Yeah, if you were expecting to "specialize in dealing high amounts of damage to a single target at a time" (PHB16), I don't think that's gonna happen...
Damage Per Round
- Thread starter loisel
- Start date
Yeah, if you were expecting to "specialize in dealing high amounts of damage to a single target at a time" (PHB16), I don't think that's gonna happen...
peterparker18974
First Post
Show me where I can find this "wand of frost", since it doesn't appear in the players handbook, and none the wands grant any specific key words other than their dailies. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]
The wand in question is "Wand of Icy Rays", PHB243. However, for that debate, you're in the wrong thread. See http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?p=4346495
WOLead
First Post
The data seems unfair, but when I can finally open that xlsx file I'll look over it and add in see. Seems, not is as I have not actually opened that xlsx file. Gotta update my OpenOffice in hopes of actually seeing it.
Just a few ideas of what I hope to work in, vs. Def average from that post the beginning post listed. Also I'm hoping to look at the data and see if there was any optimization that was lacking in the Warlock's side. Though that all depends on the equations I see.
Just a few ideas of what I hope to work in, vs. Def average from that post the beginning post listed. Also I'm hoping to look at the data and see if there was any optimization that was lacking in the Warlock's side. Though that all depends on the equations I see.
If you find a bug in my equations, please let me know.
If you just want to ballpark it to see if my damage is right, the leftmost end of the graph is easy to estimate: it's basically the average damage if everything hits (for a rough estimate, ignore the probability of critical hits). The right end of the graph is also easy to estimate, it should be all the automatic damage, plus 1/20 of the average of the damage that requires a roll to hit. In between, it's close to a straight line (with a little bit of curve only for characters with multiple or secondary attacks).
Now if the numbers you get out of this rough estimate at the right and left end of the graph, is not the same as what I got, then there's an error in my calculations.
Last edited:
If you're using a version of excel earlier than 2007, you need the Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack
I guess I should do the calculation, but that sounds weird to me. I guess it depends on your Wizard build. I really like the Wisdom wizard (e.g., Int 16, Wis 19), with Cloud of Daggers and Thunderwave (too much fire resistance for Scorching Burst). Orb specialist, sleep spell, that's very good control, no? Also, you can go to the front line with this guy just the same as a Ranger or Cleric; you've got essentially the same HP and defenses as a Ranger (if you wear, say, leather.)
Just make sure you keep the Sleep spell all the way to level 30.
Great work, very interesting!
As I couldn't get the spreadsheet to work, I don't know wether you have taken in just at-will attacks? Or did you include Encounters and Dailys? (What file should I click on after having downloaded it?)
What? The filename for version 1.6 is dnd4e-1.6.xlsx, or whatever you name it when you save it.
If you look at the graphs in the top post (they are the same as in the Excel file), you will see that I've looked mostly at At-Wills, but I've also done an analysis for Level 11 Encounter Powers.
However, it doesn't make that much difference. For At-Wills, Rangers are on top, and Warlocks at the bottom. It's the same with Encounter Powers, but Warlocks are actually slightly worse.
I didn't do dailies, but I expect the same pattern to come up.
NeoNick
First Post
I must be doing something seriously wrong. I've downloaded the link after your text "The spreadsheet is here" twice and to different locations just to check. I've unzipped it and checked all catalogues, but I cannot find the file ending with .xls nor .xlsx Buhuuu
Help please. 
edit: When I get prompted to save the file it suggest to name the file "dnd4e-1.6.zip". Is that the source to my problem? Should it end with .xlsx when downloaded?
Thanks /blush/, I can see that from the graph now. Missed my perception first.
Last edited:
