The DPR Olympics - or "I'm not the mechanic here, Ironsides! I mostly just hurt people!"


Advice

451 to 500 of 855 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

Quandary wrote:
WWWW wrote:
You know something comes to mind on the subject. Were there rulings about bonuses for two handed weapons in one hand like lances and using the two handed double weapons in one hand. Depending on what was ruled the combination could allow two handed damage bonus in two weapon fighting while still using a weapon in both hands unlike greatsword and armor spikes.
How? The 2-Handed damage is dependent on wielding a weapon in two-hands (even if it just requires 1-Hand to wield), not being CLASSED as a 2-Handed weapon. Anyhow, let's not de-rail this thread completely people, even if it seems like it's run it's course. I believe Xum just mentioned 2WF Armor Spikes+2Handed Weapon in the course of wondering what "the best" build is. As Treantmonk pointed out, for Full Attack DPS purposes, *even if it was allowed* it would likely be worse damage because you have to split your stat focus (STR/DEX) to qualify for 2WF (if using point-buy, and even if not it's very Feat heavy).

The AoO part I agree with, completely. Now, not to derail this further. I would like to see some numbers behind that assumption that this build is not the most damagy. I agree it's feat dependent, but it's no diferent than any 2 weapon fighting build. I know that there are many, many factors included about reliably full attacking and all that, but if a guy chooses to go 2 weapon fighting, I cannot comprehend how anything will beat Power attack x 4 and Strength x 2.5. Especialy when you hit 11th level and beyond.


A Man In Black wrote:
LoreKeeper wrote:
This is a high damage monk build.

It's also using a better stat array than the other characters, a shocking/frost weapon, and a non-core monk++ feat.

More troublingly, the math is borked. Shatter Defenses makes a scared foe flatfooted after the first time you hit it while it's scared. So you need to crit, make the intimidate, then hit a second time for all subsequent attacks to be attacking flatfooted AC.

Ah, thanks - I forgot about using elite array (I used 15 point buy).

To my knowledge there is nothing illegal about having a Amulet of Mighty Fist (+2 equivalent enchanted with Frost and Shock). A 20000gp item.

Yes, Hamatulatsu is non-core; but it is in the campaign setting - which is a pretty legitimate source of feats. The rules don't specify core-only feats last I checked; and the feat isn't gamebreaking or overpowered.

I didn't realize Shatter Defenses only applies after the next successful hit. I reworked the maths with new stats and rules, the result is:

Full-round flurry with ki-point, DPR: 66.65

If the character spends a round scaring enemies (Dazzling Display), or gets in a crit, he should be good for 3 rounds of shaken enemies - in which case every round benefits from Medusa's Wrath provided at least one attack hits (which is quite likely). Any crit resets the timer, which is handy as the odds are about 83% to crit at least once in 3 rounds with the number of attacks (and increasing threat range from Hamatulatsu).

Full-round flurry after scaring with ki-point, DPR: 83.69

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

LoreKeeper wrote:
To my knowledge there is nothing illegal about having a Amulet of Mighty Fist (+2 equivalent enchanted with Frost and Shock). A 20000gp item.

Except that everyone's DPR would be much higher if they used those sorts of weapons. It's an arbitrary limitation chosen for reasons that were discussed about five pages ago, just like the lack of setup rounds and the elite array.

I'm not saying your DPR is unrealistic, merely that it's artificially inflated (or that all others are artificially deflated, however you want to look at it).


Aaaah. Got it - it would help if that was mentioned on page 1 (my source of rules).

Reworking the maths once more, using +2 amulet of mighty fists (instead of shock & horror):

Full-round flurry with ki-point, DPR: 60.83
Full-round flurry after scarring, with ki point, DPR: 75.05

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

LoreKeeper wrote:
Aaaah. Got it - it would help if that was mentioned on page 1 (my source of rules).

It's cool, it was something that came as a result of the discussion. Honestly, I don't care if people break the "rules", as long as it's clear how (and why, if it's interesting). That's a good illustrative writeup of how much Hamatulatsu Strike contributes. I'll see if I can't get a theorycrafting result that's similar to your simulated result sometime when I'm game to sit down with my calculator.

I keep meaning to come back to this thread, clean up and recheck the writeups, and give it a fresh start. Alas, I'm Captain Lazy.


A Man In Black wrote:
It's cool, it was something that came as a result of the discussion. Honestly, I don't care if people break the "rules", as long as it's clear how (and why, if it's interesting). That's a good illustrative writeup of how much Hamatulatsu Strike contributes. I'll see if I can't get a theorycrafting result that's similar to your simulated result sometime when I'm game to sit down with my calculator.

Thanks :) - writing out an equation is difficult in the sense that there are many conditionals that need to be tracked - so each attack essentially carries its own set of logistics. For example, for the 3rd attack it matters whether attack 1 was a stun, or a crit (which is handled differently from the stun); then it also matters if attack 2 was a crit - but differently so than attack 1 (as this now activates the shatter defenses). Doing that for all the attacks makes a whole tree of probabilities that has many many branches.

I'd only recommend it for people that have a serious masochistic streak in their academic blood.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I didn't notice it in my scan of the thread, but has anyone run numbers on the difference Improved Natural Attack makes on Monk DPR? Since it seems to come up now and then, statistical analysis would be nice.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I didn't notice it in my scan of the thread, but has anyone run numbers on the difference Improved Natural Attack makes on Monk DPR? Since it seems to come up now and then, statistical analysis would be nice.

It's really easy to do, since it's just +damage. Take any monk build, and multiply the amount of DPR an extra point of damage-per-hit adds by the amount of damage INA adds.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
A Man In Black wrote:
It's really easy to do, since it's just +damage. Take any monk build, and multiply the amount of DPR an extra point of damage-per-hit adds by the amount of damage INA adds.

Thanks for the tip. College Algebra this semester makes me not want to think about math when I don't have to.


Just look at any monk build and specifically look at the "+" when damage is increased by 1. That, or twice that, is what you can expect from improved natural attack.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
I didn't notice it in my scan of the thread, but has anyone run numbers on the difference Improved Natural Attack makes on Monk DPR? Since it seems to come up now and then, statistical analysis would be nice.

The Improved Natural Attack feat doesn't aply to monks.

Both James and Jason has said that the monk's attack isn't considered natural attacks so they can pick that feat.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Zark wrote:

The Improved Natural Attack feat doesn't aply to monks.

Both James and Jason has said that the monk's attack isn't considered natural attacks so they can pick that feat.

Which is a moronic ruling that conflicts with the RAW, so people want to be sure it doesn't have an undue game impact.


Since folks are goofing around with multi-classed characters (for better or for worse), I'll take a shot at one too.

Big Ern, Human Barbarian 2/Alchemist 8

Spoiler:

Buffs:
Feral Mutagen (str), False Life, Heroism

Ability Scores:
STR: 22/26/30 (+6/8/10) (15 base, +2 racial, +1 level, +4 belt)
DEX: 10 (+0)
CON: 14/18 (+2/4)
INT: 16/14 (+3/2) (13 base, +1 level, +2 headband)
WIS: 12 (+1)
CHA: 8 (-1)
HP: 84.5/97 HP (12+1d12+8d8+30+false life)
Saving Throws
Fort: +15/17 (+21/23 vs. poison) Ref: +10 Will: +9 (1/day reroll) [base +9/+6/+2]
AC: 24/22 - Touch 11, Flatfooted 22 (+10 +1 full plate, +1 Amulet of Natural Armor, +1 Ring of Protection, +2 natural armor)

Attacks: claw x2, +21/23, 1d6+10/12 & bite +20/22, 1d8+10/12 dmg [+8 bab, +2 enh, +1 feat, +2 heroism, +8/10 str]
Power Attack: claw x2, +18/20, 1d6+16/18 & bite +17/19, 1d8+16/18 dmg [+8 bab, +2 enh, +1 feat, +2 heroism, +8/10 str]

Class Abilities:
Bombs
Mutagen
Feral mutagen, Enhance potion, Sticky poison
Poison use, Swift poisoning
Fast movement
Rage power (?No Escape?)
Rage 14 rounds/day

BAB: +8 CMB: +16/18 CMD: 26
Feats:
Iron Will (h)
Improved Iron Will (1)
Power Attack (3)
Heavy Armor Proficiency (5)
Extra Rage (7)
Weapon Focus (claw) (9)

Skills:
Some stuff

Formulas:
Heroism, False Life, some other stuff

Gear:
+2 amulet of mighty fists (20k)
Belt of +4 str (16k)
Headband of +2 int (4k)
+1 full plate with mwk armor spikes (3k)
Cloak of Resistance +2 (4k)
Handy Haversack (2k)
Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (2k)
Ring of Protection +1 (2k)
10k? GP in miscellaneous potions, poisons, other consumables, gear, non-portable goods, etc.

A full raging power attack with claw/claw/bite (+20/+20/+19, 1d6+18/1d6+18/1d8+18) does 57.28 damage. An extra +1 bonus does 3.44 extra damage, and an extra attack does 19.2 extra damage.


A Man In Black wrote:
Zark wrote:

The Improved Natural Attack feat doesn't aply to monks.

Both James and Jason has said that the monk's attack isn't considered natural attacks so they can pick that feat.
Which is a moronic ruling,...

No

A Man In Black wrote:


.... that conflicts with the RAW

?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Zark wrote:
No

Yes.

Quote:
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

INA is an effect that enhances or improves natural weapons.

Also, a monk character in a Paizo AP had INA as a feat.

Once again, the purpose of asking here was to determine what mechanical significance there was in a monk taking INA, for the express purpose of showing that there is no reason to deny the feat.

But we don't need to start this merry-go-round again. *bows out*


Zark wrote:

Both James and Jason has said that the monk's attack isn't considered natural attacks so they can pick that feat.

False. Jason said that the feat was too powerful relative to other feats when applied to monks, so monks aren't permitted to take it. He did not say that monks' attacks aren't considered natural attacks.


From this thread

James Jacobs wrote:

HA!

And I'm flip flopping AGAIN!

Jason crunched his numbers and the official errata is this—the Improved Natural Attack feat can not be applied to unarmed strike. We'll be issuing an errata for that feat that adds this sentence to the feat:

"Improved Natural Attack can not be applied to unarmed strikes."

Unarmed strikes ARE still treated as natural weapons for most effects (particularly for the spell magic fang and for amulets of magic fang), but the Improved Natural Attack feat is an exception to that rule.

So! There ya go! Official errata! Sorry it took so long to nail it down.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

No one denied that they made the errata. It was denied that it was a necessary errata and that according to the RAW monks cannot take the feat. I posted here for information on the mechanical effect of the feat as basis for why the errata was unnecessary.


Rogue Build using Shuriken Nekogami's Dance of the Knife feat

Jack B. Awesometastic, Human dagger rogue

Spoiler:

Str - 10
Dex - 22 (1 level, +2 human, 4 belt)
Con - 14
Int - 12
Wis - 14 (1 level)
CHA - 8

HP:68
AC: 24, 28 v. AoO (10 + 6dex +1 ammy +1 ring +1 dodge + 5 chain shirt)

Fort:7
Ref:15
Will:7

Rogue Stuff:
Evasion
Improved Uncanny Dodge
Trapsense +3
Crippling Strike

Feats:

Weapon Finesse (rogue talent)
Weapon Focus dagger (rogue talent)
Two Weapon Fighting (rogue tlaent)
Improved Two Weapon Fighting
Double slice
Improved Initiative
Dance of the Knife
Dodge
Mobility

Skills:
Sleight of hand 5, 5 acrobatics, stealth, other stuff

Gear:

+4 belt - 16k
Two +3 Daggers - 36k
+1 N AC ammy - 2k
+1 Deflectionn ring - 2k
cloak of resist +2 - 4k
+1 Mithral Shirt -2k

Technically 114gp over limit but whatever

Attacks: Bab 7/2

+3 daggers 17/17/12/12, d4+9 (19-20x2) +5d6 on sneak attack

Regular DPR : 30.42, Sneak Attack DPR assuming flanking : 82.96

Yowch.

Might be an awesome feat for a thrown daggers fighter though, I'll do that later.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
No one denied that they made the errata. It was denied that it was a necessary errata and that according to the RAW monks cannot take the feat. I posted here for information on the mechanical effect of the feat as basis for why the errata was unnecessary.

I didn't say it wasn't unnecessary. I just don't think it's moronic.

The hyperbol is just unnessesary.


Zark wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
No one denied that they made the errata. It was denied that it was a necessary errata and that according to the RAW monks cannot take the feat. I posted here for information on the mechanical effect of the feat as basis for why the errata was unnecessary.

I didn't say it wasn't unnecessary. I just don't think it's moronic.

The hyperbol is just unnessesary.

+1 to moronic here. As if monks don't have it hard enough.

Liberty's Edge

Improved Natural Attack debaters/attackers: this has been done to death. The official stance is "monks cant take it because it would be overpowered". Maybe this is right, maybe it's not - no one has crunched the numbers yet.

So maybe, instead of just attacking the official stance, try crunching the numbers and comparing it to some of the "at the power limit" feats like Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and Vital Strike. Take into account the monk belt and other stuff, and do a scaling comparison (like how much additional benefit +1 attack or an extra attack has).

If it ends up at or near those feats in strength, then maybe it is overpowered, or at least worthy of more in-depth examination (the fact that it works just as well with grappling and similar maneuvers, for instance, might push it out of bounds, even if it's just okay for full-rounding).

On the other hand, if it ends up significantly under those feats, we'll know the official stance is wrong and have the numbers to back it up, and thus can safely ignore the ruling.

But mindlessly attacking the official ruling without actually providing anything of substance is a waste of time.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
BobChuck wrote:
So maybe, instead of just attacking the official stance, try crunching the numbers

Which is what I came here to ask about, and then got told 'you can't do that'. Which had nothing to do with my question.

Anyway.


Sorry to join in like that on this wonderful but very long thread. I was wondering who is king DPR?

What race/class/built is the highest melee DPR?


goldomark wrote:

Sorry to join in like that on this wonderful but very long thread. I was wondering who is king DPR?

What race/class/built is the highest melee DPR?

Most of the time its the fighter.

When fighting certain evil monsters its the paladin.


Dagger Dan, Thrown weapons fighter.

Following RAW, rather than the Nekogami feat I used earlier.

Spoiler:

Str 18 (14 base, 4 belt)
Dex 22 (15 base, 1 level, 2 human, 4 belt)
Con 14 (13 base, 1 level)
Int 10
Wis 12
CHA 8

HP: 79 (10+9d10(49.5)+20)
AC: 29 (6 dex, 7 armor, 4 shield, 1 ring, 1 ammy)

Fort:12
Ref:12
Will:10

Feats:

Weapon Focus Dagger
Great weapon Focus Dagger
Weapon Specialization Dagger
Improved Critical Dagger
Quickdraw
Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Rapid Shot
Deadly Aim
Vital Strike
Farshot
Ironwill

Gear:

Belt +4 str +4 dex
mithral breastplate +1
shield +2
3 resist cloak
prot ring
haversack
Natural armor ammy
daggers

About 1k left over

Attacks: 16/16/11, 1d4+14 (17-20 x2)

DPR on a full Attack is 35.06. Like the monk Shuriken build, it's defensively stronger but weaker on the damage. Mostly it's an opportunity cost thing, where the money that would go towards a weapon goes to a shield and better resist cloak instead. Higer dex helps the reflex save too.


Not gonna repost the whole build, but if you let the fighter have a +3 dagger the DPR goes up to 52.41, which I think is playable. Some kind of homebrew gloves or something that would add weapon enhacement to thrown items would go a long way towards making this a playable build.

Of course the 16k spent on the gloves pretty much takes away most of the defensive advantage, since you also get screwed out of some money by Pathfinder's forcing of all physical stats onto a single item (you'd save 8k if you can have str and dex on different items, I really don't understand this change). It's a MAD build that has to spend more money on keeping the stats up.

Thrown weapon builds need luvin'.


Inquisitor Ivanova, human Inquisitor 10.

Inquisitor Ivanova:

Ability Scores:
STR: 14 (+2)
DEX: 22 (+6) (15 base, +2 racial, +1 level, +4 belt)
CON: 12 (+2)
INT: 10 (+0)
WIS: 14 (+1) (13 Base +1 level)
CHA: 8 (-1)

HP: 65 HP (10d8+20)

Saving Throws
Fort: +10 Ref: +11 Will: +11

AC: 22 - Touch 14, Flatfooted 19 (+7 +1 Breastplate, +3 dex, +1 Ring of Protection, +1 Buckler)

Attacks: Longbow +18/+13, d8+5 dmg (19-20/x3)
Initiative: +8

Class Abilities:
Good Domain
Judgment 4/ Day- 2 Judgments at once
Monster Lore
Stern Gaze
Orisons
Cunning Initiative
Detect Alignment
Track
Solo Tactics
3 Bonus Teamwork feats
Bane
Discern Lies

BAB: +7 CMB: +9 CMD: 25

Feats:
Weapon Focus (longbow)
Deadly Aim
Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Rapid Shot
Manyshot

Teamwork Feats:
Duck and Cover
Shield Wall
Swap Places

Skills:
Some stuff

Gear:
+3 composite longbow (+2 str mod)
Belt of +4 dex
+1 Breastplate
Cloak of Resistance +2
Handy Haversack
Masterwork Falchion
Ring of Protection +1
Lesser Bracers of Archery
Buckler
Leftover cash for miscellaneous consumables, gear, non-portable goods, etc.



Damage

Has access to Heroism, so that will be included in Attack routines

Full attack with Deadly Aim, Rapid Shot, Many shot and Heroism
+16x2/+16/+11
1d8+9 Damage

DPR=35.505

1st Round Swift action declare Judgment: Destruction and Justice
+17x2/+17/+12
1d8+11 Damage

DPR= 44.0975

2nd Round Judgements increase to 2nd level, Declare Bane swift Action
+20x2/+20/+15
1d8+15 + 2d6

DPR=93.28

3rd Round Judgements maximise
+21x2/+21/+16
1d8+17 + 2d6
1d8+17 +2d6

DPR= 106.305

3rd round Judgments + prebuff Divine power (For giggles)
25x2/+25/+25/+20
1d8+20 + 2d6

DPR= 161.4375

Inquisitors get pretty scary...

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

goldomark wrote:
What race/class/built is the highest melee DPR?

Not monks lol.

I mean.

It depends. This particular thread has very specific limitations which may or may not apply in your game. Archery combined with full BAB and/or fixed damage bonuses does very well in pretty much every situation.


It's been a while since I went through the whole thread, so has anyone done a Summoner's Eidolon at this level. If not, would somebody like to give it a go?


Also, could someone show the math? I made an excel spreadsheet using the equation from the first post and I never get the same numbers as everyone else. I only nearly get those numbers. I wanted to have a way to do the dpr for my monsters/npc's on the fly so I'd know if something was too dangerous for my players to face.


Hexcaliber wrote:
I wanted to have a way to do the dpr for my monsters/npc's on the fly so I'd know if something was too dangerous for my players to face.

Here they are using expected average damage factoring in criticals as fractions of every hit.

This is fine for PCs as they will have a large number of rolls over the long run.

However criticals spike damage, and for npcs this is an issue.

Becareful on what critters can do with crits.

-James


?????? Where?

Did you try to PM me or did you intend to link it?

Either way, thanx for the reply.


Hexcaliber wrote:
Also, could someone show the math? I made an excel spreadsheet using the equation from the first post and I never get the same numbers as everyone else. I only nearly get those numbers.

Congratulations! You found some math errors. (I know I made a bunch.) :-)


hogarth wrote:


Congratulations! You found some math errors. (I know I made a bunch.) :-)

Hardy har har! What I'm trying to get at is the fact that no one's numbers are matching up with what I have for the equation. With excel or a graphing calculator a person wouldn't get slightly off numbers, so my assumption is that I must be doing something wrong.

I'd be pretty impressed if everyone in this thread was off on their DPR.


Hexcaliber wrote:
hogarth wrote:


Congratulations! You found some math errors. (I know I made a bunch.) :-)

Hardy har har! What I'm trying to get at is the fact that no one's numbers are matching up with what I have for the equation. With excel or a graphing calculator a person wouldn't get slightly off numbers, so my assumption is that I must be doing something wrong.

I'd be pretty impressed if everyone in this thread was off on their DPR.

In most cases, I was using this formula.

BD = Base damage = The average damage you do on a non-critical hit.
CD = Crit damage = The average extra damage you get from a critical hit
TC = Threat chance = the chance that you threaten a critical
HC = Hit chance = The chance that a given hit will land
TCC = Threat Confirm Chance = The chance to confirm a critical threats

DPA = Average damage on a given attack = HC * BD + CD * min(HC, TC) * TCC
DPR = Sum of all DPA for all attacks

In most cases TCC = HC, thus DPA = HC * BD + CD * min(HC, TC) * HC
Now you can factor out HC you get that DPA = HC * (BD + CD * min(HC, TC))
If HC is > TC, then the formula simpilifies to DPA = HC * (BD + CD * TC)
Define the average damage per hit = AD = BD + CD * TC, and you get DPA = HC * AD
If the average damage per hit is the same for all hits, then DPR = (Sum of all hit chances) * AD

So given two attacks with +20/+15 to hit, and hitting for 30 damage with a 19-20/x2 crit mod against AC 24

AD = 30 + 10% * 30 = 33 damage

DPR = (85% + 60%) * 33 = 47.85


Hexcaliber wrote:
hogarth wrote:


Congratulations! You found some math errors. (I know I made a bunch.) :-)

Hardy har har! What I'm trying to get at is the fact that no one's numbers are matching up with what I have for the equation. With excel or a graphing calculator a person wouldn't get slightly off numbers, so my assumption is that I must be doing something wrong.

I'd be pretty impressed if everyone in this thread was off on their DPR.

If you're getting the hit chance by subtracting the To hit from the AC, and then subtracting that from a 20, you need to add 1 to it. I remember someone else making that mistake somewhere.

Also my 20x2 crit attack chains are wrong, because for whatever reason I used 10% for the crit chance in my calculations rather than 5% (I plead long term temporary insanity)


Sarandosil wrote:
Hexcaliber wrote:
hogarth wrote:


Congratulations! You found some math errors. (I know I made a bunch.) :-)

Hardy har har! What I'm trying to get at is the fact that no one's numbers are matching up with what I have for the equation. With excel or a graphing calculator a person wouldn't get slightly off numbers, so my assumption is that I must be doing something wrong.

I'd be pretty impressed if everyone in this thread was off on their DPR.

If you're getting the hit chance by subtracting the To hit from the AC, and then subtracting that from a 20, you need to add 1 to it. I remember someone else making that mistake somewhere.

Also my 20x2 crit attack chains are wrong, because for whatever reason I used 10% for the crit chance in my calculations rather than 5% (I plead long term temporary insanity)

I did that at first. I had an annoying time setting up the proper hit chance, and have a seprate cell for it so I can pay attention to it.

My DPR is off on Bitey. I forgot that you lose the bite attack when not raging.


Hexcaliber wrote:
hogarth wrote:


Congratulations! You found some math errors. (I know I made a bunch.) :-)

Hardy har har! What I'm trying to get at is the fact that no one's numbers are matching up with what I have for the equation. With excel or a graphing calculator a person wouldn't get slightly off numbers, so my assumption is that I must be doing something wrong.

I'd be pretty impressed if everyone in this thread was off on their DPR.

I wasn't really kidding; I honestly think that there are just a bunch of math errors in there.


Thank you Charender. It turns out my equation is right. The earlier posts were the one's I was number comparing and either those guys are off or there's some information I'm missing.

I also made a section in the spreadsheet to handle crits, it's just easier than trying to insert an equation in the equation.

All better now! Thanx!


The very earliest people in the the thread were using the wrong Wealth By Level.


Quandary wrote:
The very earliest people in the the thread were using the wrong Wealth By Level.

???? Was I not factoring in their magic items? I thought the attack routine presented was the final after all modifiers? Oh well.

I do love this thread though and would love to see a DPR set up for casters based on the number of potential targets vs spells cast over 5 rounds (typical length of combat).

If I do have the equation right then I'm going to offer up (at some point) DPR for summonings. Curious to see how they all stack up.


Hexcaliber wrote:
Was I not factoring in their magic items? I thought the attack routine presented was the final after all modifiers?

I don't know, I'm not going over your #"s in that detail...

I'd say look for the posts discussing the discrepancy several pages into the thread, and check if your wealth is correct by that amount.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'attack routine' - for most builds this is full attacking, with whatever full attack feats/abilities activated, which has very little to do with gear, though some builds have items like rhino armor which gives bonus damage on charges which you may want to list as a sub-case of single attack damage.

Quote:
If I do have the equation right then I'm going to offer up (at some point) DPR for summonings. Curious to see how they all stack up.

Aren't you using Tejon's DPR Calculator? Search the thread, it's a Google Doc that makes physical DPR (Full Attack/Single) easy to calculate (and consistent - you don't have to worry about the equation being used - this also makes it easy for anybody to check it, or make a variant, if you link the the googledocs like I did for the Curvy Camilla build).

It doesn't cover quite every corner case, like I never figured the damage difference from dropping 1 level of Fighter from Curvy Camilla for another level of Barbarian for Animal Fury, because enabling secondary attacks in the spreadsheet seems to lower over-all damage in Tejon's spreadsheet, while Animal Fury should be pure gain for the same build.
That case can be figured out simply by dropping BAB by 5, removing Vital Strike, imput-ing Bite attack and damage values to find the single attack DPR, and add that to the normal Full Attack DPR for the Barb/Fighter build. I haven't bothered running the #'s just because I assume it DOES do more DPR than Barb1/WeaponTraining2(Fighter), given the Curvy Camilla build has ~45-50 'damage per additional attack.

It should be easy enough to figure Summoned creatures DPR, just imput their stats, and if you want to figure DPR over 3 rounds just stat out 3 summoned monsters, with the latter monsters each having 1 less round to contribute to average DPR. Summoning in combat doesn't have too much real-game-play viability in my experience, given the interruptability, so I would take any such #'s with a grain of salt, but go ahead and stat 'em up!

Remember that too posters many focus only on Full Attack DPR, which isn't realistic to achieve most of the time, you also want good Single Attack DPR with Vital Strike (or, out of this comparison: Cleave/GC). The 'mediocre' full Barbarian builds seemed to have perfectly good single attack DPR for the most part (subject to individual build), and this like-wise applies for Cleaves.


@BigStupidFighter: Inquisitor Ivanova is interesting. I like Inquisitors and your numbers show what to expect, i.e. starting out wimpy (for a combat class), coming up to par by 3rd round.

I'd be interested to see what a melee Inquisitor build looks like, maybe I'll do it myself once the final class it out :-)

I think the Teamwork Feats can be directly relevant to damage output, e.g. if Rogues can count Flanking for Full Attacks, why not grab the Feat giving +4 instead of +2 for Flanking, which should bring up +attack enough to make a difference. Likewise, the Initiative Feat/ always act on surprised is practically giving you an extra round of combat, which your numbers show is pretty crucial for Inquisitors.

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 4

Don't forget the feat to add +1d6 precision damage if you're flanking.


Since the last post for this was in May, given the change to the Inquisitor's Judgement Ability, where does that put them now?

Sovereign Court

Dr Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, Half-Orc Barbarian 10

This build is pure barbarian natural attacking frenzy using the new options from the APG. HOrcs get a primary bite attack by giving up the Ferocity trait, gain two primary claw attacks from Lesser Beast Totem, and a primary gore attack from Lesser Fiend Totem. This build reaches ultimate scariness at 10 when Greater Beast Totem ups claw damage, crit multiplier and ADDS POUNCE! Throw in a smattering of elemental damage and we have a DPR leader.

Build:

Ability Scores:
STR: 22 (+6) (15 base, +2 racial, +1 level, +4 belt) (26 w/ Rage)
DEX: 14 (+2) (13 base, +1 level)
CON: 14 (+2) (18 w/ Rage)
INT: 10 (+0)
WIS: 12 (+1)
CHA: 8 (-1)

HP: 95 HP (10d12+20)

Saving Throws
Fort: +12 Ref: +8 Will: +7 (9 while raging)

AC: Doesn't matter. You're gonna get hit.

Attacks: 2 Claws +18 1d8+16+1d6 elemental (20/x3) w/Rend
Bite +17 1d4+16+1d6 elemental (20/x2)
Gore +17 1d8+16+1d6 elemental (20/x2)

Initiative: +2

Racial Abilities:
Toothy

Class Abilities:
Rages (Beast Totem [Lesser to Greater], Elemental Rage [Lesser, Regular], Lesser Fiend Totem)
Pounce
Everything else is secondary

BAB: +10 CMB: +16 (+18 raginging) CMD: 28 (30 raging)

Feats:
Power Attack
Extra Rage Power
Weapon Focus (Claw)
Rending Claws
Improved Critical (Claw)

Skills:
Some stuff

Gear:
+2 Amulet of Mighty Fists
Belt of +4 str
+1 Breastplate
Cloak of Resistance +2
Stuff

Damage

Claws:
4.5+8+2+6+3.5=24

2*[(.75*24)+(.75*.1*2*24)]+(.75*.75*3.5)=45.17

Bite:
2.5+8+2+6+3.5=22

(.7*22)+(.7*.05*22)=16.17

Gore:
4.5+8+2+6+3.5=24

(.7*24)+(.7*.05*24)=17.64

Total:78.98

Total (w/o elemental):67.53

Total (w/ charge and pounce):90.13


RtrnofdMax wrote:

Dr Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, Half-Orc Barbarian 10

This build is pure barbarian natural attacking frenzy using the new options from the APG. HOrcs get a primary bite attack by giving up the Ferocity trait, gain two primary claw attacks from Lesser Beast Totem, and a primary gore attack from Lesser Fiend Totem.

Gore and bite overlap, you get one or the other but not both. Much the same way that a troll using a two-handed sword would not get claw attacks as well as the sword swings.

Also you'll want to spend some resources on AC as yours, as you admit, is way below accepted levels for this comparison.

-James

Sovereign Court

I understand that you are likening the head to a limb that can only have a single attack, but I don't think the head is limited the same way an arm is. Look at a gargoyle or Half-fiend Minotaur from the bestiary and you will have at least two examples of a creature with a bite and a gore as a full attack.

And as for defenses, I would only be comfortable playing this character if I knew he was a glass cannon. The DR path combined with high HP should keep him alive most of the time, while not much will last long against him.


RtrnofdMax wrote:

Look at a gargoyle or Half-fiend Minotaur from the bestiary and you will have at least two examples of a creature with a bite and a gore as a full attack.

And as for defenses, I would only be comfortable playing this character if I knew he was a glass cannon.

I guess you're right on bite and gore. I should have thought of the gargoyle.. mea culpa.

As to lack of defenses, while I agree with you in the main, part of the exercise was to have a certain baseline of defenses to make sure people didn't skimp on them entirely.

For example, you've put a lot of cash into the amulet and the belt, which is all very reasonable. But I think you need to lower these to afford some better defenses for the comparison. Not if you were going to PLAY the PC, but rather simply for the comparison.

-James

451 to 500 of 855 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / The DPR Olympics - or "I'm not the mechanic here, Ironsides! I mostly just hurt people!" All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.