D&D (2024) December 1st UA Spell changes

[Chaosmancer]

All of which are tools for determining CR for the stuff THEY put forward with the MATH they keep secret.

Citation Needed since it says it is about creating new monsters.

Yes they do.

Aggressive increases damage which increases CR. Ambusher does the same with attack bonus. Lots of abilities give increased CR. Hell, it even lists the column those are in as "Effects on Challenge Rating."

So is Agressive a CR 1 ability or a CR 12 ability? Because "increasing CR" is not the same as "has a CR". The distinction is important, especially since you split my response which covers WHY it is important.

First, it's a viable ability if used carefully. Second, you're missing the forest for the trees. There are literally millions of abilities not on their short list that would have "Effects on Challenge Rating" and which we cannot rate since we do not have their math.

But altering someone's level, the measure of CR, is basically impossible to recursively give an increase to CR. Used to change level 2 to level 1 it would have a far smaller impact than being used to change level 20 to level 10. That's why what you are asking for is impossible, the variability of halving someone's level is too immense. There is no math for that. There cannot be.

And just because there are abilities that could theoritically exist that the Designers didn't use or didn't write down, doesn't mean that there is some secrete hidden math to the game. And in fact, I'll note that since Invisibility, Flyby attack, Echolocation, and the ability to Resist or be Immune to turn undead all are given dashs to note that they do not affect CR, that many of those literally millions of abilities (whatever they are) would also not effect CR. Heck, Sunlight Sensitivity doesn't change CR.

Page 24 of This is How the Game is Usually Played.

PG 24 of the DMG? Nope.
PG 24 of the MM? Nope.
PG 24 of the PHB? Nope.
PG 24 of Xanathars? Nope.

Hmm, well I guess I shouldn't give you the benefit of the doubt then. You made up a page number then said the book is "This is How the Game is Usually Played". So, in other words, you just made up something and declared it true. Which, I suspected considering the number of campaigns I've been in that didn't feature undead at all. So, no, there is no reason to believe that any given party MUST encounter undead. You are once again trying to assert as facts your own warped opinions of what should be counted.

A save is a save is a save.

Once more proving you don't know how to analyze impact on combat.

Seen many create water? I have. Seen many detect evil? I have. Seen many detect poison? I have. Purify food and drink? Yep. The list goes on and on man. Utility spells get used.

Detect Poison? Never.
Purify Food and Drink? Never
Create Water? Once.

And, again, listen to what I am saying. I'm not saying that no cleric ever uses any utility spell. I am saying that they are not REQUIRED to use them. Do you know why I don't see Detect Poison or Purify Food and Drink? Because I essentially never poison food and drink for the party. Why have I almost never seen create water? Because my groups don't track mundane supplies, like rations. The one time I'd seen it, it was used to put out a fire.

All you are doing is proving my point. I am not required to account for utility spells, because there is no guarantee that utility spells will need to be used. If they have pure clean water in their waterskins to last the couple of hours they are dungeon delving, then they don't need to create water or purify water.

They are in absolute fact, wrong. The game cannot be played RAW to 11th level without subclasses, therefore all your numbers are wrong. You'd have to compare levels prior to subclass which are levels 1 and 2 for most classes, but you couldn't use clerics at all.

Ceteris Paribus

Sure. I can't prove that you won't win the Powerball tomorrow, but I can tell you that your chances are absolutely somewhere between nil and almost nil.

And yet the chances of winning the Powerball would absolutely be calculable. The math is easy if you have all the information. The problem is that you don't have all the information, such as how many tickets were sold and how many winning tickets were in circulation.

However, you aren't doing something as simply as basic probability, you are trying to mathematically express opnions and decision-making for an unknownable group. You are essentially claiming math can make you psychic, which it can't.

No. Because you don't use any subclass which makes it a violation of RAW when comparing any class at 11th level and clerics starting at level 1.

Your numbers are an utter waste of time and energy.

Well, since you didn't say that my Battle Master was unacceptable, let's clear your mind and give you those subclasses you so desperately, desperately say will make all the difference. That will make this OBJECTIVELY true and make my numbers not a waste of time and energy. I'll even be nice and not use a Cleric subclass that increases damage


Team Battle Master Fighter with Evasive Footwork, Ambush, Tactical Assessment, Grappling Strike, Commanding Presence, Bait and Switch, and Rally. They are using Greatswords and GWM, I could say they increase their AC, but you don't like AC increasing, so I'll say they can get 5d10+10 temp hp per short rest (37.5 temp hp per short rest). You know what, I'll even do what you claim I did for clerics and let the Battlemaster use all their dice for utility as well, doubling or tripling their available dice. Also note at this point I've assumed a 20 str, a 14 charisma, and a 20 con as well as single feat.

So, 144.9 damage per two fights, with 174 effective hp.

Twilight Cleric. I won't count advantage on Initiative, since the fighter can use Ambush for the same thing as well as all their other maneuvers. Channel divinity is twice between short rests, but since it is an aura not all of them can use it at the same time. So, while they get three rounds of their unique channel divinity (3d6+33 temp hp or 43.5 temp hp) every single fight, the other three clerics can restore spell slots with Harness Divine Power. They can only do it twice each, but that is an additional two 2nd level spell slots for every single cleric.

So, a damage underestimate of 167.40 for clerics (remember, this gives Spirit Guardians zero damage on a miss, which is false) for those two fights. An effective 193.5 hp, and two more 2nd level spells than my previous anaylysis (because I wasn't using Channel Divinity before). Oh, and for three fights they could fly, potentially reducing their incoming damage significantly.

So now with this OBJECTIVE analysis, using the Battlemaster as you insisted I do, and a cleric subclass that does not increase damage at all.... I'm left with the cleric having more damage, more effective hp, and more spell slots than before. But hey, I used the battlemaster and subclasses, so now these numbers aren't a waste of your time, right? After all, it isn't like you are going to insist on a specific subclass, and specific set of abilities in that subclass, and ban a different subclass all at the same time, right?

 

[Maxperson]

Citation Needed since it says it is about creating new monsters.

Quote me any section in those DMG pages that shows the math behind the CR numbers the tools give. Just one quote.

So is Agressive a CR 1 ability or a CR 12 ability? Because "increasing CR" is not the same as "has a CR". The distinction is important, especially since you split my response which covers WHY it is important.

Pedantic=pedantic. You know what I mean.

But altering someone's level, the measure of CR, is basically impossible to recursively give an increase to CR. Used to change level 2 to level 1 it would have a far smaller impact than being used to change level 20 to level 10. That's why what you are asking for is impossible, the variability of halving someone's level is too immense. There is no math for that. There cannot be.

The save DC would show what level it is designed for. Higher level PCs will most likely make the save and not be bothered by it. Lower level PCs shouldn't be fighting it. In any case, it's a viable ability.

And just because there are abilities that could theoritically exist that the Designers didn't use or didn't write down

Fact, not theory.

doesn't mean that there is some secrete hidden math to the game.

Sure. They just guessed at it. There was no design(math) involved in how they chose to balance the CR adjustments. You're right and the designers are incompetent bozos.

And in fact, I'll note that since Invisibility, Flyby attack, Echolocation, and the ability to Resist or be Immune to turn undead all are given dashs to note that they do not affect CR, that many of those literally millions of abilities (whatever they are) would also not effect CR. Heck, Sunlight Sensitivity doesn't change CR.

Which just proves my point all the more. They know from their math which abilities should have CR adjustments and which should not and we don't.

And, again, listen to what I am saying. I'm not saying that no cleric ever uses any utility spell. I am saying that they are not REQUIRED to use them. Do you know why I don't see Detect Poison or Purify Food and Drink? Because I essentially never poison food and drink for the party. Why have I almost never seen create water? Because my groups don't track mundane supplies, like rations. The one time I'd seen it, it was used to put out a fire.

So you house rule away that resource. No wonder you don't see much utility. Your games don't seem to include it.

All you are doing is proving my point. I am not required to account for utility spells

You are not required to. Nor does your homebrew have any relevance to this discussion. Your experience is incredibly biased and unusable because of how you run your games.

Ceteris Paribus

E Pluribus Unum.

Well, since you didn't say that my Battle Master was unacceptable, let's clear your mind and give you those subclasses you so desperately, desperately say will make all the difference. That will make this OBJECTIVELY true and make my numbers not a waste of time and energy. I'll even be nice and not use a Cleric subclass that increases damage

Silence isn't approval.

Team Battle Master Fighter with Evasive Footwork, Ambush, Tactical Assessment, Grappling Strike, Commanding Presence, Bait and Switch, and Rally. They are using Greatswords and GWM, I could say they increase their AC, but you don't like AC increasing, so I'll say they can get 5d10+10 temp hp per short rest (37.5 temp hp per short rest). You know what, I'll even do what you claim I did for clerics and let the Battlemaster use all their dice for utility as well, doubling or tripling their available dice. Also note at this point I've assumed a 20 str, a 14 charisma, and a 20 con as well as single feat.

A 20 con is a waste of space. Assume a 16 and 2 feats. Also, why avoid Disarming Attack, Precision Attack, Sweeping Attack and Menacing Attack? Avoiding the good combat options = afraid of the result. Why are you afraid to build a good fighter?

The second feat can be Heavy Armor Master to reduce damage taken, Lucky to improve success in battle, Sentinal for increased damage and lockdown of enemies, or another good combat feat.

I'm curious how you got to 20 str and 20 con AND a feat with just 3 feats and v. human? Assuming you didn't roll stats, a starting 15 str and 14 con from the array + racials = 17 str, 15 con at level 1. You've need 3 ASI's to get to 19/19 and the fourth to make both 20.

Twilight Cleric. I won't count advantage on Initiative, since the fighter can use Ambush for the same thing as well as all their other maneuvers. Channel divinity is twice between short rests, but since it is an aura not all of them can use it at the same time. So, while they get three rounds of their unique channel divinity (3d6+33 temp hp or 43.5 temp hp) every single fight, the other three clerics can restore spell slots with Harness Divine Power. They can only do it twice each, but that is an additional two 2nd level spell slots for every single cleric.

Initiative isn't all that relevant.

 

[James Gasik]

I'm curious how you got to 20 str and 20 con AND a feat with just 3 feats and v. human? Assuming you didn't roll stats, a starting 15 str and 14 con from the array + racials = 17 str, 15 con at level 1. You've need 3 ASI's to get to 19/19 and the fourth to make both 20.

Initiative isn't all that relevant.

Why are we assuming point-buy? The PHB doesn't, it says "roll or use this array", then gives point-buy under the heading "Variant: Customizing Ability Scores".

Initiative can have relevance, if you are in a position to negate an enemy's first turn, either by killing it outright, or imposing a condition upon it that will foil it's ability to act. This is theoretically something even a Battlemaster (let alone a squad of them) can do (though they might have to waste some time if they can't reach their enemies, which is why I prefer archery-based Battlemasters myself).

The same holds true for losing initiative against the wrong foe, like that dragon mentioned upthread. Dragon wins initiative, outright kills an unlucky character who fails a Dex save and seriously injures the rest. So initiative can seriously impact the momentum of a battle, though how often it does so is dependent on the strategies employed by the DM and the players.

 

[Maxperson]

Why are we assuming point-buy? The PHB doesn't, it says "roll or use this array", then gives point-buy under the heading "Variant: Customizing Ability Scores".

My quote literally said "array."

Initiative can have relevance, if you are in a position to negate an enemy's first turn, either by killing it outright, or imposing a condition upon it that will foil it's ability to act. This is theoretically something even a Battlemaster (let alone a squad of them) can do (though they might have to waste some time if they can't reach their enemies, which is why I prefer archery-based Battlemasters myself).

This exercise is about damage per fight. Basically against testing dummies with infinite hit points. If we have to calculate in varying AC's, movement, resistances, excess damage beyond killing monsters, etc., it becomes impossible to figure out. We're human and can't account for all the possible variables that will occur when 5 people play at least 4 different beings in 6-8 fights over an adventuring day. Initiative really isn't going to matter for this exercise.

 

[James Gasik]

My quote literally said "array."

This exercise is about damage per fight. Basically against testing dummies with infinite hit points. If we have to calculate in varying AC's, movement, resistances, excess damage beyond killing monsters, etc., it becomes impossible to figure out. We're human and can't account for all the possible variables that will occur when 5 people play at least 4 different beings in 6-8 fights over an adventuring day. Initiative really isn't going to matter for this exercise.

Well yeah, but I was just curious when you had both decided arrays were in use. ^-^

As for your second point, that's fair enough, I just saw your statement saying initiative wasn't all that relevant and my first thought is "well, it can be...".

This debate is a little hard to follow sometimes. I personally don't think there is any "hidden math" used by the designers beyond "enlightened guesstimation". Which means that they themselves don't really know if something is balanced, and they don't really care, assuming that every DM will just ban or houserule things to make them work the way they want to, and if the result is a broken mess, well, you can't blame them, man!

 

[Maxperson]

Well yeah, but I was just curious when you had both decided arrays were in use. ^-^

We didn't agree to anything, but rolling seemed like it wouldn't really apply to this sort of comparison and point buy can't be assumed to be allowed, so I figured array.

As for your second point, that's fair enough, I just saw your statement saying initiative wasn't all that relevant and my first thought is "well, it can be...".

This debate is a little hard to follow sometimes. I personally don't think there is any "hidden math" used by the designers beyond "enlightened guesstimation". Which means that they themselves don't really know if something is balanced, and they don't really care, assuming that every DM will just ban or houserule things to make them work the way they want to, and if the result is a broken mess, well, you can't blame them, man!

 

[Chaosmancer]

Quote me any section in those DMG pages that shows the math behind the CR numbers the tools give. Just one quote.

Using the same page numbers I've given you a dozen times.

Average damage is calculated over three rounds, example given is 37+37+90 = 164 / 3 = 54.6. 54.6 is the expected average damage for CR 8 creature.

Now, if you want to demand why a CR 8 = 51 to 56 damage, then that would be because level 8 has hp between 59 and 84 for the average party member. There isn't an equal sign, but the math is really clear.

Pedantic=pedantic. You know what I mean.

And yet you still split my point, and then attacked me for making a claim that is true, because supposedly "I know what you mean".

The save DC would show what level it is designed for. Higher level PCs will most likely make the save and not be bothered by it. Lower level PCs shouldn't be fighting it. In any case, it's a viable ability.

So.... since you said DC 17 that makes it a appropriate for a CR 11 or a CR 12 monster. Done. I told you that the first time you asked. Where's the problem then?

Heck, you could likely figure in the amount of damage equivalent the ability does to a level 11 character and use that to figure out how it affects CR. Not exactly rocket science if you demand to know how your homebrew ability works in the math of the game.

Fact, not theory.

Oh fun, useless pedantry.

Sure. They just guessed at it. There was no design(math) involved in how they chose to balance the CR adjustments. You're right and the designers are incompetent bozos.

And a strawman! Double word score.

Wrong. It isn't that they guess and there was no design involved. It doesn't mean that they are bozos. What it is, is that the math of the game isn't hidden. It is right there in plain sight. Just because they didn't list every possibly ability in the game doesn't mean there is hidden math.

Which just proves my point all the more. They know from their math which abilities should have CR adjustments and which should not and we don't.

Yes we do. It is blatantly obvious why these abilities don't adjust CR.

So you house rule away that resource. No wonder you don't see much utility. Your games don't seem to include it.

I didn't houserule anything. There was no need for the utility, so it doesn't get used. Which goes back to my initial question. WHAT utility am I REQUIRED to account for in an analysis. Because whether or not utility gets used DEPENDS on the the situation.

That isn't houseruling, that's adventure design.

You are not required to. Nor does your homebrew have any relevance to this discussion. Your experience is incredibly biased and unusable because of how you run your games.

And yet you have howled and wailed that I didn't include it, demanding that I factor it in. If I'm not required to factor it in... why the gnashing of teeth?

E Pluribus Unum.

Sorry, "Out of Many, One" is not a term used in analysis of complex systems. That's on the US Money, to denote the United part of the countries history. It has no bearing on the discussion.

Ceteris Paribus IS used in these sorts of analysis, and has bearing on why I was analyzing as I did.

A 20 con is a waste of space. Assume a 16 and 2 feats. Also, why avoid Disarming Attack, Precision Attack, Sweeping Attack and Menacing Attack? Avoiding the good combat options = afraid of the result. Why are you afraid to build a good fighter?

The second feat can be Heavy Armor Master to reduce damage taken, Lucky to improve success in battle, Sentinal for increased damage and lockdown of enemies, or another good combat feat.

I'm curious how you got to 20 str and 20 con AND a feat with just 3 feats and v. human? Assuming you didn't roll stats, a starting 15 str and 14 con from the array + racials = 17 str, 15 con at level 1. You've need 3 ASI's to get to 19/19 and the fourth to make both 20.

Initiative isn't all that relevant.

Really? I didn't build a "good" fighter? But that isn't possible. The game is balanced. How are you determining that these fighter's aren't good? How do you know that Menacing Attack is better than Rally? Are you accounting for all party resources? Because balance is a range accounting for all party resources and any two teams of adventurers would be balanced....

Oh wait. Despite you saying that, that was a lie. At this point a rather blatant lie. Because it doesn't count if I use the champion (which I never did) and it doesn't count if I build a utility battlemaster (which I did) because it only counts if I build a "proper" battlemaster with the "proper" equipment and then take the "proper" feats (in a scenario that was initially no feats for team fighter) and THEN I'd be proven that ANY two teams are balanced against each other.

And it turns out, I even cheated in favor of team fighter, giving them more stats than they could have. Though, I'm curious why 20 Con is useless when the clerics are supposed to die in fight number two with their "measly" 150 effective hp, and dropping the fighter to 16 Con would leave them with fewer than 120 effective hp. Heck, you want Great Weapon Master, Lucky, Heavy Armor Mastery, Sentinel on a Variant Human Battle Master fighter wielding a greatsword with Precision attack, Menacing Attack, Sweeping Attack, and Disarming attack. And THAT will prove than any possible two teams are balanced against each other.

Can't you see the blatant hypocrisy here? You refuse to accept the analysis of general balance unless this highly specific build is the only one considered for the other side. Yet your original claim was that I can't show that healing is too weak because ANY two parties are balanced and everything is balanced on the party level.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Well yeah, but I was just curious when you had both decided arrays were in use. ^-^

We never did.

I knew if I had the clerics with feats and anything over a 16 I'd be accused of cheating. Then I figured that since the fighters were using all feats and started with 16s then they should be able to get multiple 20's.

When using Rally, I calculated a 14 charisma, because that is incredibly high for a fighter, but makes sense if you are building to utilize charisma for an ability. I never bothered to adjust the other scores back down, because it didn't matter.

This debate is a little hard to follow sometimes. I personally don't think there is any "hidden math" used by the designers beyond "enlightened guesstimation". Which means that they themselves don't really know if something is balanced, and they don't really care, assuming that every DM will just ban or houserule things to make them work the way they want to, and if the result is a broken mess, well, you can't blame them, man!

Agreed. There is no hidden math. They did their best to get close, and we have all their relevant work and plenty of abilities to use as references. The claim of hidden math is just a red herring to prevent me from being able to claim that healing is less than it should be.

 

[Maxperson]

Using the same page numbers I've given you a dozen times.

Average damage is calculated over three rounds, example given is 37+37+90 = 164 / 3 = 54.6. 54.6 is the expected average damage for CR 8 creature.


Now, if you want to demand why a CR 8 = 51 to 56 damage, then that would be because level 8 has hp between 59 and 84 for the average party member. There isn't an equal sign, but the math is really clear.

So you can't do it. That's not the math. That's the tool their math gives you to figure out CR. It tells you nothing about why 54.6 is good for CR 8 against a party of 4. And no, because hit points of the party has between 59 and 85 hit points is not it. At least the tools in the DMG doesn't say that. Nor are hit points the only measure of CR.

So.... since you said DC 17 that makes it a appropriate for a CR 11 or a CR 12 monster. Done. I told you that the first time you asked. Where's the problem then?

That's the tool, not the math. Especially since you did it wrong. A DC 17 doesn't make it CR 11 or 12. Let's say it's a CR 8 creature that relies on that save. Since it's not 2 points higher than the 16 for CR 8, it remains CR 8 despite using a 17. What's more I can make it DC 19, which is fine for level 17-20 CR according to the chart, but the CR of the creature we're building only goes from 8 to 9. And we can adjust the save DC for the creature like that per Step 3.

Where's the math that explains why it happens that way? Not in the DMG, that's for sure.

Oh fun, useless pedantry.

You made a false claim. It's not pedantry to correct you. It's a fact, not a theory. They mean very different things.

Yes we do. It is blatantly obvious why these abilities don't adjust CR.

Really? Show me the math on why invisibility doesn't, but constrict does. Where's the math on why the effective attack bonus of a creature with blood frenzy goes up by exactly 4, even though the ability is not always in use and advantage has varying effectiveness based on AC?

I didn't houserule anything. There was no need for the utility, so it doesn't get used. Which goes back to my initial question. WHAT utility am I REQUIRED to account for in an analysis. Because whether or not utility gets used DEPENDS on the the situation.

If you guys don't track food, you are house ruling the game to get rid of the food consumption rules.

Sorry, "Out of Many, One" is not a term used in analysis of complex systems. That's on the US Money, to denote the United part of the countries history. It has no bearing on the discussion.

Ceteris Paribus IS used in these sorts of analysis, and has bearing on why I was analyzing as I did.

It's not applicable here. I looked at what it was and since you're just repeating it Ad Nauseam(applicable Latin Phrase), I figured I'd throw a non-applicable Latin phrase back at you.

All other things are not equal when comparing two classes like this. That you think it is is why you get into white room trouble so often. White room stuff is rarely applicable to how the game actually plays.

Really? I didn't build a "good" fighter? But that isn't possible. The game is balanced. How are you determining that these fighter's aren't good? How do you know that Menacing Attack is better than Rally? Are you accounting for all party resources? Because balance is a range accounting for all party resources and any two teams of adventurers would be balanced....

Fine. Let's say you deliberately built one that you could "beat" with the clerics, rather than one with useful abilities that would be chosen.

And it turns out, I even cheated in favor of team fighter, giving them more stats than they could have. Though, I'm curious why 20 Con is useless when the clerics are supposed to die in fight number two with their "measly" 150 effective hp, and dropping the fighter to 16 Con would leave them with fewer than 120 effective hp. Heck, you want Great Weapon Master, Lucky, Heavy Armor Mastery, Sentinel on a Variant Human Battle Master fighter wielding a greatsword with Precision attack, Menacing Attack, Sweeping Attack, and Disarming attack. And THAT will prove than any possible two teams are balanced against each other.

In a real fight, it wouldn't work out the way your white room comparisons do.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So you can't do it. That's not the math. That's the tool their math gives you to figure out CR. It tells you nothing about why 54.6 is good for CR 8 against a party of 4. And no, because hit points of the party has between 59 and 85 hit points is not it. At least the tools in the DMG doesn't say that. Nor are hit points the only measure of CR.

So... why do you think the damage is listed as that? Do you think they compared the damage to AC? Maybe they compared the damage versus the player's background? Oh, I know, the secret is you compare the damage against the equipment the party is holding.

Of course they don't state that the damage is at the CR because of the health totals. That's because it is obvious. As for hit points being the only measure, of course they aren't. You've heard of multi-variable equations right? Just because I only discussed one variable, and there is more than one variable, doesn't mean the entire thing falls apart.

That's the tool, not the math. Especially since you did it wrong. A DC 17 doesn't make it CR 11 or 12. Let's say it's a CR 8 creature that relies on that save. Since it's not 2 points higher than the 16 for CR 8, it remains CR 8 despite using a 17. What's more I can make it DC 19, which is fine for level 17-20 CR according to the chart, but the CR of the creature we're building only goes from 8 to 9. And we can adjust the save DC for the creature like that per Step 3.

Where's the math that explains why it happens that way? Not in the DMG, that's for sure.

Yet despite your claim there is no math in the DMG... you certainly seem to know exactly how to use the system and what numbers go where. Must be witchcraft, it would be impossible for you to know all that, because the design is completely hidden and incomprehensible! (By the way, the explanation might come in with that whole section about defensive vs offensive CR, and the discussion of how to average those, averages being a math thing.)

You made a false claim. It's not pedantry to correct you. It's a fact, not a theory. They mean very different things.

Uh huh, because it is vitally important to clarify that it is a fact that theoritical abilities could exist. Obviously no one could otherwise understand that people can make up whatever abilities they want. And you wouldn't be using your phrasing to try and make it sound like I'm spouting theories, when I didn't actually propose a theory, but called the abilities "theoritical", which is an indication that they don't actually exist in the text of the game. Which, by the way, is a fact.

Really? Show me the math on why invisibility doesn't, but constrict does. Where's the math on why the effective attack bonus of a creature with blood frenzy goes up by exactly 4, even though the ability is not always in use and advantage has varying effectiveness based on AC?

Invisibility is only advantage for a single attack. It doesn't exist long enough to affect their damage output more than getting a successful stealth roll or any other reason for advantage. There is no math for this, in the terms of a formula, but the reasoning is obvious. Meanwhile, while the disadvantage to being attacked might matter, since invisibility almost always disappears when an attack is made, the defensive use only applies as long as the enemy is out of the fight, and again, usually doesn't last long enough. You keep screaming "Math!math!math!" but there is no "abilities over time" equation to write out.

Meanwhile. look at Constrict. It is an attack, so you deal damage when you use it unlike casting invisibility. It auto-restrains, and the enemy has to use their action to escape (not attacking you) meanwhile they have disadvantage to attack you. It is an AC of +1 effectively, because it only affects a single party member for an extended period of the fight, so it is only 1/4 as effective as permanent disadvantage.

And Blood Frenzy is going to almost always be in use, the only time it isn't is when the party is at completely full hp, which is incredibly rare. And while the effect varies depending on AC, dozens of articles have been written about how advantage is (on average) between a +4 and a+5.

Sure, you aren't going to get this ∫v0dv=Vb∫t0dtm0−bt anywhere in the book, but that's because this stuff isn't physics.

If you guys don't track food, you are house ruling the game to get rid of the food consumption rules.

Or we aren't out of town for longer than a few days and everyone tends to buy a month of rations and restock in town all the time, because rations are cheap. And I don't feel like a couple of silver every so often is really breaking anything.

It's not applicable here. I looked at what it was and since you're just repeating it Ad Nauseam(applicable Latin Phrase), I figured I'd throw a non-applicable Latin phrase back at you.

All other things are not equal when comparing two classes like this. That you think it is is why you get into white room trouble so often. White room stuff is rarely applicable to how the game actually plays.

It doesn't literally mean all other things are equal, it means you HOLD all other things as being equal. Such as assuming that subclasses will have equal impact on the base class. Because if you assume all subclasses are about equal within the class, then assume every subclass affects the class power equally, then you can just compare the classes.

If you don't then you can't compare the classes without first comparing the subclasses within the class, finding their balance, then looking to the classes, but then you also have to determine if the subclass has a greater or less effect on the main class, and then find a way to balance THAT. It's a huge complicated mess that was completely unnecessary for ANY point beyond your red herrings to get me to stop talking about healing.

Fine. Let's say you deliberately built one that you could "beat" with the clerics, rather than one with useful abilities that would be chosen.

In a real fight, it wouldn't work out the way your white room comparisons do.

So your claim that all teams are equally balanced is false. Still. I don't care how you phrase it, the very fact you lost your crap over the idea that I DARED to use the champion, followed by your tirade about how I completely mis-built the battlemasters just highlights that single fact. Because a Team can be comprised of all one class, and just this alone shows that a team of all champions wouldn't be balanced against a team of all Battlemasters.

I don't need to prove it likely, I just need to prove it true. Because the moment it is true that not all teams are balanced against each other, you complaints about my analysis of healing collapse. Because team's aren't balanced, so I don't need to assume that the team balances the cleric's ability to restore HP.