| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
D&D/PF is a co-op game with team elements, no player should be dictated what to do to "benefit the team". That is something that the player needs to make, and something for the group to discuss.
DPR is still not the problem, as it's still just a tool to determine what is a good option.
The point is to educate when it's a good tool and when it's not. Choosing between Power Attack, normal attacks, and what weapons to use are decent times to think of it -- I did the same in my 1E game where I decided against the Large bastard sword route.
I guess it's a learning experience, though. In the cleric example, are the other squishies getting hurt/killed excessively? Is the cleric working fine back there? Do the other two *benefit* from not having the cleric in the way? Is there a hidden offensive lineman handling blocking duties?
Just like DPR isn't the only measure of combat, armour class isn't the only measure of tankiness (even though it does help).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No matter how many ways I have tried to explain to him, "sure buddy you do 22% better damage at ranged you are, however, giving the enemy a +5 to hit"So wait... this is a team game, but you try to dictate how other people play their characters? Did this player volunteer to tank? If so there is some merit to the discussion. If not, why assume they would?
He wasn't 'tanking', he was in front because his passive perception is 1 higher than everyone else.
Where did I tell him what to do?
I didn't
I pointed out the consequences of his actions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You didn't tell him to tank. But by your own phrasing, "No matter how many times I told him..." you heavily implied it.
No he demands to be up front because of that 1 better passive perception.
This is what I said
A player does d6+1 with his mace, but does 22% better with his Magic Stone spell at d6+3. He also has the best Perception.
So his turn consists of being in front,to spot things, when combat start he runs to the back to go ranged. You know cuz his Magic Stone spell does 22% better damage. Seeing as how he is a cleric and started with an 18 AC, he moves behind the Warlock(AC 12) and Bard(AC13).
No matter how many ways I have tried to explain to him, "sure buddy you do 22% better damage at ranged you are, however, giving the enemy a +5 to hit"
If the goal is to maximize the DPR of the group....
D&D/PF is a co-op game with team elements, no player should be dictated what to do to "benefit the team". That is something that the player needs to make, and something for the group to discuss
Hmmm. Something for the group to discuss. you mean like "sure buddy you do 22% better damage at ranged you are, however, giving the enemy a +5 to hit"
That is something that the player needs to make... you mean like No matter how many ways I have tried to explain to himSure sounds like it has been pointed out, discussed as a group and the player has decided to do what he wants.
Sounds like he shouldn't be in the front. You have said that a +1 doesn't matter. Surely he knows this too.
Sounds like he shouldn't be in the front. You have said that a +1 doesn't matter. Surely he knows this too.
Actually, what I said was:
"A +1 to hit only comes into play when two people roll the exact same number and one hits the other misses. And what is the odds of two people rolling the exact same number enough times to make that even noteworthy?"
Well, the odds of them rolling the exact same number is 5%, since we're talking about d20's here. So...Sounds like he shouldn't be in the front. You have said that a +1 doesn't matter. Surely he knows this too.Actually, what I said was:
"A +1 to hit only comes into play when two people roll the exact same number and one hits the other misses. And what is the odds of two people rolling the exact same number enough times to make that even noteworthy?"
Um... better check those maths again. So...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is quite possibly the worst application of math I've ever seen.
You don't need two people rolling the same number, unless they're the same person playing two characters at the same table. You only need the chances of one person rolling the number that would improve their roll from a miss to a hit, or a hit to a crit. That's going to be either 5% on each roll (assuming you only crit on a 20), or 10% (if you crit on an anything below that).
|
Um... better check those maths again. So...
I have to ask, because I see people use this term from time to time ...
Why are you saying ‘maths’?? You don’t add an ‘s’ to the word to make it plural. The sentence is “you better check that math”Sorry for the thread derail, but people saying ‘maths’ really drives me nuts ...
people saying ‘maths’ really drives me nuts ...
British/Australian usage.
North American style is 'math'
So, like I said, the odds of that +1 mattering is only 5%. Just like increasing your attack by 1. Or increasing your AC by 1.
Hmm... maybe it does matter.
So, like I said, the odds of that +1 mattering is only 5%. Just like increasing your attack by 1. Or increasing your AC by 1.
Hmm... maybe it does matter.
It matters. But is not the end all be all. The good think is that you can make meaningful trade-offs and still be able to perform well your primary purpose. For example you're dealing a little bit less damage for more AC, or extra HP or maybe an extra skill.
I think the designers found a good spot between optimization and freedom of choice. If your character's main purpose is to be highly competent in one single thing, then every +1 you have available, you must take it, but if that's not the main driving factor for your character creation and development, then you can still do your main thing while not fully investing in it. By later levels, the guy specializing will have a significant advantage in that field, but the character that made other choices will perform adequately while also having other advantages such as more HP to take one extra hit and finish the fight afterwards for example, or avoiding a crit with higher AC or outright being able to get into or out of the fight because of a skill (We had to climb in one of our fights in Age of Ashes and my monk passed quite well on it, while my party member wasted a round failing those checks).
I agree. But it certainly felt like someone on this thread was discussing that a +1 didn't matter. Typically RPGs reward specialization, PF1E did to a fault one may say.
This is quite possibly the worst application of math I've ever seen.
You don't need two people rolling the same number, unless they're the same person playing two characters at the same table. You only need the chances of one person rolling the number that would improve their roll from a miss to a hit, or a hit to a crit. That's going to be either 5% on each roll (assuming you only crit on a 20), or 10% (if you crit on an anything below that).
I believe that Ten10's argument is based on the concept of DPR comparisons, as in, what impact does a +1 to hit have on the relative DPR performance of two characters, all other things being identical.
But, I could be misunderstanding Ten10's argument, as I haven't really been paying as close attention as I probably should have.
That's accurate, but that's the problem. These are never characters played at the same table that are being compared. The whole point is to compare characters that would be played by the same person - thus, the rolls would be the same as well. Given that, the odds of any particular roll are as I noted.
You don't compare the DPR performance of one character rolling 1s while the other character rolls 20s, after all, you compare them assuming that everything you haven't changed remains the same.
Well a shield is functionally a numbers change. It's a downgrade of damage dice or accuracy (2 hander or agile off hand) and a reduction in number of attacks for +2 AC. If that isnt trading dpr for ac then I dont know what counts.
As for not being able to trade combat ability for skill ability that is untrue as well, there are several ways to trade out your combat choices for skill choices already.
It's more than a number change, it's a role change. You don't exactly trade DPR to AC, you trade DPR + your third action + Reaction + one item to AC + damage reduction (without shield block, shields are not fantastic) + a sturdy shield. So, in my opinion, it's more complicated than that.
I also think there are not many situations where you trade something for something else. Most of the times, the feat/attribute choices are much more about what role you want to have than small number fixers.
Damage min/max in pf2: taking not a shield.
It's actually more easy: Damage min/max in PF2 is starting with an 18 in your primary attribute.
This is quite possibly the worst application of math I've ever seen.
You don't need two people rolling the same number, unless they're the same person playing two characters at the same table. You only need the chances of one person rolling the number that would improve their roll from a miss to a hit, or a hit to a crit. That's going to be either 5% on each roll (assuming you only crit on a 20), or 10% (if you crit on an anything below that).
I believe that Ten10's argument is based on the concept of DPR comparisons, as in, what impact does a +1 to hit have on the relative DPR performance of two characters, all other things being identical.
But, I could be misunderstanding Ten10's argument, as I haven't really been paying as close attention as I probably should have.
That's accurate, but that's the problem. These are never characters played at the same table that are being compared. The whole point is to compare characters that would be played by the same person - thus, the rolls would be the same as well. Given that, the odds of any particular roll are as I noted.
You don't compare the DPR performance of one character rolling 1s while the other character rolls 20s, after all, you compare them assuming that everything you haven't changed remains the same.
Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
Also I said:Yes it is super situational.
A +1 to hit only comes into play when two people roll the exact same number and one hits the other misses. And what is the odds of two people rolling the exact same number enough times to make that even noteworthy?
It doesn't kick in to around a +3Again it's a group game. Multiple dice from multiple people the 80DPR vs 70DPR is absorbed by the randomness of the dice.
I can tell you with the utmost assurance the dice never obey the spreadsheet
Cuz you know, as hard as this is for some people to understand, this is a group game.
Sometimes you have to look up from the white room spreadsheet and engage with the others around the table.
Well then I guess there is no difference between any of the Ranger Edges, or Sudden Charge and Double Slice for DPR in different situations. It doesn't give +X to a number so it isn't relevant.
Citricking calculated that Precision and Flurry were giving roughly the same DPR. And you take Double Slice when you use 2 weapons, and Sudden Charge otherwise.
I don't think there are real situations where you have the choice between 2 feats. Most of the time, your style determines the feat you take.
Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
Because most don't need to compare themselves to others. DPR is a personal metric.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
Cuz you know, as hard as this is for some people to understand, this is a group game.
Sometimes you have to look up from the white room spreadsheet and engage with the others around the table.
Except the others around the table have completely different everything. I wouldn't compare the DPR of the Wis-focused Druid to a AoO-focused Hellknight, because that's like comparing apples to hats.
Except the others around the table have completely different everything. I wouldn't compare the DPR of the Wis-focused Druid to a AoO-focused Hellknight, because that's like comparing apples to hats.Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
Cuz you know, as hard as this is for some people to understand, this is a group game.
Sometimes you have to look up from the white room spreadsheet and engage with the others around the table.
If you played Ragnarok Online then you know they're the same thing!
Like apples to penguins, then?
I mean yeah, that is true of basically all games once they have been mathed out. That doesn't mean the trade isn't happening, just that it is the presumptive starting point.
As an example I have a player who has gone Sword and Shield (well not Sword but you get the point) that has Double Slice as a middle ground. Less DPR than getting two proper weapons but higher AC.
No, that's not true at all in PF1. I can very easily find 2 PF1 builds for the same fighting style and even sometimes the same classes with extreme difference in DPR. Power Attack alone increases greatly the DPR. That is no more true in PF2, there is nothing to know to maximize your DPR but to put an 18 in your primary attribute and take the feats that are speaking about your fighting style.
And I agree that DPR calculation can be useful to compare different fighting styles, even if it'll be rarely the reason why you choose a style instead of another. Fighting with a shield should obviously give you more defense but less DPR, and the game respects logic for that matter.
It's very easy to design competitive builds even for an absolute newbie as long as you make a sensible build.
Because most don't need to compare themselves to others. DPR is a personal metric.Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
DPR a personal metric in a group game? Damage per Round? Yep says nothing about it being a personal metric.
Except the others around the table have completely different everything. I wouldn't compare the DPR of the Wis-focused Druid to a AoO-focused Hellknight, because that's like comparing apples to hats.Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
Cuz you know, as hard as this is for some people to understand, this is a group game.
Sometimes you have to look up from the white room spreadsheet and engage with the others around the table.
Except, I know here I go again eyeroll and all of that, but hear me out. Is not Group Damage per Round way the Asmodeus more important then your personal damage per round? Isn't the point to maximize(group) efficiency?
What is better for the group You to do +3.69872456349872345072348 PDPRor
You deal -3.69872456349872345072348 PDPR, but increase the GDPR by +19.88245234505 GDPR?
DPR a personal metric in a group game? Damage per Round? Yep says nothing about it being a personal metric.
DPR is a personal metric because your character is personal. Maybe you play in groups where other players have their say about the way you build your character, but I think you are the exception.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because most don't need to compare themselves to others. DPR is a personal metric.Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
DPR a personal metric in a group game? Damage per Round? Yep says nothing about it being a personal metric.
Except the others around the table have completely different everything. I wouldn't compare the DPR of the Wis-focused Druid to a AoO-focused Hellknight, because that's like comparing apples to hats.Who said this had to be about characters played by the same person? That seems oddly specific.
Cuz you know, as hard as this is for some people to understand, this is a group game.
Sometimes you have to look up from the white room spreadsheet and engage with the others around the table.
Except, I know here I go again eyeroll and all of that, but hear me out. Is not Group Damage per Round way the Asmodeus more important then your personal damage per round? Isn't the point to maximize(group) efficiency?
What is better for the group You to do +3.69872456349872345072348 PDPR
or
You deal -3.69872456349872345072348 PDPR, but increase the GDPR by +19.88245234505 GDPR?
I'm surprised your (possibly changing, in PFS's case) group hands you all their character sheets to put into a spreadsheet and run numbers on them so that they can follow your instructions.
Because mine certainly doesn't.
Can you post the build and the choices of that character to lower their damage by 3 while increasing the group's damage by 19 please? I have several players that would be interested.
DPR a personal metric in a group game? Damage per Round? Yep says nothing about it being a personal metric.DPR is a personal metric because your character is personal. Maybe you play in groups where other players have their say about the way you build your character, but I think you are the exception.
Personally, sounds like your in the boat of 6 people sitting around trying to play a group game instead of in the boat of a group playing PF2. I feel for yas. Trust me I've been there. I've played in that boat. It was never enjoyable.
Why would you want to play in a boat where everyone is stepping all over each other trying to maximize their personal damage? Is there a prize awarded at the end by the GM for who was the bestest at their personal damage per round? Are you mocked for taking a "lesser DPR choice" but helping out other members? Why aren't you discussing with the other members in the boat about what choices to take as you level? Does it not seem totally counter-productive to choose your build in a vacuum?Can you post the build and the choices of that character to lower their damage by 3 while increasing the group's damage by 19 please? I have several players that would be interested.
Um it wasn't lower their damage by 3. It was lower their damage by 3.69872456349872345072348. Use your spreadsheets and found the solution.