The final word on DPR, feats and class balance

[Warpiglet]

True. It's one of the reasons why I put only so much faith into white room comparisons. Rarely does it reflect actual game play.

Oh! And thanks for the XP! That put me in 2nd place over Morrus, and behind only Gary Gygax himself, and with less than 5000 posts myself. I win an award!!!! Or maybe not lol. What can I say, my entire life is around the validation I get from an internet forum and the opinion of random strangers

My pleasure and congrats! It is fitting as you are one of my favorite posters.

Its OK to be excited about thumbs up from a stranger...it balances out all the times we get mad at them on a forum!

Like some others even a few I do not always agree with (some on this thread) I appreciate well thought out posts that make me evaluate my game in new ways.

 

[Gadget]

If everyone gets that, then why do people keep making the argument that casters are too powerful damage comparison wise when their argument depends on limited resources (spell slots, points, etc) but they always treat those resources as unlimited like a basic fighter's attack is?

Are you like only reading the first sentence of every post? This is not the same old "Casters rock, martials sux" argument. Cantrips are just as infinite as a fighter's attacks, last I checked. Warlocks don't have to spend a finite resource to really make their cantrips cook. It has been argued that Sorcerers, at a modest level, can burn through a whole lot of Sorcery points in a day if they so choose by sacrificing spell slots. I'm not sure that presents the problem the OP describes, but I can see that at some point good enough gets the job done as well as infinite in most situations. It seems you're ignoring the finer points of this particular thread to continue an age old argument of fighter vs magic user.

But hey, I just saved a bundle on my car insurance, so it's all good.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Are you like only reading the first sentence of every post? This is not the same old "Casters rock, martials sux" argument. Cantrips are just as infinite as a fighter's attacks, last I checked. Warlocks don't have to spend a finite resource to really make their cantrips cook. It has been argued that Sorcerers, at a modest level, can burn through a whole lot of Sorcery points in a day if they so choose by sacrificing spell slots. I'm not sure that presents the problem the OP describes, but I can see that at some point good enough gets the job done as well as infinite in most situations. It seems you're ignoring the finer points of this particular thread to continue an age old argument of fighter vs magic user.

But hey, I just saved a bundle on my car insurance, so it's all good.

Maybe instead of accusing me of not reading, and saying "everyone gets it", you need to go back and reread this thread. Because people have made arguments you're saying isn't being made.

 

[TwoSix]

If everyone gets that, then why do people keep making the argument that casters are too powerful damage comparison wise when their argument depends on limited resources (spell slots, points, etc) but they always treat those resources as unlimited like a basic fighter's attack is?

1) Agonizing blast IS unlimited.

2) As I showed above, sorcerers get enough sorcerer points to sustain them even through a 6 encounter day of 5 combat rounds each, if they're so inclined.

3) The argument isn't about casters, the argument is specifically about warlocks and sorcerers.

 

[Krachek]

Here is what I was getting at earlier about why single combat comparisons are bad, and we have to factor in the entire adventuring day. This is just a rough example to illustrate the point. I'm sure someone could probably min/max a bit better, but I think this is a pretty typical comparison. Since most adventuring is done between levels 5 and 10, I went in the middle with a 7th level PC. No feats. Assuming 18 in max stat. I did two types of battle master fighters, a sword and board, and a great weapon versus a sorcerer focusing only on damage spells.

NOTE: fireball is an AoE spell, and when you factor in an average of 3 targets in the AoE of each spell, the average damage goes way up--about to that of the GW fighter. So you may ask the question: "Ok, so the sorcerer is doing the overall same damage as the fighter, but the sorcerer also can choose to use those spells for something else." Fair question. My answer would be, "Yes, but then they aren't doing nearly the same damage as the fighter, and if they do choose to do the same average damage as the fighter, they still don't have the AC or HP of the fighter.

The results are pretty clear: If you have short adventuring days and/or allow lots of rests, a class like the sorcerer will seem overpowered. But based on 6-8 encounters a day with 4-5 rounds of combat in each encounter, then it levels off. And if the adventuring day is longer or if combat lasts longer, then the fighter quickly is the superior option.

View attachment 98269

Dragon Sorcerer can do more damage.
2 fireball well placed 75 damage, for 150
3 scorching ray 25 damage. For 75
7 twin firebolt for 210
18 firebolt for 270
700 damage and still 4 level 1 slot and 1 level 4 for utility.

 

[Tony Vargas]

This is not the same old "Casters rock, martials sux" argument.

I believe it was 'rule' and 'drool,' respectively. But, I mean, that argument was back when fighters & casters had completely different resource sets and only theoretically balanced at some hypothetical number of encounters/day, and, now fighters & casters have completely different resource sets and only theoretically balance at 6-8 encounters/day, so it's like, totally* different!








* you probably won't get this in-joke, but it helps if you say "totally" with a Valley Girl accent.

 

[Gadget]

Maybe instead of accusing me of not reading, and saying "everyone gets it", you need to go back and reread this thread. Because people have made arguments you're saying isn't being made.

Maybe I have missed something, heaven knows this thread is long enough, but I have not seen this thread being about fighters vs magic users to which you seemed to be responding. Please enlighten me.

 

[TwoSix]

Maybe I have missed something, heaven knows this thread is long enough, but I have not seen this thread being about fighters vs magic users to which you seemed to be responding. Please enlighten me.

We've had better threads on that topic over the years anyway. There was a 3.5 version that broke 2000 posts. That was fun.

 

[Oofta]

We've had better threads on that topic over the years anyway. There was a 3.5 version that broke 2000 posts. That was fun.

Is that a challenge?

 

[TwoSix]

Is that a challenge?

I'm game.

Warlocks are broken, prove me wrong!