Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elric" data-source="post: 5054482" data-attributes="member: 1139">Then you can create a measure of how well each build does based on the results of the encounters.  However, that could be very difficult, so maybe just categorize them according to "Warden party did better; Fighter party did better."  To get the margin of error down to a reasonable 3% level, run about 1000 fights.  No problem <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />This goes to show the impossibility of using by-hand testing results to establish any propositions about character superiority.  You could make a character who was strictly inferior to another one (a Hammer Warden who took Weapon Proficiency: Whip just for kicks- and didn't buy a whip- versus one who spent the feat wisely), and the strictly better Warden might come out ahead in 55% of the encounters due to the high variability of d20s.  Even that would take hundreds of tests to notice statistically, though in this special case you could answer the question ("Which character is better?") without any tests.</blockquote>