D&D 5E Optimization and the +1 Weapon Principle

[FrogReaver]

There have been many discussions around optimization lately. Some calling a class better at DPR when it's only better by a razor thin margin. There's also been alot of pushback around DPR not being a great metric. It's not but it's still one of the best we have. That's why in my personal calculations I've started listing some form of NOVA damage alongside DPR because it gives a much better picture albeit still not a full picture. All that being said, there comes a point in DPR comparisons where 2 builds are close enough in DPR that a bunch of traditionally minor more campaign specific factors have enough umph to push one build ahead of another in actual play DPR. That's where the +1 Weapon Principle comes into play. It says that as long as a lower DPR build is within a +1 Weapon of a higher DPR build that those builds should be viewed as equal in terms of DPR because the other factors that may impact DPR in actual play can easily equate to the difference of a +1 weapon and that these factors will vary from campaign to campaign fairly drastically. Things like combinations of range, defense, mobility, saves, skills, darkvision, spellcasting, etc.

Why a +1 weapon? Because +1 hit/+1 damage is the simplest and most atomic form of damage increase in 5e while still being a very substantial increase. Thoughts?

 

[DemoMonkey]

pulls pin

Well, it depends.

throws

What do you define as "optimized"?

ducks

 

[jgsugden]

DPR is a weak metric. Worrying about whether a build is within a +1/+1 weapon of another build is, quite frankly, pointless.

Which is better: +8 for 4d10 or 4 attacks at +8 for 1d10? The answer depends upon what you're fighting.

If you're facing multiple foes that have 5 hps each, the 4X +8 for 1d10 is much better. If your opponent has 22 hps, and it needs to die in 1 round.... +8 for 4d10 is much better (as it is all or nothing and you need all to get a good chance to get the kill). However both have the same DPR.

Every class, and every subclass, is playable. None of the are so overpowered as to prevent the game from being fun. If you're finding he game ruined by a build, I'll put it to you that the probem is best solved not by "fixing" the builds, but by taking a more productive approach to the game.

 

[Stoutstien]

It probably would be easier to just state X is a reasonable mean and as long as you fall within a set margin of error from that point it's fine.

So for your example of Nova potential what is a good bar to measure from? Are we taking feats into account? Does the Nova rely on RNG such as critical hits? Is the Nova reliant on special circumstances like darkness or being able to maintain melee range?

Lots of questions to address before you even have a starting point. My personal point is the humble Champion fighting with def for first style and duelist for the second pick. Just a real easy class to grab DPR/DPA/DPT and Nova damage numbers from that serve as a solid point to judge from. At the same time it provides a good point to judge defense, mitigation, and self relianant recovery.

 

[Argyle King]

DPR is a weak metric. Worrying about whether a build is within a +1/+1 weapon of another build is, quite frankly, pointless.

Which is better: +8 for 4d10 or 4 attacks at +8 for 1d10? The answer depends upon what you're fighting.

If you're facing multiple foes that have 5 hps each, the 4X +8 for 1d10 is much better. If your opponent has 22 hps, and it needs to die in 1 round.... +8 for 4d10 is much better (as it is all or nothing and you need all to get a good chance to get the kill). However both have the same DPR.

Every class, and every subclass, is playable. None of the are so overpowered as to prevent the game from being fun. If you're finding he game ruined by a build, I'll put it to you that the probem is best solved not by "fixing" the builds, but by taking a more productive approach to the game.

Arguably, 4 attacks are 4 chances to critical due to the nature of the d20. Whether or not that is valuable depends upon other factors. Some builds gain extra attacks after a critical; some items do special things on a critical.

(On the flipside of that, multiple attacks can also be a liability if the system includes critical failure.)

 

[FrogReaver]

DPR is a weak metric. Worrying about whether a build is within a +1/+1 weapon of another build is, quite frankly, pointless.

Which is better: +8 for 4d10 or 4 attacks at +8 for 1d10? The answer depends upon what you're fighting.

If you're facing multiple foes that have 5 hps each, the 4X +8 for 1d10 is much better. If your opponent has 22 hps, and it needs to die in 1 round.... +8 for 4d10 is much better (as it is all or nothing and you need all to get a good chance to get the kill). However both have the same DPR.

Every class, and every subclass, is playable. None of the are so overpowered as to prevent the game from being fun. If you're finding he game ruined by a build, I'll put it to you that the probem is best solved not by "fixing" the builds, but by taking a more productive approach to the game.

I understand the distributions generated by those 2 methods and yet your example and assumptions for it are so far off from how the game is actually played that the criticism is next to worthless. By the time you can do 4d10 damage in a single attack or do 4 different 1d10 attacks you will be fighting enemies that can easily take the 4d10 hit and still live. After that point is reached neither distributions is really better or worse.

 

[FrogReaver]

It probably would be easier to just state X is a reasonable mean and as long as you fall within a set margin of error from that point it's fine.

It probably would be less useful to do that.

So for your example of Nova potential what is a good bar to measure from? Are we taking feats into account? Does the Nova rely on RNG such as critical hits? Is the Nova reliant on special circumstances like darkness or being able to maintain melee range?

The important part of a NOVA is that you can choose when to use it. So I personally wouldn't consider NOVA that relies on crits in that comparison.

Lots of questions to address before you even have a starting point. My personal point is the humble Champion fighting with def for first style and duelist for the second pick. Just a real easy class to grab DPR/DPA/DPT and Nova damage numbers from that serve as a solid point to judge from. At the same time it provides a good point to judge defense, mitigation, and self relianant recovery.

Not really. Champion is one of the few classes that don't tend to keep up with the +1 rule. Later they are a fair bit tankier than most but that's considerably later.

 

[FrogReaver]

Arguably, 4 attacks are 4 chances to critical due to the nature of the d20. Whether or not that is valuable depends upon other factors. Some builds gain extra attacks after a critical; some items do special things on a critical.

(On the flipside of that, multiple attacks can also be a liability if the system includes critical failure.)

Sure, but I think the fair assumption for that challenge is that no such abilities that directly favor one or the other are in play.

 

[Asisreo]

I understand the distributions generated by those 2 methods and yet your example and assumptions for it are so far off from how the game is actually played that the criticism is next to worthless. By the time you can do 4d10 damage in a single attack or do 4 different 1d10 attacks you will be fighting enemies that can easily take the 4d10 hit and still live. After that point is reached neither distributions is really better or worse.

Another assumption that plagues theorycrafting.

Even at high levels, mooks can be threatening. Sure, it's hard to kill something with a single 1d10+5 attack, but at these high levels, the damage may as well be 1d10+15 or closer. There are plenty of mooks that are threatening with this HP even at high levels, like shadows, intellect devourers, and so-on.

 

[Charlaquin]

DPR is a weak metric. Worrying about whether a build is within a +1/+1 weapon of another build is, quite frankly, pointless.

Which is better: +8 for 4d10 or 4 attacks at +8 for 1d10? The answer depends upon what you're fighting.

If you're facing multiple foes that have 5 hps each, the 4X +8 for 1d10 is much better. If your opponent has 22 hps, and it needs to die in 1 round.... +8 for 4d10 is much better (as it is all or nothing and you need all to get a good chance to get the kill). However both have the same DPR.

4 attacks for 1d10 each is still better against the single 22-hp opponent unless that opponent also has resistance to the damage you’re doing with it. Multiple attacks is always better than a single attack that deals the same total damage because you have a better chance of hitting with at least some of the attacks.