D&D General DPR Calculations Wut?

[Maxperson]

That build will be meh because you're a bad fighter and bard.

Only if you are a power gamer and every +1 matters to you. Otherwise it's a very good, versatile PC.

You want to be good at something vaguely relevant. Damage, healing, support, control etc. Bards being bad at damage and barbarians being bad at control doesnt really matter.

I see you post a lot about the best class, ability, spell, etc. to use. You're into optimization/power gaming, so the fighter/bard seems bad to you when it really isn't.

 

[Maxperson]

What precisely don't you see any point to?

A DPR only comparison. Most of the time it's not going to be useful, since the majority of the time where nobody will want to use resources will be when the fight is won and it's just the last bit of monster clean-up. DPR doesn't matter then. The fight is already won.

 

[FrogReaver]

A DPR only comparison. Most of the time it's not going to be useful, since the majority of the time where nobody will want to use resources will be when the fight is won and it's just the last bit of monster clean-up. DPR doesn't matter then. The fight is already won.

Do you mean at-will DPR? Most DPR metrics include resource use in some way.

 

[Maxperson]

Do you mean at-will DPR? Most DPR metrics include resource use in some way.

Yes. If resources are being used, there's no reason to assume that non-damage, combat affecting spells will not be used.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes. If resources are being used, there's no reason to assume that non-damage, combat affecting spells will not be used.

Of course. I've been trying to get you to tell me which spells are being used in which spell slots for quite a while now so I can actually model that impact for us. Depending on the spell we can probably convert it into either additional eHP, additional DPR or both. I can't think of any that wouldn't be able to be modeled that way, though some can be harder to model than others.

 

[TwoSix]

I see you post a lot about the best class, ability, spell, etc. to use. You're into optimization/power gaming, so the fighter/bard seems bad to you when it really isn't.

To be fair, the people you should be listening to about evaluations of various character strength ARE the people interested in optimization and power gaming.

If your game is focused on character presentation and thespianism, then obviously character efficacy is of relatively little importance.

 

[FrogReaver]

I see you post a lot about the best class, ability, spell, etc. to use. You're into optimization/power gaming, so the fighter/bard seems bad to you when it really isn't.

You know what would be cool, if we could actually show that it isn't bad under an optimization framework.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

DPR is useful as a comparison tool rather than an exact mathematical expectation.
A set of baseline assumptions can be made. There will be variation from these due to luck or unusual circumstances in real play, but variation should average out. More to the point, as long as those same assumptions are used in all examples, a comparison of baseline performance can be made.
Even if the exact values are out by a bit, the baseline performance of multiple examples should be directly comparable since they are all running off the same assumptions.

More to the point, DPR can be calculated. There is no way that you can accurately gauge the effectiveness of using an invisibility spell, but you can calculate the DPR of that spell slot if used to cast scorching ray.
This is also why DPR only sets a baseline: unless you're a martial character, using your resources to deal damage is often not the best option, but it is an option that can be calculated and compared. So it forms a baseline of your performance, even though the actual performance is likely to be considerably better if better options than damage exist.

So if character A is calculated to have a DPR of 5, and characters B and C have a DPR of 10, they might not actually put out that exact damage every round, but you know that A is doing about half the damage of the other two, whatever that ends up being. Also, if character B is better at control , and damage dealing is only their tertiary function, whereas it is character C's prime focus, you know that the actual performance of character B will be considerably better than C, despite them having similar DPRs.

 

[FrogReaver]

If your game is focused on character presentation and thespianism, then obviously character efficacy is of relatively little importance.

I want to see a character presentation and thespianism person rank the classes based on presentation and thespianism potential with justificaiton. That would be entertaining.

 

[Zardnaar]

Only if you are a power gamer and every +1 matters to you. Otherwise it's a very good, versatile PC.

I see you post a lot about the best class, ability, spell, etc. to use. You're into optimization/power gaming, so the fighter/bard seems bad to you when it really isn't.

Its a bad build by any conventional metric. You've missed out on a second attack and 3rd level spells. And its MAD (may be less if stats are rolled)

Its objectively bad in terms of mechanics. It may not be bad for RP but that all essentially irrelevant if youre rating effectness.

And you cant really rate role playing its DM, player, group dependent.

Internet over rates damage imho. But you kinda want to be good at something that matters.