Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 7240540" data-attributes="member: 6795602">For the first question: I thought that would be obvious to any creature with a 3 intelligence.  Of course I agree.The actual balance point is important though.  It's what's going to inform us if this general concept of less short rests lowering the fighters abilities compared to a paladin actually matters in predicting which fights better.  The basic inference when someone says that less short rests favor classes like the paladin is that the paladin actually becomes better than a fighter when using no short rests.  I think my numbers show that isn't really the case.Let's look at the nova point you brought up.  The fighter makes 5 attacks with CE + SS.  He will hit on them nearly just as often as the paladin hits with his attack.  The paladin can use polearm mastery for 3 attacks so at least that part of the comparison is the same.  9.5 damage vs 16.5 damage (2x) and 7.5 damage vs 16.5 damage (1x) and 0 damage vs 16.5 damage (2x) = 26.5 vs 82.5.   Even looking at a enemy where we only have 50% chance to hit that's 13.25 dpr vs 41.25 dpr.  It will take 28 damage from divine smite to break even with the fighter's nova.  Using 2 level 2 divine smites gets pretty close but not quite there.  The paladin won't normally be able to use more as he only has a .125 chance of landing all 3 attacks.In other words, the fighter's nova is better at this point.  In a no-short rest campaign the paladin can nova a few more times a day though.</blockquote>

Verification