|1 person marked this as a favorite.|
I don't understand how you can be arguing around an obvious misunderstanding: dpr is average damage. Most (all?) abilities in PF2 do damage in a range, not a static one.Thus, doing 80 average damage in a round could mean something like 4d12+54, or 23d6 (more or less).
Conversely, 70 average damage could be 4d12+44, or 20d6.
Probabilities of killing a 140 HP enemy in two rounds:
98.31% with 4d12+54/round (avg: 80)
96.84% with 23d6/round (avg: 80.5)
52.00% with 4d12+44/round (avg: 70)
51.84% with 20d6/round (avg: 70)
So yes, doing 80 dpr is much more reliable.
You cannot calculate probability of killing if you do not simulate vs probability of being killed. Your DPR is irrelevant when you are downed or you have downed, there is no damage tally being kept - the simulation has an exit condition and resets after each kill. All that matters is who got to who first.
That is where STR is no longer the prime optimization variable, but all the defensive option of the other stats have to be considered as tradeoffs.
When you actually do the tradeoff analysis for rounds to kill(ed) that you find the difference in options is much less than the variance in tables - literally +/-5% for options becomes +/-50% for variation