Search results

Huh, I would consider dual wield rogues to be below average at damage. At least below average among classes whose main contribution in combat is damage.

Winning initiative or not is something the Monte Carlo simulation accounts for, since over thousands of iterations, you'll get both sides winning sometimes, in proportion to how likely they are to win. What you get at the end is a win rate. As for the starting conditions, you could vary those...

Sure. I'll try to spell out a sufficiently detailed tactical plan for a computer program to execute it without the need for further input. It ends up being pretty complicated! Though if there's something I've missed, let me know. For the record, I agree with others that this exercise doesn't...

I'm not ready to concede that just yet. It might turn out that way, but what I said before that we should really do is roll it out a bunch of times (and not clog up this thread further with a fake play-by-post match). But you went ahead with it anyway. There's about a 16% chance 4 or 5 of my...

We can work out the expected damage boost from the possibility that I'm stunned after one attack. It's not that big. The chance that the first attack hits and results in a stun is 0.55 * 0.35 = 0.19. That would mean your next three attacks would be made at advantage (80% to hit), for a net...

I get a 57% chance that I fail. And a 75% that you are a turn ahead in the first place, since your bigger initiative bonus is not a guarantee that you go first. So, all together, about 43% that you get a third turn before I've had a second.

So we need to figure out the average result. Because you might not hit 3 times. In fact, the most likely is that you hit two times. But you might hit zero, one, three or four.

Edit: N/m, I'm wrong. Agile parry doesn't cost ki.

31 was before your second turn. Ok, so you're doing the same thing on your second turn, except no agile parry, and instead flurrying and making two stun attempts?

As part of the attack action, yep. Elfcrusher is right, you can do one longsword attack. So I'm at 31 instead of 32.

Ah, yes, I think you're right. Ok, we'll give him an extra 1 damage. I'm at 31.

If you're using your longsword you can't use agile parry.

That's fine you can retcon your first action. But if we're not rolling, let's agree to use averages, not modes. So your first turn was to use flurry and agile parry, correct? My first turn assumed agile parry so if you wouldn't have done that then I need to recalculate. You have 55% to hit...

Yep, you're right; let's fix that. Needing a nat 16 or higher to hit), I will use precision attack when the d20 is between 8 and 15, which happens 40% of the time. On average, when I use precision attack I hit 56% of the time (the average of 1/8 through 8/8, since each margin is equally...

Yes, and the DM determines their AC, HP, and resistances and immunities. It's non-functional for a "laboratory" simulation. No DM in their right mind is going to have held objects use the "suggested" values for tiny objects in the DMG table. But let's set that aside. I pull out another...

The problem is that allowing attacks to target held weapons using the AC and HP values for tiny objects in the DMG creates a completely degenerate game. PCs are much more likely to be using weapons on average than monsters are, and so once you start allowing this, it renders weapon-using PCs...

I mean, there can be multiple baselines. But a fighter who doesn't outdamage a warlock using EB+AB+Hex isn't contributing much mechanically either, unless they have something else they are offering (consistently keeping attacks off their allies, say). Because, again, a warlock --- even a warlock...

No one is suggesting that there's anything wrong with anyone's subjective experience of fun playing a monk. The only claim being made is that they are mechanically underpowered. It's fine not to care! But saying "that's not important" isn't the same thing as saying the claim is wrong. It might...

If your party does 1 enemy worth of damage per round then they probably only take one attack in that scenario, since they can all ready actions to hit each incapacitated enemy at one time, and then some of them get their actual turns on top of that, before the enemy can act. Of course. It's...

I was assuming variant human, but sure. Without feats, looking at "at will damage", the defense style greatsword champion has probably 21 AC, and 17.1 DPR. The monk has 17 AC and 11.4 DPR. About 33% less (or the fighter has 50% more, depending on which way you look at it). But I'm not sure that...