Elder-Basilisk
First Post
In all of this discussion about power attack and average damage per round on this thread,
http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54055
I'm beginning to wonder whether that is generally the most relevant factor in offensive combat effectiveness.
It certainly is the biggest factor in combats against a single foe. However, the previous analysis of power attack against bugbears demonstrated that optimum effectiveness against multiple opponents (measured in bugbears killed/round in that example--although damage sustained or likely combat duration (which may be a reliable proxy for changes in damage sustained since it doesn't need to figure in ACs or saves) may be better measures effectiveness) does not necessarily correspond to average damage/round (power attacking decreased the damage/round but increased the number of bugbears killed/round).
So, what is your experience? Does average damage/round reliably track combat effectiveness? What experience lead you to believe or disbelieve this?
http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54055
I'm beginning to wonder whether that is generally the most relevant factor in offensive combat effectiveness.
It certainly is the biggest factor in combats against a single foe. However, the previous analysis of power attack against bugbears demonstrated that optimum effectiveness against multiple opponents (measured in bugbears killed/round in that example--although damage sustained or likely combat duration (which may be a reliable proxy for changes in damage sustained since it doesn't need to figure in ACs or saves) may be better measures effectiveness) does not necessarily correspond to average damage/round (power attacking decreased the damage/round but increased the number of bugbears killed/round).
So, what is your experience? Does average damage/round reliably track combat effectiveness? What experience lead you to believe or disbelieve this?