Nifft
Penguin Herder
Yeah, our Fighter has been a lot happier since he dropped his Maul and picked up a Heavy Shield.
The "great weapon" path is more than a little deceptive.
Cheers, -- N
Lots of statistics from the Monster Manual
The "great weapon" path is more than a little deceptive.
Cheers, -- N
robertliguori
First Post
All right, allow me to settle this debate once and for all.
There is our shared consensus of how the world should be. Fighters should stab things effectively, wizards should harness the powers of magic, evil rotty magic doesn't work well against undead and shiny divine magic does, and so forth. We each have a set of these perceptions, and most of them are pretty well aligned.
Now, there are also the set of numbers used to describe the world. And most of these numbers line up with the majority of our perceptions.
Now, let us take the view that the numbers are fundamentally important, and the only thing that matters is our perceptions. In this view, the numbers exist so we can play with dice; if numbers come up that disagree with our perceptions, we throw them out and make up new ones. In this view, looking at the numbers distracts us from the simple expression of shared consensus.
However, another view is that numbers and shared consensus are both important, and that when they are misaligned, one or the other should be shifted around. If we perceive a hit from a longsword and a hit from a longbow as being pretty much equivalent in terms of human squishing potential, but one does 2d6 and the other does 1d4, we will see our expectation of the world violated in actual play. We need to either adjust our perception, or adjust the numbers, and in order to know which to do, it helps to have a lot of data in one place.
There is our shared consensus of how the world should be. Fighters should stab things effectively, wizards should harness the powers of magic, evil rotty magic doesn't work well against undead and shiny divine magic does, and so forth. We each have a set of these perceptions, and most of them are pretty well aligned.
Now, there are also the set of numbers used to describe the world. And most of these numbers line up with the majority of our perceptions.
Now, let us take the view that the numbers are fundamentally important, and the only thing that matters is our perceptions. In this view, the numbers exist so we can play with dice; if numbers come up that disagree with our perceptions, we throw them out and make up new ones. In this view, looking at the numbers distracts us from the simple expression of shared consensus.
However, another view is that numbers and shared consensus are both important, and that when they are misaligned, one or the other should be shifted around. If we perceive a hit from a longsword and a hit from a longbow as being pretty much equivalent in terms of human squishing potential, but one does 2d6 and the other does 1d4, we will see our expectation of the world violated in actual play. We need to either adjust our perception, or adjust the numbers, and in order to know which to do, it helps to have a lot of data in one place.
Wonderful bit of Math! Thanks -- these numbers really make me happy!
Here is a bit of statistics I'd love to see:
(% of creatures on which this Defense is their lowest Defense) (Mean difference from (level+12), and Variance from (level+12), for which this defense is their lowest defense) (Mean differences from AC, and variance from AC, for which this defense is their lowest defense).
That will help tell us how useful having a good attack against a given defense is, rather than against AC.
...
Did you factor out Elite/Solos or not? That is important, as Elites shouldn't be averaged in with normal monsters.
...
Another good bit of information? The average damage output of monsters by level and role, say on a 5 round horizon.
(One of each encounter power, starting with refresh ones. Refresh ones have a N/6 chance of activating each round after the first -- and then 5 - ((1+N*4/6) recharge powers + Standard action Encounter Powers) at-will power usage).
Having information about the enemy "damage budget" would be exceedingly useful!
Here is a bit of statistics I'd love to see:
(% of creatures on which this Defense is their lowest Defense) (Mean difference from (level+12), and Variance from (level+12), for which this defense is their lowest defense) (Mean differences from AC, and variance from AC, for which this defense is their lowest defense).
That will help tell us how useful having a good attack against a given defense is, rather than against AC.
...
Did you factor out Elite/Solos or not? That is important, as Elites shouldn't be averaged in with normal monsters.
...
Another good bit of information? The average damage output of monsters by level and role, say on a 5 round horizon.
(One of each encounter power, starting with refresh ones. Refresh ones have a N/6 chance of activating each round after the first -- and then 5 - ((1+N*4/6) recharge powers + Standard action Encounter Powers) at-will power usage).
Having information about the enemy "damage budget" would be exceedingly useful!
Nifft
Penguin Herder
darkdragoon
First Post
"Best block: no be there."-- Mr. Miyagi.
Or "Does catching a football mean you can stop a crossover?"
As a side note: Since there is that argument about how bad wizards are on the WotC forums, I have just made a short analysis comparing AC to the weakest defense of a monster.
I only did the first 152, but it seems that the average difference is about 4.4, which favors flexible casters over casters which mainly attack the same defense.
Also there are quite a few creatures who have a really amazing gap between AC and their weakest defense.
I only did the first 152, but it seems that the average difference is about 4.4, which favors flexible casters over casters which mainly attack the same defense.
Also there are quite a few creatures who have a really amazing gap between AC and their weakest defense.
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
OK, this was 6 days ago and only just been noticed.
Normally I'd let it pass after this length of time, but since Rel explicitly warned you about this kind of post in this thread, it is a seven day ban for you.
Similar Threads
