Blue Tanya, female human barbarian 1, neutral
STR..17
DEX..13
CON..14
INT...8
WIS..12
CHA..10
Hit Points: 15 [12 + 2 con + 1 favored class]
AC 14 [+1 dex, +3 armor], Touch 11, Flat 13
Initiative: +1
BAB/CMB: +1/+4 [+1 bab, +3 str]
Speed: 40 ft
Saves: Fort +4, Ref +1, Will +1
Weapons:
javelin (1d6+3, x2), +2 [+1 bab, +1 dex]
guisarme (2d4+4, x3), +4 [+1 bab, +3 str]
club (1d6+4, x2), +4 [+1 bab, +3 str]
armor spikes (1d6+3, x2), +4 [+1 bab, +3 str]
Armor: studded leather
Feats:
Dodge [racial], Mobility [1st]
Racial and Class Abilities:
Rage (6 pts/day), Fast Movement
Skills
Armor Check Penalty: -1
Acrobatics +4
Intimidate +4
Perception +5
Survival +5
Stealth +0 (untrained)
Other Items: 1 potion of Enlarge Person CL 1 [50 gp], 3 javelins, 3 torches, 1 sunrod, flint & tinder
Note: I took my challenges from the Core Coliseum random monster tables, picking the entries that correspond to rolls of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60. I then ran each fight 3 times.
CR 1 challenges:
-2 fire beetles: 3 wins
-2 dwarf warriors: 2 wins, 1 loss
-1 lemure: 3 wins
-2 goblins: 2 wins, 1 loss
-4 kobolds: 1 win, 2 losses
-2 human zombies: 3 wins
Comments: Fighting multiple opponents was challenging with Tanya's low AC (and bad luck). But overall the opponents were pretty weak. The ability to avoid all attacks of opportunity with Mobility is extremely powerful; using her guisarme, Tanya gets a 2-for-1 ratio of attacks against a melee opponent without reach.
Level 4:
-Str => 18
-HP => 44
-add rage abilities: Animal Fury, Surprise Accuracy
-18 rage points/day
-add feat: Power Attack
-add equipment [5300 gp]: guisarme +1 [2309 gp], tower shield, longbow (silver + cold iron arrows), silver + cold iron longswords, cold iron armor spikes, chain shirt +1 [1100 gp], cloak of protection +1 [1000 gp], light warhorse
-add expendables: 10 vials of acid, 2 tanglefoot bags, 2 potions of Protection from Evil, 1 potion of Invisibility, 1 potion of Levitate, 1 more potion of Enlarge Person, 1 oil of Bless Weapon, 1 oil of Curse Weapon, 2 oils of Magic Weapon, 1 potion of Slow Poison
-add 3 points to all trained skills
-saves: F +7, R +3, W +3
Opponents:
-1 harpy: 2 losses, 1 win
-1 human wereboar: 3 wins
-2 crocodiles: 3 wins
-2 large monstrous spiders: 3 wins
-2 owlbear skeletons: 3 wins
-2 chokers: 3 wins
Comments:
Tanya lost two saves vs. the harpy's save-or-die (I gave them a free chance to sing before Tanya could drink a potion of Prot from Evil), but otherwise none of these opponents could stand against the combination of Enlarge Person + reach weapon + Mobility. The general tactic was to hit once, walk out of the enemy's reach (ignoring attacks of opportunity due to Mobility), and force the enemy to provoke attacks of opportunity to get back within melee range.
The grappling monsters (crocodiles, chokers) were incredibly useless; there was basically no chance for them to succeed. The spiders poisoned Tanya, but she drank her potion of Slow Poison first; she would be in trouble after the potion expires (in 2 hours).
I didn't use the fancy rage powers at all; none of them are 3, 6, or 12 times as good as regular rage (IMO).
Why not use the same challenges I did? Actually, I can just run those fairly easily.
See I honestly believe that you've gone the oposite end of him and overoptimized to make this test, I agree with S that a class should be managable without being optimized, you did go guisarme and armour spikes, I guarantee I'll never see that in play, I will see a great axe, and I'll give advice on feat choice for players struggling but I think your test went to far, and you should've also posted this in his thread instead of starting a whole new one, it's kinda rude to make a thread to debunk someone.
Note, this is being compared to this thread
EL 1 Challenges
A locked and trapped door
A 20' deep pit trap
A pair of Orcs
Three Celestial Dogs
An Elf Wizard 1
A Lemure
A Ghoul
A pair of human zombies
A pair of stirges
A spider swarm
A Locked and Trapped Door
Without a portable ram this is mildly annoying. If the door is made of wood then Blue Tanya can hack it to pieces, but a stone door could be a serious roadblock as its hardness is near her average damage with her best weapon, but she can rage to make it easier - and it'll still take awhile, burning lots of rage points.
Even 'fight'.
A 20' deep pit trap
Its not going to kill her, but she doesn't see it and falls in. This is a win for the pit trap.
Almost Certain Loss.
A pair of Orcs
If its indoors the Orcs spot her first because she has a torch and they have darkvision. Surprise round features 2 javelin throws for an expected (.4*6.5) 2.6 damage each (5.2 damage total). Chances are Tanya knows which direction her foes are in now though (although if they aren't close to each other this could be trouble - we'll assume they are).
Tanya has a 1pt initiative advantage over the orcs, meaning chances are one goes before her. It charges her for an expected (.65*9) 5.85 damage (11 damage total). Tanya doesn't really need to rage, she just kills that orc with her club. (Can't use a torch and the halberd simultaneously), and moves toward the next orc 40', putting it in her sights. At which point it charges her and kills her. Even if she rages, it expects to deal (.75*9) 6.75 damage, which means the extra 2 hp don't help.
Note that at 1st level this combat could go her way with a series of freak rolls, but I wouldn't count on it. (Tanya does worse than Baughdvnleob in this encounter).
Outdoors is still at night because orcs are *light sensitive* and thus don't go wandering about during the day if they can help it. Combat happens more or less identically.
Probable Loss.
Three Celestial Dogs
They're just as fast and their senses are just as good, so no one is surprised. They have a 2pt initiative advantage, so two of them go first on average (although if only one goes first it really doesn't matter), and more likely than not combat starts within charge range for either party.
They expect to do (.55*3.5) 1.925 damage on the charge and 1.575 damage otherwise. It takes Tanya an expected 6 rounds to kill all three with one weapon, over which time they deal an expected (1.925 x 3 + 1.575 x6 + 1.575/2 *3) 17 damage, which makes this a really close fight. (I can explain that last calculation if you like). However, Tanya can TWF for a minimal penalty to-hit, and so probably mops up in about 4-5 rounds, making this a probable win.
Probable Win. (Baughdvnleob is the equal here)
An Elf Wizard 1
The elf wizard takes improved initiative as his level 1 feat, has a dex of 16, an int of 17, and a con of 11. He goes first ~75% of the time. He drops one of Sleep or Colorspray with a DC of 14 that Tanya fails 60% of the time, which is a win for the elf.
If Tanya gets to attack at all she can kill the wizard at range if she hits, or possibly charge him.
Javelin vs. AC 13 = 50% chance to kill.
Rage and Charge vs. AC 13 = 70% chance to kill (preferable, terrain may prevent).
P(Tanya wins) = P(win initiative)*(P(kill wiz rnd 1)+P(miss wiz)*P(make save)*(P(kill wiz rnd 2)+P(miss wizard rnd 2)...etc..))+P(lose initiative)*(P(make save)*(P(kill wizard rnd 1)+P(miss wizard)*P(make save)*(P(kill wizard rnd 2)...etc...))
Ok, so we really want to know P(kill wizard rnd 1) and onwards because we need that calculation twice. We'll assume Tanya can charge. So .7+.3*.4*(.7+.3*.4) is probably a sufficient approximation. Which makes this .798... or .8 for simplicity.
Thus we have P(win initiative)*.8 + P(lose initiative)*P(make save)*.8 = .25*.8 + .75*.4*.8 = .2 + .24 = .44.
This of course assumes charging is possible - that number gets much less favorable if there is difficult terrain or otherwise charging is hard.
Probable Loss (even the best case scores below 50%)
A Lemure
Certain Victory, for the same reasons as the other thread with Baughdvnleob.
A Ghoul
Baughdvnleob scored a probable win in the other thread, and had a higher fort save by 1, which is the only thing that matters in this fight (as paralyzation is the only way the ghoul wins). A +6 raging fort fails 25% of the time against the DC 12 paralysis, and the ghoul expects around 2 hits before dying, meaning there's a (1-.75^2) 44% chance of getting paralyzed before winning the fight.
Even Fight (Baughdvnleob outperforms)
A pair of human zombies
Almost certain win, for the same reasons as Baughdvnleob.
Pair of Stirges
They get surprise, meaning Tanya is down 2d4 Con before she gets to act. One of them likely beats her at initiative, draining another 1d4 Con and likely flying off sated. Tanya kills the second one.
Probable Loss, same reasons as Baughdvnleob. (They drain almost the max con they could possibly).
A Spider Swarm
With their climb they likely surprise Tanya by dropping down from above her. Tanya has no real weapons against the swarm, but can outrun it.
Almost certain loss.
Performance review:
Certain Win 2
Probable Win 1
Even 2
Probable Loss 3
Certain Loss 2
Baughdvnleob actually outperforms Tanya at level 1. If you give 1 for a certain win, .75 for a probable, .5 for an even, .25 for a probable loss, and 0 for a certain loss, sum and divide by 10, Tanya has a 4.5 and Baughdvnleob had a 5.5.
Squirrelloid wrote: Why not use the same challenges I did? Actually, I can just run those fairly easily. Because this is my thread -- my thread, my challenges.
:)
I picked mine at literally at random from a long list. Personally, I think your challenges are a little biased against non-spellcasters (I suspect you tried to avoid repetitive challenges like "one wolf", "one boar", "one [insert animal here]"), but that's your choice.
I want to see S's challenges for the other classes too.
It should first be noted that Blue Tanya has too much gear for 4th level. A 4th level character has 5.4k gp of gear, which Tanya exceeds. Expendables still count against this amount, they're just supposed to be replenished, but her value of gear at any time should be 5.4k gp. If she was even plausibly close, I wouldn't mind, but she's not.
And sigh, you're going to make me figure out her attack bonus and damage. I at least did everyone the courtesy of posting a full stat block.
Init +1
Perception +8 presumably
HP44
AC 16
F+7, R+3, W+3
Full Attack:
Guisarme +7(9 raging) (2d4+7, +10 raging) and Armor Spikes +6(8 raging) (1d6+2, +3 raging)
Attacks:
Guisarme +9(11 raging) (2d4+7,+10 raging)
Other weapon +8 with appropriate damage +4, +6 raging
Option: Animal Fury (add natural attack, 3 rage)
Option: Power Attack (-4 hit +4 damage)
Option: Surprise Accuracy (+4 hit, 6 rage)
EL 4 challenges
A Water-Filled Room Trap
An Aranea
A Five-Headed Hydra
A Centipede Swarm
A Pair of Blink Dogs
A Pair of Huge Monstrous Centipedes
A Pair of Quasits
An Elf Wizard 4
A Sea Hag
An Endless Sea of Rats (ok, not endless, but a freaking huge number of them)
A Water-Filled Room Trap
The stone doors slam shut, and you've got 5 rounds to hack your way out through one. (You certainly aren't just breaking it - DC 28 str check).
Hardness 8 60hp. Raging with power attack nets us 2d4+14 damage per round for an expected damage of 19, which is 11 damage per round after hardness. Armor spikes add a smidgin of damage (1d6+7 from power attack = 2.5 expected damage after hardness), which is the only thing that saves her.
It takes her all 5 rounds to chop her way out on average, and she only barely cuts through the door in those five rounds. Poor rolls could seriously kill her.
Even Fight. (Baughdvnleob outperforms)
An Aranea
The Aranea gets the drop on Tanya, likely from up a tree. Even if it doesn't it tends to win initiative (and its still up a tree). It webs her. Tanya has 22 Str when raging, for a +6 str check, meaning it takes 2 rounds per web to break free, during which time the Aranea casts Sleep alternating with webs. It has 6 webs per day. The DC 13 sleep nails Tanya 45% of the time, and since the Aranea can ensure it can spam them, Tanya is almost certain to lose. (P(Tanya makes 6 DC 13 will saves) = .55^6 = 2.7% of the time.
Certain Loss (Baughdvnleob does better, but not significantly)
A Five-Headed Hydra
Its native to marshes and has a swim speed, meaning running away is actually hard (you can't move in a straight line while it can because of water). You also have to deal with difficult terrain, and it can just swim. It gets to melee you - yeah, sucks to be you.
Spotting distance in a swamp averages 90ft max, meaning you expect to get a few rounds of ranged attacks in (at 1d8 = 4.5 average damage, it really doesn't even care. It just heals that).
Does anyone really doubt it tears Tanya apart in melee? I didn't think so. Even quaffing a potion of invisibility doesn't really help, it just lets you run away.
Certain Loss. (Baughdvnleob got eaten too).
A Centipede Swarm
It has darkvision 60' and is subterranean, it seriously surprises Tanya with her torch. It also has a climb speed meaning it can literally get the drop on her.
It also has 31 hp, meaning on average your 10 acid flasks just barely kill it if they all hit (35 damage - ok, it only takes 9). It also has a touch AC of 18 to your +5 to hit with the flask... oops. You seriously can't expect to kill it.
It also gets to inflict 7-14 average damage and force 1-2 DC13 fort saves before you get to do anything. (Surprise, +3 advantage on initiative). Fortunately you can run away, but you still lost.
Certain Loss
A Pair of Blink Dogs
Baughdvnleob got a certain win here, and I'm pretty certain Tanya does too. Unless someone actually wants me to look at the numbers here.
Certain Win
A Pair of Quasits
Tanya has the same problems Baughdvnleob does, Fear and poison, and her saves are worse. In fact, its sufficient difference that she really suffers here.
They cast Fear in the surprise round (which they get) for a 35% chance per quasit of making Tanya run like a little girl. She has only a 42% chance of making both, and then we look at the odds of her failing some DC 13 poison saves if she stays and things go downhill from there.
Probable Loss (Baughdvnleob significantly outperforms)
A Pair of Huge Monstrous Centipedes
Baughdvnleob goes even here, but has better AC and saves and has Darkvision. This is probably worth playing out.
They're native to subterranean, so the centipedes get surprise (60' sight vs. 40' with the torch, and the torch is screaming 'i'm over here'). They partial charge, hitting flat-footed AC 15 65% of the time (.65*11 average damage) for ~7 expected damage each.
Round 1 and on average Tanya only beats one of them at initiative. It attacks (.55*11) for ~6 expected damage. (20 total thus far). She's also had to make 3 DC 14 poison saves thus far, each of which she fails 30% of the time (P(make all three) = .7^3 or 34.3% of the time), each of which inflicts 1d6 dex damage, quite probably dropping her AC precipitously.
Tanya now has a tough choice, she can drop her longsword/club/whatever and torch to go for her halberd, or can fight with the worse weapon. We'll be generous and assume the torch doesn't go out when dropped, and draw the halberd. Alternately, she can drink a potion of delay poison to stop the endless poison saves from being too relevant. She seriously dies to this encounter.
Certain Loss.
Elf Wizard 4
Lets be honest, the wizard has access to web, glitterdust, colorspray, and sleep all in his useful arsenal of choices. He also has Protection from Arrows that would already be up at the start of combat (1hr/lvl) meaning Tanya has to waste a round making her bow magical with a potion if the wizard chooses levitate and longbow. And of course a simple Shatter spell can ruin that plan.
Almost Certain Loss
A Sea Hag
Baughdvnleob certainly lost this with better saves than Tanya and similar attack options (ranged, it stays in water because it can). She loses even faster than he does.
Certain Loss.
An Endless Sea of Rats
Like Baughdvnleob, even an extra attack per round isn't enough to weather this endless tide. Loss.
Certain Win 1
Probable Win
Even 1
Probable Loss 1
Certain Loss 7
For a performance rating of .175, significantly worse than Baughdvnleob.
What have we learned?
(1) More damage with one attack can be advantageous
(2) Saves matter a lot
(3) Darkvision is really really important when fighting subterranean monsters.
I don't have a 7th level version of Tanya to compare to Baughdvnleob, but i'm not hopeful she'll do any better.
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: Why not use the same challenges I did? Actually, I can just run those fairly easily. Because this is my thread -- my thread, my challenges.
:)
I picked mine at literally at random from a long list. Personally, I think your challenges are a little biased against non-spellcasters (I suspect you tried to avoid repetitive challenges like "one wolf", "one boar", "one [insert animal here]"), but that's your choice. The intention in my challenges is to span the spectrum of monster types available at a given level. I literally did choose mine off a long list, and while it wasn't totally random (i wanted to make sure I had puzzle monsters, save or dies, and melee monsters represented), it is a fairer representation of the range of challenges a level N character is expected to face than yours is, which seems to mostly be groups of weaker melee monsters for the most part.
Squirrelloid wrote:
The intention in my challenges is to span the spectrum of monster types available at a given level. I literally did choose mine off a long list, and while it wasn't totally random (i wanted to make sure I had puzzle monsters, save or dies, and melee monsters represented), it is a fairer representation of the range of challenges a level N character is expected to face than yours is, which seems to mostly be groups of weaker melee monsters for the most part.
I took my level 1 monsters from the table on page 79 of the DMG (I picked #10, #20, #30, #40, #50 and #60 without looking at the table beforehand).
The thing about your "fair representation" is that it's assuming that 30% of encounters will be against plain vanilla melee-only creatures. My "fair representation" is assuming that 50% are. Similarly, your "fair representation" assumes that a guy with a torch will get surprised a lot. My "fair representation" assumes that the average character will only get surprised by a "sneaky" enemy. Who's right? Who knows?
My point all along is this: this kind of test depends a lot more on the methodology used (e.g. the build used, the assumptions made for the monsters, etc.) than it does on the strength of the actual class itself.
Next up: level 7. Time to buy an Eversmoking Bottle! The monsters will be:
-1 drider
-1 invisible stalker
-1 red slaad
-4 cockatrices
-3 wereboars
-4 flamebrother salamanders
I predict the cockatrices might get lucky at least once or twice. Same with the drider. But the wereboars and salamanders are dead meat.
:)
hogarth wrote:
Similarly, your "fair representation" assumes that a guy with a torch will get surprised a lot. My "fair representation" assumes that the average character will only get surprised by a "sneaky" enemy. Who's right? Who knows?
A guy with a torch can see 20' well and out to 40' in shadows. A monster with darkvision can see 60' clearly. Its not an assumption, a guy with a torch does get surprised alot against foes who have darkvision, because a fricking torch stands out like a sore thumb. All one has to do is compare their sight ranges...
In a subterranean encounter the guy with the Torch is going to be surprised, a lot.
But one nitpick in defense of the Splash Weapon vs. Swarm... splash weapons deal 1.5 damage agains the swarm and if she had Alchemist's Fire instead of Acid the swarm would be taking another round of fire damage unless it takes a full round action to extinguish it or finds some water and swarms being Int - creatures it'd likely just burn! So that's 10.5 damage per flask over 2 rounds, meaning it'd only take 3 hits to kill the swarm. Granted rollling 13+ to hit does suck, but I'd definitely try it!!!
Squirrelloid wrote:
A guy with a torch can see 20' well and out to 40' in shadows. A monster with darkvision can see 60' clearly. Its not an assumption, a guy with a torch does get surprised alot against foes who have darkvision, because a fricking torch stands out like a sore thumb. All one has to do is compare their sight ranges...
Assumptions:
- monsters are perfectly silent and cannot be heard
- monsters cannot be snuck on
- monsters with darkvision always hang out in pitc-black dungeons 24/7
- etc., etc.
I'm not saying they're good assumptions or bad assumptions, but they're assumptions -- there's no point arguing about it. Personally, I've fought orcs in non-pitch black conditions; maybe I'm the only one.
I'm guessing if you actually follow the descriptors of the monsters in the monster manual, those are quite safe assumptions. Things that normally live in subterranean places like caves and tunnels... don't tend to leave caves or tunnels. It's your loss that you're in there. You're still in darkness, and even if you make a listen (perception) check, they would still be considered to have concealment; even if you got the first in initiative. You're still flatfooted if any of them charge you though; cause you can't see them. And more so, if you're not first in the initiative.
You do realize that perception receives the following bonuses to DC for listening, right?
Base DC typically 10 (unarmored creature walking)
+1/10 ft
+5 for cavernous locations (ie, caverns... gee)
+5 Louder noise present - ie, you moving about in armor vs. them moving about 10s-100s of feet from you.
You also don't know when you do hear something if what you heard is actually something threatening or not. Which is a problem.
So a DC of 19 is the bare minimum for hearing something at the edge of your sight range with a torch, assuming the space you're in has no echo (ie, no +5 from cavernous). And there's another +1/10ft beyond that. Yeah, good luck with that at level 4.
The guys with darkvision can, on the other hand, see your torch from over 100 ft away with regular sight (assuming unobstructed sight), because it stands out like a sore thumb. And light means something tasty when you're underground. And because they have darkvision, they have no problem getting around without light, so they *don't* stand out. This means they *know* to be sneaky because they knew you were there long before you had any clue.
A stealthy subterranean monster? He just gets all that as a *bonus* to his sneaky check. Yeah, you never see him coming.
We're on the same side here, guys and gals, even though you disagree with each other.
I was just wondering if anyone had any problems with my analysis on Tanya's performance vs. the challenges Baughdvnleob faced other than my assumptions on sensory perception. If there are no further objections, I think the conclusion that Baughdvnleob outperforms Tanya is inescapable.
Alternately, if anyone wants to discuss the rules on sensory perception more, i'd be happy to oblige, and i think they support my 'assumptions' on sensory perception. (Which are thus not assumptions but functions of the rules).
I'm also interested in seeing Tanya's level 7 build.
Squirrelloid wrote: I was just wondering if anyone had any problems with my analysis on Tanya's performance vs. the challenges Baughdvnleob faced other than my assumptions on sensory perception. If there are no further objections, I think the conclusion that Baughdvnleob outperforms Tanya is inescapable.
Alternately, if anyone wants to discuss the rules on sensory perception more, i'd be happy to oblige, and i think they support my 'assumptions' on sensory perception. (Which are thus not assumptions but functions of the rules).
I'm also interested in seeing Tanya's level 7 build.
I think that your assumption is remarkably arrogant and anything but inescapable. Your dwarf used a battleaxe, which is a terrible weapon for soloing. You went in with virtually no plan for being alone and lost spectacularly. You drew all your conclusions from that and when we tried to show you where you went wrong you ignore us entirely and assume you have to be correct. Now you are trying to criticize another tester without any solid evidence of mistakes.
I personally find Tanya to be vastly superior to Baughdvnleob in every way. She has a plan, the right gear, and ways to offset her weaknesses. Dont make any more assumptions without something to back it up.
Glan Var wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: I was just wondering if anyone had any problems with my analysis on Tanya's performance vs. the challenges Baughdvnleob faced other than my assumptions on sensory perception. If there are no further objections, I think the conclusion that Baughdvnleob outperforms Tanya is inescapable.
Alternately, if anyone wants to discuss the rules on sensory perception more, i'd be happy to oblige, and i think they support my 'assumptions' on sensory perception. (Which are thus not assumptions but functions of the rules).
I'm also interested in seeing Tanya's level 7 build.
I think that your assumption is remarkably arrogant and anything but inescapable. Your dwarf used a battleaxe, which is a terrible weapon for soloing. You went in with virtually no plan for being alone, drew conclusions from it, and lost spectacularly.
We have tried to point out the flaws in your reasoning, but you have repeatedly chosen to ignore our advice entirely. Now you are trying to criticize another tester without any solid evidence of mistakes.
I personally find Tanya to be vastly superior to Baughdvnleob in every way. She has a plan, the right gear, and ways to offset her weaknesses. Dont make any more assumptions without something to back it up.
I've posted my analysis above. If you want to critique it, do so rather than attack me. Your post does nothing to contravene the evidence i've already presented.
Just a note about surprize in caverns - you're assuming that line of sight is 60' or more. Even if you are in natural caves, it's not very common that line of sight would actually extend that far (not that I'm an expert, but I have gone through a few caves, one just a week ago swimming through a river - which was very cool by the way, I wouldn't want to be an adventurer in an underground river with aquatic monsters!)
Since most games take place in dungeon settings, with rooms, doors, halls, etc. the 60 foot line of sight is going to be even less common, so that the darkvision critters don't have the ability to see that someone's coming and attack them until they're in line of sight, which would probably be within torchlight range. Sure the darkvision guys will know something's coming, but if they're not stealthy, they're not likely to get surprize, since both parties will spot each other at the same time.
Squirrelloid wrote: Glan Var wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: I was just wondering if anyone had any problems with my analysis on Tanya's performance vs. the challenges Baughdvnleob faced other than my assumptions on sensory perception. If there are no further objections, I think the conclusion that Baughdvnleob outperforms Tanya is inescapable.
Alternately, if anyone wants to discuss the rules on sensory perception more, i'd be happy to oblige, and i think they support my 'assumptions' on sensory perception. (Which are thus not assumptions but functions of the rules).
I'm also interested in seeing Tanya's level 7 build.
I think that your assumption is remarkably arrogant and anything but inescapable. Your dwarf used a battleaxe, which is a terrible weapon for soloing. You went in with virtually no plan for being alone, drew conclusions from it, and lost spectacularly.
We have tried to point out the flaws in your reasoning, but you have repeatedly chosen to ignore our advice entirely. Now you are trying to criticize another tester without any solid evidence of mistakes.
I personally find Tanya to be vastly superior to Baughdvnleob in every way. She has a plan, the right gear, and ways to offset her weaknesses. Dont make any more assumptions without something to back it up.
I've posted my analysis above. If you want to critique it, do so rather than attack me. Your post does nothing to contravene the evidence i've already presented. Very well. In your analysis you rarely ever assume that Tanya takes her reach into account, either by five foot stepping to bring her weapon back into reach or by simply withdrawing and forcing the opponent to take another attack of op. She gets an extra raging attack every turn against most creatures at similar damage outputs, yet that rarely seems to factor in to your analysis.
For example, in your orc analysis an orc "Charges her and kills her." Yet she gets an attack of op against that orc that is almost guaranteed to kill it in one hit. If she wins initiative she is almost certain to kill both orcs without taking any damage whatsoever.
And again with the ghoul, even if the ghoul wins initiative she simply hits it with her spiked gauntlet and withdraws. The ghoul cannot take an attack of op against her because of mobility, and it has to provoke to move into melee again. After a round or two of hit- withdraw the ghoul is going to be dead at least a round faster than against Baugh.
You didn't take into account Tanya's acid against the endless sea of rats. Acid is a splash weapon, dealing damage in an AOE. Your average rat has 1 hp. Oops, 5-6 rats are going to die a in a round. which means after a few rounds of that Tanya not only has a chance to survive, but even if she dies she has slain vastly more rats that Baugh. And unlike Baugh her speed of 40 keeps her out of the reach of the rats, assuming she has somewhere to go.
Why didnt tanya also flee from the centipede swarm? She is even faster Than Baugh and can actually kill it given enough time. Also unlike Baugh there is no risk for her doing so because of Mobility.
And NITHER of you has taken into account that any PC that goes off alone into hostile territory is supposed to die. Tanya just has a slightly better chance of living to see daylight again.
That sort of thing. As far as I can see, when you actually use the strategy, Tanya outperforms in the winnable fights, and looses less often than Baugh in the close fights.
That enough to satisfy you? Lets not even take into account Combat Reflexes, wherein she can take attacks of op even while flat-footed.
Lets go over these one-by-one. Some of them I may have been wrong about - this is why I asked.
Glan Var wrote: Very well. In your analysis you rarely ever assume that Tanya takes her reach into account, either by five foot stepping to bring her weapon back into reach or by simply withdrawing and forcing the opponent to take another attack of op. She gets an extra raging attack every turn against most creatures at similar damage outputs, yet that rarely seems to factor in to your analysis.
For example, in your orc analysis an orc "Charges her and kills her." Yet she gets an attack of op against that orc that is almost guaranteed to kill it in one hit. If she wins initiative she is almost certain to kill both orcs without taking any damage whatsoever.
Look, she needs a hand to hold the torch. Either she keeps the torch and can advance towards the second orc, or she can drop the torch to draw her halberd. She doesn't have 3 hands. And if she drops the torch she can't *see* the second orc, and it can just throw javelins at her because she can't move her light source (which also expects to kill her). A halberd is not an option for her underground against foes with ranged weapons and intelligence > 2.
Glan Var wrote:
And again with the ghoul, even if the ghoul wins initiative she simply hits it with her spiked gauntlet and withdraws. The ghoul cannot take an attack of op against her because of mobility, and it has to provoke to move into melee again. After a round or two of hit- withdraw the ghoul is going to be dead at least a round faster than against Baugh.
Except she fails a save a lot faster than Baughdvnleob too. Ie, she's more likely to lose to paralysis than Baughdvnleob, which is the relevant factor. (Her AC is also 1 lower, meaning she gets hit an additional 5% of the time).
Glan Var wrote:
You didn't take into account Tanya's acid against the endless sea of rats. Acid is a splash weapon, dealing damage in an AOE. Your average rat has 1 hp. Oops, 5-6 rats are going to die a in a round. which means after a few rounds of that Tanya not only has a chance to survive, but even if she dies she has slain vastly more rats that Baugh. And unlike Baugh her speed of 40 keeps her out of the reach of the rats, assuming she has somewhere to go.
You may have a point here. If we assume she can hit 4 rats/acid vial (possibly a little high as an average over the entire combat, but not much), and she hits 50% of the time, she expects to kill 20 rats with acid vials. Assuming she can continuously run away, that's enough to win in melee.
I'm willing to conceed that as a certain win.
Glan Var wrote:
Why didnt tanya also flee from the centipede swarm? She is even faster Than Baugh and can actually kill it given enough time. Also unlike Baugh there is no risk for her doing so because of Mobility.
Swarms don't get AoO, they don't have attacks. They deal area damage to anyone in them. She is surprised by it, just like Baughdvnleob, and takes 1-2 rounds of damage and saving throws. If she passes all those saving throws, she can try running and gunning vs. it. With 5 average damage per flask (1.5*3.5 expected damage), she needs to hit 7 times, but hits less than 50% of the time, meaning she doesn't carry enough flasks to kill it. If she was packing alchemists fire she can barely kill it on average because it burns a second round, but she's not (and people held forgetting to write a grappling hook against my wizard), and that just makes it an even fight because if she misses just once more than expected it survives and she has to run.
Glan Var wrote:
And NITHER of you has taken into account that any PC that goes off alone into hostile territory is supposed to die. Tanya just has a slightly better chance of living to see daylight again.
Really, even accounting for beating the rats, she still does worse than Baughdvnleob on average. She seriously dies 40% of the time to a water-filled room trap of appropriate CR, something Baughdvnleob *never* dies to. The point isn't they're supposed to beat all of them, they're supposed to go ~50-50 (somewhere between 40%-60% would be fine), and they don't. Neither of them.
Glan Var wrote:
That sort of thing. As far as I can see, when you actually use the strategy, Tanya outperforms in the winnable fights, and looses less often than Baugh in the close fights.
That enough to satisfy you? Lets not even take into account Combat Reflexes, wherein she can take attacks of op even while flat-footed.
She doesn't have combat reflexes, she has dodge, mobility, and power attack.
JoelF847 wrote: Just a note about surprize in caverns - you're assuming that line of sight is 60' or more. Even if you are in natural caves, it's not very common that line of sight would actually extend that far (not that I'm an expert, but I have gone through a few caves, one just a week ago swimming through a river - which was very cool by the way, I wouldn't want to be an adventurer in an underground river with aquatic monsters!)
Since most games take place in dungeon settings, with rooms, doors, halls, etc. the 60 foot line of sight is going to be even less common, so that the darkvision critters don't have the ability to see that someone's coming and attack them until they're in line of sight, which would probably be within torchlight range. Sure the darkvision guys will know something's coming, but if they're not stealthy, they're not likely to get surprize, since both parties will spot each other at the same time.
And light shines on walls at corners, letting creatures around corners know you're coming. Light also shows around doors if they aren't perfectly flush. It also shows as you open the door. There is every reason to believe monsters without light get a warning that creatures with light are coming.
Further, natural caverns in D+D are humongous. Dragons live there. Assuming features like doors could easily favor either side, its better not to assume them at all. (Especially as generally the adventurer is on the monster's home turf, and thus it has the key to locked doors, knows where the secret doors are, and so forth). If this is a subterranean stronghold of some sort such that it has doors it probably also has spy holes the monsters can post sentries at to watch for intruders, traps the monsters can take advantage of during an ambush, and other advantages. This is a can of worms that is best left unopened.
Squirrelloid wrote: JoelF847 wrote: Just a note about surprize in caverns - you're assuming that line of sight is 60' or more. Even if you are in natural caves, it's not very common that line of sight would actually extend that far (not that I'm an expert, but I have gone through a few caves, one just a week ago swimming through a river - which was very cool by the way, I wouldn't want to be an adventurer in an underground river with aquatic monsters!)
Since most games take place in dungeon settings, with rooms, doors, halls, etc. the 60 foot line of sight is going to be even less common, so that the darkvision critters don't have the ability to see that someone's coming and attack them until they're in line of sight, which would probably be within torchlight range. Sure the darkvision guys will know something's coming, but if they're not stealthy, they're not likely to get surprize, since both parties will spot each other at the same time.
And light shines on walls at corners, letting creatures around corners know you're coming. Light also shows around doors if they aren't perfectly flush. It also shows as you open the door. There is every reason to believe monsters without light get a warning that creatures with light are coming.
Further, natural caverns in D+D are humongous. Dragons live there. Assuming features like doors could easily favor either side, its better not to assume them at all. (Especially as generally the adventurer is on the monster's home turf, and thus it has the key to locked doors, knows where the secret doors are, and so forth). If this is a subterranean stronghold of some sort such that it has doors it probably also has spy holes the monsters can post sentries at to watch for intruders, traps the monsters can take advantage of during an ambush, and other advantages. This is a can of worms that is best left unopened. Just because the creatures know you're coming doesn't mean they will surprise you if you see them at the same time they see you. Yes, stealthy creatures will have the chance to set up an ambush, but others will simply be ready and not be able to be surprised themselves. I disagree that it's a can of worms best left unopened, since your assumption is that darkvision equal automatic surprise vs. torch users.
A two-handed weapon can be carried in one hand.
A torch can be dropped as a free action.
Torches don't go out when dropped.
Putting a second hand on an already carried weapon is not an action.
She doesn't need three hands.
Also, the 4th level version has a potion of levitate. Swarms have 0 ft. reach. That's an auto-win.
Vigil wrote: A two-handed weapon can be carried in one hand.
A torch can be dropped as a free action.
Torches don't go out when dropped.
Putting a second hand on an already carried weapon is not an action.
She doesn't need three hands.
Also, the 4th level version has a potion of levitate. Swarms have 0 ft. reach. That's an auto-win.
And thats not taking into account the remarkably cheap Everburning Torch or Sunrod. Both can be strapped to a backpack and leave the hands free.
But this is all beside the point. First and foremost, please dont assume anything, particularly here surrounded by people who have been playing the game for ages.
Secondly, neither of you has addressed the pressing issue here: How does the barbarian do as part of a group in these challenges?
Any PC, and let me be very clear about this, ANY PC who is not massively overgeared or overstated is expected to die the majority of the time if they are alone. Its a classic mistake of low level parties, to the point where it has been named the Scoobie Doo death (referring to the classic line, "lets split up gang!")
Expecting any class to be even 50% successful is asking a lot. Adventurers travel in groups because each class brings unique strengths to the table. A rogue to find the water trap, a mage to AoE swarms and groups. A tank to get into melee with brutes and a healer to patch everyone up. Taken out of that context, the CR ratings mean nothing. Thats why there is a ECL rating for monsters as well as a CR rating. Some abilities become more powerful when there are no other allies, and some challenges simply cannot be overcome alone.
Glan Var wrote: Expecting any class to be even 50% successful is asking a lot. Adventurers travel in groups because each class brings unique strengths to the table. A rogue to find the water trap, a mage to AoE swarms and groups. A tank to get into melee with brutes and a healer to patch everyone up. That's the thing. When a class is only 50% successful, this is because each class has a weak point that causes a loss, but a different weak point from the others. Having a varied party means those weak points are covered. Mages do well against swarms and poorly against traps, while the rogue does well against traps and poorly against swarms.
It's an assured win when all four are together (when EL=APL), with exceptions being when all four have an extreme weak point (the incapable of slowing them down kind of weakness).
Vigil wrote: A two-handed weapon can be carried in one hand.
A torch can be dropped as a free action.
Torches don't go out when dropped.
Putting a second hand on an already carried weapon is not an action.
She doesn't need three hands.
Also, the 4th level version has a potion of levitate. Swarms have 0 ft. reach. That's an auto-win.
Torches don't move when they're dropped, which is sort of necessary if your opponent isn't interested in walking into your torchlight.
Carrying a 2h weapon in one hand means you aren't wielding it, just carrying it. (Even if you did have combat reflexes, which Tanya doesn't)
And did you miss the point where i proved she didn't have enough damage available in potions to defeat the swarm? It doesn't matter how untouchable she is, run and gun is as good as levitate, she simply can't expect to kill it with 10 acid vials. And eventually that potion of levitate runs out (and the swarm isn't going anywhere).
Glan Var wrote: Vigil wrote: A two-handed weapon can be carried in one hand.
A torch can be dropped as a free action.
Torches don't go out when dropped.
Putting a second hand on an already carried weapon is not an action.
She doesn't need three hands.
Also, the 4th level version has a potion of levitate. Swarms have 0 ft. reach. That's an auto-win.
And thats not taking into account the remarkably cheap Everburning Torch or Sunrod. Both can be strapped to a backpack and leave the hands free.
But this is all beside the point. First and foremost, please dont assume anything, particularly here surrounded by people who have been playing the game for ages.
Secondly, neither of you has addressed the pressing issue here: How does the barbarian do as part of a group in these challenges?
Any PC, and let me be very clear about this, ANY PC who is not massively overgeared or overstated is expected to die the majority of the time if they are alone. Its a classic mistake of low level parties, to the point where it has been named the Scoobie Doo death (referring to the classic line, "lets split up gang!")
Expecting any class to be even 50% successful is asking a lot. Adventurers travel in groups because each class brings unique strengths to the table. A rogue to find the water trap, a mage to AoE swarms and groups. A tank to get into melee with brutes and a healer to patch everyone up. Taken out of that context, the CR ratings mean nothing. Thats why there is a ECL rating for monsters as well as a CR rating. Some abilities become more powerful when there are no other allies, and some challenges simply cannot be overcome alone. If a character doesn't do much against *any* challenges on his or her own, what are they going to contribute to a party? If they very rarely do much on their own, they're very rarely going to be valuable to the party. No one cares about 'defense' beyond how long it keeps you alive. And if you don't have an offense worth talking about, no one cares how long you stay alive. There is no good way to adequately defend another character, especially at high levels, and that means that every character needs to pack a plausible offense.
Perhaps what should be calculated then, is the total percentage of the encounter they did defeat, then tally all of it together to get a raw percentage of capability rather than a straight win loss record.
This means that even if Tanya can't smash open the water trap door, if she can destroy 90% of it before drowning then she gets +90% but -100% for a net of -10% effectiveness.
If the ghouls consistently kills Tanya off before taking even half damage, she scores 50% - 100% for a net of -50% effectiveness.
Slaughtering a pair of zombies and taking no damage means she gets +100% - 0%, for a net of +100% effectiveness.
Wizards also take into account their spell usage as a percentage, perhaps roughly equal to their HP. So a mage who uses half his spells and loses half his hit points, evens out to no gain or loss.
This would give us a rough idea of how that party member would weigh into a party atmosphere since it gives us an idea of what the rest of the party would need to contribute for that character to get through the fight alive (heals, AOE spells, trap finding and disarming, etc.)
JHegner wrote: Perhaps what should be calculated then, is the total percentage of the encounter they did defeat, then tally all of it together to get a raw percentage of capability rather than a straight win loss record.
This means that even if Tanya can't smash open the water trap door, if she can destroy 90% of it before drowning then she gets +90% but -100% for a net of -10% effectiveness.
If the ghouls consistently kills Tanya off before taking even half damage, she scores 50% - 100% for a net of -50% effectiveness.
Slaughtering a pair of zombies and taking no damage means she gets +100% - 0%, for a net of +100% effectiveness.
Wizards also take into account their spell usage as a percentage, perhaps roughly equal to their HP. So a mage who uses half his spells and loses half his hit points, evens out to no gain or loss.
This would give us a rough idea of how that party member would weigh into a party atmosphere since it gives us an idea of what the rest of the party would need to contribute for that character to get through the fight alive (heals, AOE spells, trap finding and disarming, etc.)
This is interesting as a suggestion, but faced with the real problem of alternate solutions don't allow incremental gains to matter.
For example, in the water-filled room trap, if the rogue disarms it before it goes off, no one cares if the barbarian could chop through most of the door. If it does go off and the wizard uses knock, no one cares if the barbarian could chop through most of the door. At which point the barbarian's performance only matters if she can reliably chop through the door.
Now, in combat against the undead, yes, damage is a relevant metric. But against some other creatures it might not matter how much damage you can do in N rounds if you blind it in round one. It flails around and the party plays shooting fish in a barrel with their ranged weapons. So there are some encounters where strict additive performance measures do matter, but i'm not sure offhand how common those are. This leads to a lot of ad hoc (and non-objective) assessments of party performance based on some judgement call of how much the characters *partial* solution contributes to the global party solution.
Ideally, it would be a good direction to move in. Realistically, I'm not comfortable making that many subjective calls because it will just lead to endless arguments (as if we didn't have those already).
Squirelloid,
Do you realize you come off as extremely arrogant and bull-headed? I don't know if you realize it. But over the internet it's easy to give the wrong impression.
This is not an attack, merely an observation. If you're not meaning to come off that way, then you should let people know. I have read several of your posts, and most of them come off like this.
Aww, what a nice non-provoking statement to make, and with lots of constructive feedback to boot.
But Glan Var does make a good point that our barbarian can readily enough have an everburning torch on his primary weapon, which makes the strategy possibly work and influence the results.
I really do believe that if you're doing a solo test, you need to see what a class is capable of, it's best as it were. Which means building for solo work and not choosing subpar abilities. We need to see the class at its best, and let human error lower them.
Now, once you do that, we can then look at the non-best options for opinion. Admittedly, having only one conceivably good choices out of a cornucopia of junk is a design flaw. But at least we have a standard that the bad choices need to meet, and having that can help us redesign them.
Squirrelloid wrote: It should first be noted that Blue Tanya has too much gear for 4th level. A 4th level character has 5.4k gp of gear, which Tanya exceeds. Expendables still count against this amount, they're just supposed to be replenished, but her value of gear at any time should be 5.4k gp. If she was even plausibly close, I wouldn't mind, but she's not. Oops...I get a total of ~6300 gp. You can scratch the Cloak of Protection. [Note that I made at least one dubious assumption -- a CL 2 potion of Delay Poison crafted by a ranger. ;-) ]
Note that your 4th level dwarven barbarian was way over the limit, too -- he had a 4,000 gp belt of strength, a 900 gp mighty masterwork longbow, and a 2,000 gp magic weapon, just for starters...
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: It should first be noted that Blue Tanya has too much gear for 4th level. A 4th level character has 5.4k gp of gear, which Tanya exceeds. Expendables still count against this amount, they're just supposed to be replenished, but her value of gear at any time should be 5.4k gp. If she was even plausibly close, I wouldn't mind, but she's not. Oops...I get a total of ~6300 gp. You can scratch the Cloak of Protection. [Note that I made at least one dubious assumption -- a CL 2 potion of Delay Poison crafted by a ranger. ;-) ]
Note that your 4th level dwarven barbarian was way over the limit, too -- he had a 4,000 gp belt of strength, a 900 gp mighty masterwork longbow, and a 2,000 gp magic weapon, just for starters... Whoops, math error. I think i counted the belt of str as 2000gp for some reason - he's fine if we drop it - i'll see if that relevantly effects his combat performance. (This is what I get for playing Craft Wondrous mages)
Edit: Consider the belt of Str dropped. Doesn't actually change much - the Monstrous Centipede fight is slightly less favorable now, but still pretty close to even. Everything else wasn't actually effected.
Recent threads in Races & Classes
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
