D&D General DPR Calculations Wut?

[FrogReaver]

Basically I was right. You dont get much pushback now if you say CO is really good at least as far as damage dealing spells go.

Within the first few minutes of the video you posted, the specific case being made was ‘if you are a sorcerer and take 3 specific feats you’ll be a damage god’

That’s far from a generic ‘this spell is good’. When people talk about shield or hypnotic pattern or whatever they don’t caveat any of them with this spell is amazing when you take a bunch of feats and one specific class. They just say those spells are good, and this specific feature can make them even better.

Heck in one of the first sentences in the video he even acknowledges people overvalue CO because of its accuracy problem.

That video doesn’t align with your claims.

 

[Zardnaar]

Within the first few minutes of the video you posted, the specific case being made was ‘if you are a sorcerer and take 3 specific feats you’ll be a damage god’

That’s far from a generic ‘this spell is good’. When people talk about shield or hypnotic pattern or whatever they don’t caveat any of them with this spell is amazing when you take a bunch of feats and one specific class. They just say those spells are good, and this specific feature can make them even better.

Heck in one of the first sentences in the video he even acknowledges people overvalue CO because of its accuracy problem.

That video doesn’t align with your claims.

Irs really good for sorcerers and back wen I was talking aboutvit the context was Sorcerer.

We didnt deep dive into it as far as he has. His is optimused build.

We just used basic sorcerer and empower. And feats you probably woukd take anyway eg elemental adept (as a dragon sorcerer).

We didnt do the full build eg elven accuracy. We built a hybrid with scorching ray+hex and lightning bolt.

I know the theory craft that this video lays out.

So yeah when I was talking about it it was 1 feat. Used in real game.

When we theorcrafted him to abuse it further we covered what's in that video.

We did use empower and i saw it used on 3 different sorcerers. Once again empowers something you take anyway as a blaster.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I'm with this. I aced a probability and statistics class back in college because I'd taught it to myself playing D&D. The effort over years with something I enjoyed frankly was greater than I probably would have put into the class otherwise.

This is why I try to ask students I've worked with about their hobbies and interests, so I can give them real connections, not just random oddball applications, for the math or science they're working with. Eventually, those who care about a STEM career always seemed to grow into a sort of more generalized love of math itself, perhaps because when they've seen deep enough beneath the world's skin, the beauty of the machinery reveals how all of it is a tool worth using.

I did not understand this.

TL;DR: Advantage is roughly +4 to +5 if you're okay at something, +3 if you're good but not amazing or weak but not awful, and +2 if you're really good or absolutely awful.

 

[Clint_L]

Basically, when your chance to hit is really low, advantage almost doubles your hit chance. But since your chance to hit is so low, even a doubling of that chance is only equivalent to a +1.

When you hit chance is really high, advantage can't increase it much more, so it's also only worth a +1. The benefit of advantage when your chance to hit is really high is that makes your miss chance go from "maybe once in a session" to "maybe once in an entire campaign".

Similarly, being able to easily impose disadvantage basically takes critical hits off the table as something that your character needs to worry about.