D&D 5E The impact of overkill damage

[jgsugden]

...This is why my conclusion has consistently been that normal assumptions about overkill damage being a mitigating factor for high damage characters is misleading. Under normal situations you fight enemies that take more than 1 hit to kill. Having a higher damage increases the chances you kill the enemy faster. Doing more damage isn't about assigning every point of damage to an enemy, it's about having those enemies you target die faster. Also worth noting is that this view requires one to move away from averages and instead view things through the lens of damage distributions - which makes for a more accurate view...

Which essentially means that in all but the most rare or carefully constructed scenarios that overkill damage doesn't actually mitigate higher damage setups. Whatever negative impact of overkill damage exists, it never actually outstrips the value of a higher damage attack (at least under realistic parameters).

This has been proven false in so many threads it is ridiculous - with math to back it up. Dismissing the math as irrelevant because you consider it 'unrealistic' (in your subjective lens) is not proving anything. We don't need to relitigate this every few months.

However, a good exercise to study this situation is to build an efficient 5th level rogue, and an efficient 5th level monk. The monk attacks 3 times, the rogue only twice, but gets to deal sneak attack damage once per round (assuming they hit at least once) and can use a main weapon and an off hand weapon. No magic items will be used, but a +1 bonus to the damage of the rogue main hand to balance out the simple DPR.

Now, have them cut down targets. These targets will have (2d4-1)d20 hps (a range of 1d20 to 7d20, with a tendency towards 4d20), and ACs of 8+2d6 (10 to 20 with a tendency towards 15).

To limit the influence of random chance, you'll have them each tackle the same targets in the same order (so if you roll a 46 hp target with an AC of 16, both will use their attacks to kill it and then will move on to the second one you roll so that their second one is also identical, even if they get to it at different rounds). You'll also record your d20 rolls and apply them to the attack rolls in the same order so that the first 6 d20 roll will cover 3 rounds for the rogue (who has main hand and off hand) and only 2 rounds for the monk (who has multi-attack and martial arts).

I've run this experiment. For 3000 targets. The monk killed 3000 targets in 9886 rounds. The rogue took 15,224 rds to kill the same number of targets.

The monk was attacking three times - twice at d8+4, and once at d6+4 for basic DPR of 24.5. The rogue was attacking for d8+5 (an extra plus one to balance out the DPR), d6, and 3d6 sneak. 24.5 for the rogue. Same DPR - massively different kill rates because of the overkill factor - even when we allowed a wide range of hps. However, I did not calculate DPR to include the criticals, which actually favors the rogue as they get to roll more additional dice on a crit.

Run the experiment. You'll see that lost efficiency due to overkill is a huge factor in balance.

 

[FrogReaver]

This has been proven false in so many threads it is ridiculous - with math to back it up. Dismissing the math as irrelevant because you consider it 'unrealistic' (in your subjective lens) is not proving anything. We don't need to relitigate this every few months.

However, a good exercise to study this situation is to build an efficient 5th level rogue, and an efficient 5th level monk. The monk attacks 3 times, the rogue only twice, but gets to deal sneak attack damage once per round (assuming they hit at least once) and can use a main weapon and an off hand weapon. No magic items will be used, but a +1 bonus to the damage of the rogue main hand to balance out the simple DPR.

Now, have them cut down targets. These targets will have (2d4-1)d20 hps (a range of 1d20 to 7d20, with a tendency towards 4d20), and ACs of 8+2d6 (10 to 20 with a tendency towards 15).

To limit the influence of random chance, you'll have them each tackle the same targets in the same order (so if you roll a 46 hp target with an AC of 16, both will use their attacks to kill it and then will move on to the second one you roll so that their second one is also identical, even if they get to it at different rounds). You'll also record your d20 rolls and apply them to the attack rolls in the same order so that the first 6 d20 roll will cover 3 rounds for the rogue (who has main hand and off hand) and only 2 rounds for the monk (who has multi-attack and martial arts).

I've run this experiment. For 3000 targets. The monk killed 3000 targets in 9886 rounds. The rogue took 15,224 rds to kill the same number of targets.

The monk was attacking three times - twice at d8+4, and once at d6+4 for basic DPR of 24.5. The rogue was attacking for d8+5 (an extra plus one to balance out the DPR), d6, and 3d6 sneak. 24.5 for the rogue. Same DPR - massively different kill rates because of the overkill factor - even when we allowed a wide range of hps. However, I did not calculate DPR to include the criticals, which actually favors the rogue as they get to roll more additional dice on a crit.

Run the experiment. You'll see that lost efficiency due to overkill is a huge factor in balance.

what level were the PCs? What was the hp range of the enemies?

 

[Fanaelialae]

what level were the PCs? What was the hp range of the enemies?

5th level and (2d4-1)d20 hit points. @jgsugden goes over the methodology in the post.

 

[FrogReaver]

5th level and (2d4-1)d20 hit points. @jgsugden goes over the methodology in the post.

i don’t understand the hp notation. Must have missed the 5th level.

 

[Fanaelialae]

i don’t understand the hp notation. Must have missed the 5th level.

The range is (inclusive) between 1 and 140 HP, with a median of 42 HP (4d20).

 

[FrogReaver]

The range is (inclusive) between 1 and 140 HP, with a median of 42 HP (4d20).

I will write something later to run a scenario like this. My goal is to modify the go range to what is specified in this theead

 

[FrogReaver]

I’ll start by looking at enemies with 37+ hp. 1 above the rogues max damage (non crit). that’s the scenario I set up in this thread after All.

The scenario that’s being challenged is not at all realistic. Far to many cases of extremely low hp.

 

[Campbell]

From an analysis standpoint the main thing this tells us is that given similar DPR results classes with multiple attacks and the ability to attack at range will probably perform better in real situations.

My rogue/Sorcerer who often can do 40-50 damage in a single attack is far more likely to do overkill damage than our warlock or fighter/ranger ginsu artist.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I’ll start by looking at enemies with 37+ hp. 1 above the rogues max damage (non crit). that’s the scenario I set up in this thread after All.

The scenario that’s being challenged is not at all realistic. Far to many cases of extremely low hp.

I've put 5th level characters against groups that included lots of low HP monsters. I think that's a pretty reasonable use case for 5e.

The example would have generated about as many high HP creatures as low, since it's not a linear distribution. Given the large same size (3000) you'd have roughly as many high HP creatures as low HP, with many somewhere in the ballpark of 42. That doesn't seem particularly unrealistic to me.

 

[Dausuul]

Which essentially means that in all but the most rare or carefully constructed scenarios that overkill damage doesn't actually mitigate higher damage setups. Whatever negative impact of overkill damage exists, it never actually outstrips the value of a higher damage attack (at least under realistic parameters).

Increasing the damage of your attack, while holding everything else the same, will almost always make you more effective in combat and will never* make you less effective. Overkill doesn't change that. This much is true.

Overkill becomes a consideration when you are evaluating cost-benefits. Let's say you are a wizard deciding whether to throw a fireball at four ogres. Is that a good use of your 3rd-level spell slot? If the ogres are at full hit points, it's an excellent use. But if they are all heavily beaten down and close to death, it's... well, overkill. Unless it's deadly important to put them down right this instant, you're usually better off to throw an attack cantrip at one and let your fellow PCs clean up the rest.

[Edited to swap in "damaged ogres" for "kobolds," to clarify the point.]

*Except in some really incredibly bizarre scenario.