How Low is Too Low

[Elric]

According to the Wizards Optimisation forums for 4e:

"What I've observed is: 14 DPR(1st), 20 DPR(6th), 40 DPR(12th), 60 DPR(16th), 100 DPR (24th), 150 DPR(30th)"

DPR meaning damage per round.

If you're going to go "that's not possible", one of many character builds that accomplish it is here, and it's not even a particularly munched out or complex one to do. There are also builds that do more damage.

Even at first level, though, you can expect to take out a guy every two rounds with a decently-made striker, and damage increases ten-fold from there to level 30.

Note that you can't divide HP/DPR = average rounds to take out a monster. The average rounds to kill a target is >= HP/DPR.

The reason why is that you typically kill a monster "with overkill." Only when there's never any overkill does HP/DPR= average rounds to kill the monster.

The difference can be significant: see calculations here

For example, an attacker with a 55% chance to hit (including a 5% chance to crit), dealing 1d12+13 on a hit, plus an extra 1d12 on a critical, averages 5.22 rounds to kill a defender that is equally likely to start with 42-55 HP.

In this case, DPR= 11.325, so HP/DPR= 4.28. The actual average rounds to kill the defender is 22% larger than this formula would indicate.

 

[Nytmare]

Dangit, I was hoping there was some kind of elegant little "roughly (n-2)/2, give or take a level" answer.

 

[interwyrm]

Off the cuff, I'd say never go below n-6. Be careful going more than n-4.

 

[Starfox]

If your party has high defenses (say, many defenders), low-level monsters get obsolete more quickly. If your party are all squishies, less so.

I think the -4 for general use and -6 for special cases proposed above is a good general rule.

 

[Gort]

For instance the 8th level BS rogue in current game is doing 1d4+2enh+4dex+4str+1feat+2d8 = 22.5 per HIT with say Piercing Strike. A 2W attack is only going to bring that up to 25 and a 3W to 27.5 per hit. Figure in crit damage adds a negligible amount and with a typical to-hit bonus of +14 vs NAD you're going to be hard pressed to be doing anything close to the 30DPR you're considering. More like in the high teens. This is pretty typical for real world PCs vs what shows up on charops.

Just because you can make a striker who doesn't do much damage doesn't mean you should. If you consider low damage output to be a problem, perhaps the onus is on you to do a little research and see where it can be brought up.

After all, if you were playing a fighter who went down every fight, you'd find out what was going on there as well, wouldn't you?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Just because you can make a striker who doesn't do much damage doesn't mean you should. If you consider low damage output to be a problem, perhaps the onus is on you to do a little research and see where it can be brought up.

I think you missed the whole point of what I'm saying Gort. The numbers I showed are what you will ACTUALLY find in real parties that are actually playing vs the ultra-twigged out numbers of your Charops ranger/stormwarden with cheesed out spiked chain frost cheese build. Yes, you could find that in play somewhere and maybe in LFR munchkinland its the norm, but that doesn't actually relate in any special way to assessing what you WILL find in most games.

Looking at charops builds is fine when talking about how well the rules handle extreme builds and seeing what different elements work well together but its not at all useful as benchmarks for real characters in most games. That's why I dropped in numbers from an actual character running in an actual campaign that was built by an average player through 8 levels of play. The two are totally different beasts.

 

[Byronic]

I think you missed the whole point of what I'm saying Gort. The numbers I showed are what you will ACTUALLY find in real parties that are actually playing vs the ultra-twigged out numbers of your Charops ranger/stormwarden with cheesed out spiked chain frost cheese build. Yes, you could find that in play somewhere and maybe in LFR munchkinland its the norm, but that doesn't actually relate in any special way to assessing what you WILL find in most games.

Looking at charops builds is fine when talking about how well the rules handle extreme builds and seeing what different elements work well together but its not at all useful as benchmarks for real characters in most games. That's why I dropped in numbers from an actual character running in an actual campaign that was built by an average player through 8 levels of play. The two are totally different beasts.

I agree, I know a Warlock that would do 19 DPR with his at wills, at level 11. Mind you, this IS the lower part of the spectrum since many feats, items etc simply aren't allowed which lowers the DPR quite a bit. Otherwise we'd be looking at something just over 30 DPR.

The guidelines given there are for players focussed on damage above all else. I've missed a few DPR myself simply because choose something to aid me out of combat rather then in (extra languages and such), I have to wonder though, is it really that much of a difference? The difference between a level 12 striker with 30 DPR and 40 DPR when fighting a soldier of the same level (githyanki soldier) is only about 1 round

 

[Hejdun]

I've seen level one goblins be completely ineffectual against level 3 parties. As in, the party spent MAYBE 1 healing surge total, and no daily powers or magic item powers.

Monster level is easily the most important factor in determining how appropriate it is for an encounter. Since attack and defense rise so quickly in monsters, even small differences lead to big results. Such that a monster 4 levels above a PC is extremely frustrating for PCs because they can barely hit it, and it autohits them. Similarly, monsters lower level than the PCs will barely hit, and get autohit, making them useless.

I use Monster Builder quite regularly now. If I have a monster I want the PCs to fight, but isn't the right level, I just use Monster Builder to adjust it's level to between 0 and 3 levels higher than the party. That's the ideal level, IMO.

 

[Ryujin]

Last week our DM tried something a little different. He put together an encounter of regular ol' humanoids (ogres, goblins, hobgoblins) that had been levelled up to 8th or 9th. The total experience point pool was equal to our average level; 19th. He didn't use any minions. It went something like this:

Round 1 - We break into the compound. The Goliath Warden and Bugbear Glaive Fighter get swarmed. The Bugbear starts tossing opponents back, while the Warden hammers one. The Cleric moves in and gets driven like a tent stake by multiple opponents. The Ranger drops a weak opponent outright, then gets pimp-slapped back out of the compound. I (Eladrin Fey/Darklock) teleport onto the compound battlements and use Quickcurse Rod to nail a weaker opponent in the middle of a swarm, followed by Twofold Curse of the two closest opponents and an eyebite to the hobgoblin archer that is closest to me on the battlements (then take much damage from several others I hadn't seen).

Round 2 - The defenders continue to play "toss the humanoid" in the heaviest area of combat, doing what defenders are supposed to do. The Cleric gets up, fires off an attack, then gets smashed down again by multiple opponents. I ask the Ranger to try and take out the target that I cursed, since he managed to do just that in the previous round. He succeeds and suddenly my Rod of Corruption has spread the curse to about 15 opponents that were within 5 squares of that target. I teleport to another convenient location, Twofold Curse a couple more opponents, and cut loose with Cursegrind. A quarter of the opposition evaporates and several more are damaged (I take more damage from archers; still not bloodied).

Round 3 - Two Ogres drop to the defenders. After getting pounded again the Cleric gives up on trying to stand up and casts healing Word from where she is, then tosses out some kind of summoned soldier. The Ranger drops another opponent, which spreads my curse again. I move to another spot, Twofold Curse again, then drop Cursebite. Creatures that have already taken damage drop (the total opposition is now about 20% of what it started as). The remainder start looking for a hasty way out of their compound.

*Moral of the Story* Using lower level creatures can work, but don't go much more than 3 or 4 levels lower when building your mob.

 

[Shin Okada]

IMHO, the point is that while low-level monsters are almost no threat against higher-level characters, they can be some force or at least annoyance when fighting along with stronger monsters.

Goblin Hexer's case could be an exceptional one. But any monsters do occupy squares and hit PCs when rolling natural 20.

So, a mass of lower-level monsters may work as meat shield for a higher level artillery. And 40 archers still hit PCs twice per turn in average.

Thus, unless PCs can wipe out all or many of them easily, preferably by an close or area attach power which also damage the main opponent, lower-level monsters do matters for higher level PCs.

But I guess that does not mean a DM SHOULD use lower level monsters. And not encouraged to do so. That is what minions of appropriate level meant to do, especially to speed up combats.

But when you really want to, say, use 100 Gnoll Huntmasters for RP or other reasons, you can use them against an epic level party, when fighting against a mighty Yeenoghu himself.