks should succeed most of the time if you're trained, and hard checks should succeed some of the time if you're trained, and never if you're not.
Honestly, I'm nowhere near OP. I've just been on the optimizing scene for long enough that I know how to build a character to be a little bit more effective than people that are more unfamiliar with the system.
Edit: Taking a look at your character, it seems you've fallen into the trap that a lot of 3.5/PF->4e players make. Namely- switch-hitting is not necessary in 4e. The reason that switch hitting became necessary is due to the full attack action taking up room, which mean that once an archer was engaged in melee, he had no real way out of getting out of melee. Due to the standard/move/minor action economy of 4e, you don't need to switch hit, as you can simply shift+attack, particularly for the ranger, which actually has a lot of shifting built right into it's abilities. Personally, I would drop your strength to 10, con to 13 and crank your dexterity all the way to 20 points. That way, you'll be hitting with many of your attacks, and be putting out quite a bit of nova damage. As for your feat, I'd retrain out and grab a greatbow for more damage (2 average damage and further range), and maybe pick up the noble adept theme to boost an attack roll once per encounter. If you're concerned about health, you can always pick up the Impiltur theme as well from the Forgotten realms Players guide, which gives you wisdom for your health rather than your constitution. So you don't lose any health there. If you do want to continue being a switch-hitter though, I'd recommend picking up the feat Master at Arms, as it gives the same bonus, but a +1 to all attack rolls with weapon attacks as well.
Yeah, Mia's based on a switch hitter in an mmo that is no longer online, Master at arms... Hmm... Why don't I pick up Melee Training: Dex as well?(g if ph2 is still correct I would be adding my Dex mod to both my attack and Damage rolls? So that I could still fit the switch hitter role as envisioned?)
but, would a statistical rebuild be allowed, byDM Ashman?
Melee training only adds half Dex to damage rolls, but that's only about a 4-5 damage hit at epic (2-3 damage in heroic) overall, and not a bad hit, particularly for rangers, who have such high burst functionality anyways.
If only Melee training redid powers, I don't mind half bonus for those in melee . She actually ended up in Melee alot more than ranged anyways, but she was crazy dangerousin all positions.
Hey guys I am going to have to end this the thread for the next 10 weeks or so. I have somethings coming up in real life that taking over. Sorry for the short notice. I will start posting again sometime in the Fall. Thanks for being apart of this.
Ash
I just realized something, we have so many strikers, and no controllers, would we even need a controller with this many damage-dealers?
I'm sorry, I thought this would be the best place to ask.