D&D (2024) UA 8 Barbarian Discussion

[mellored]

Agree to disagree

Don't get me wrong. I understand not wanting to swap weapons.

 

[billd91]

It’s not really a tactical choice, because there’s a right answer. It’s a math problem disguised as a tactical choice.

With a random generator in the mix, I'm not sure there's ever a "right" answer to a math problem. There's an answer that maximizes certain probabilities - but if you treat that as a "right" answer, the die roll still has the potential to leave you with egg on your face. The real right answer really is dependent on the situation and the player's willingness to accept the risk/reward variations, which puts this back on the side of tactical choice.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yep. Then we're back at it being rewarding when you do get to use it, because you have options for making the situation better, not just the choice to make your roll worse.

That is how it was advertised in the video. So I really hope it gets reworded to make it clear.

 

[Charlaquin]

it's 1st grade elementary school math, how simpler can it get?

It’s not hard, it just takes longer than not having that step.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It’s not really a tactical choice, because there’s a right answer. It’s a math problem disguised as a tactical choice.

That is a wrong understanding of mathematics, probabilities and expectation values.

Lets say: I have 1000000 Dollars, you have 1000. I give you the option of rolling a d20 die and on an 5+, I double your money. On a 4 or lower, you lose all your money to me. We can repeat that a few times on the same condition.
Would you do that?

If I instead offer you to that you gain 1 dollar on a 10+ and lose 1 dollar on a 9 or lower, and you can repeat as much as you like, but only 100 times per day.

Is that better or worse?

So. Lets change the preconditions a bit.
You are in desperate need of 2000 dollars, because for the next ten days you can buy a lifetime free pass for DnDbeyond. After this initial deal, you have to pay 10k for that.

Which option would you take then?

 

[Charlaquin]

With a random generator in the mix, I'm not sure there's ever a "right" answer to a math problem. There's an answer that maximizes certain probabilities - but if you treat that as a "right" answer, the die roll still has the potential to leave you with egg on your face. The real right answer really is dependent on the situation and the player's willingness to accept the risk/reward variations, which puts this back on the side of tactical choice.

There’s an answer with a higher average damage output, which is the “right” answer in any situation where you’re trying to maximize damage. Granted, in cases where accuracy is more important than damage (e.g. when the target’s health is low enough that any hit is very likely to be a kill), the right answer is the one with the best chance of hitting.

 

[Charlaquin]

That is a wrong understanding of mathematics, probabilities and expectation values.

Lets say: I have 1000000 Dollars, you have 1000. I give you the option of rolling a d20 die and on an 5+, I double your money. On a 4 or lower, you lose all your money to me. We can repeat that a few times on the same condition.
Would you do that?

I mean, that depends. If I can’t afford to lose that money, obviously not. If I can, then sure.

If I instead offer you to that you gain 1 dollar on a 10+ and lose 1 dollar on a 9 or lower, and you can repeat as much as you like, but only 100 times per day.

Is that better or worse?

Better or worse for what purpose?

So. Lets change the preconditions a bit.
You are in desperate need of 2000 dollars, because for the next ten days you can buy a lifetime free pass for DnDbeyond. After this initial deal, you have to pay 10k for that.

Which option would you take then?

I wouldn’t call that a “desperate need,” but if we assume that it was in fact desperate, and I need the money within a 10-day frame, obviously I’d take the first option because the second can’t get to the needed total in time. I don’t know what you think this example is demonstrating, because it absolutely has a right answer.

 

[mellored]

Assuming 60% chance to hit, with 1d12+9 damage.

Advantage adds 4.38375
And extra d10 adds 3.575

So don't use Brutal Strike solely for the damage. Use it to punt a target though spiked growth.

 

[Charlaquin]

Assuming 60% chance to hit, with 1d12+9 damage.

Advantage adds 4.38375
And extra d10 adds 3.575

So don't use Brutal Strike solely for the damage. Use it to punt a target though spiked growth.

Well, don’t use it solely for the damage when you only have a 60% chance to hit, anyway.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I mean, that depends. If I can’t afford to lose that money, obviously not. If I can, then sure.


Better or worse for what purpose?

To get all my money.

I wouldn’t call that a “desperate need,” but if we assume that it was in fact desperate, and I need the money within a 10-day frame, obviously I’d take the first option because the second can’t get to the needed total in time. I don’t know what you think this example is demonstrating, because it absolutely has a right answer.

No. It has a right answer depending on situation. The last one will nearly surely allow you to gain money over the course of mayn days. The first one has a 20% chance to cost you all your money. And you need to double up a few times before you have more money than I can afford. Your chance to stay in the game is 0.8^number of rounds. After which you are rich.

In poker that is there is the independent chip model. Which tells you that not all 50% chances are equal because if you lose all your chips you are out. So the fewer chips you have, the more they are worth to you (roughly spoken).

In D&D you have no chips. You and your enemies have hp. And even though there is a "right" answer. It is a) difficult to find, and b) there are other players and other monsters and sometimes just dealing a few damage with a very high chance tops dealing much damage with a low chance and sometimes it is the opposite.
And fights usually don't last long enough to really allow for low hit big damage attacks to zero in on the expectation value. So a few points of extra damage won't help you often enough.

Often enough it is just the tactical question: is it worth risking to miss and deal 10 more damage, or should I just try to hit (especially when you try to break concentratiom on the enemy or deal the last few points of hp damage).