I'll take the meta out one further.FrankTrollman wrote:This. Also recall that the to-hit rolls of the enemies are actually the activation rolls of the player's defenses. If a player's defenses fail to reduce or negate the effects of incoming attacks for several rounds in a row, the player is as apt to ask what the point of having the defenses is as when their attacks fail to accomplish anything for several rounds and they justifiably ask what the point of taking actions is.Caedrus wrote:What's the context, here? A 60% miss chance for a given action means something completely different when you're talking about having one action vs having five, or whether you're talking about all or nothing actions or ones that have secondary effects even if you miss, or whether or not the miss chance involves enemies expending resources or not, and so on and so forth. You can't just pull out some "magic" number outside of any meaningful context.
The thing is, the "hit/miss ratio" the OP brought up isn't a terribly important concept on its own. For example, if you fire 12 shots in a turn and expect half to miss, that's very different from if you fire one shot in a turn and have a 50% chance of doing nothing and a 50% chance of doing full damage. In the latter case, a player can reasonably expect to go multiple turns without accomplishing anything whatsoever on a rather frequent basis and the gameplay is more swingy.
In short, I think the OP is asking the wrong question.
-Username17
It also depends on how much actual real time at the table actions take and how many of them there are in total and how they are sequenced around the table.
If you get a pile of actions for a few minutes but then everyone else gets a pile of actions, there's a pretty big go-round before your input matters again, and in such a case it's essential that your input always have a meaningful result and never end in total failure or futility.