D&D (2024) ENworld Damage Guide Vs Treantmonk's?

Maybe the metric should multiply survivability with damage. That way, if you have one of those factors too low, the metric goes down.
=EHP * DPR
That gives you a number you can compare characters with, but it's not a very real world meaningful number.

Like if EHP is 100 and DPR is 30 that's 3000.
If EHP is 300 and DPR is 10 then that's also 3000.

But it's fairly clear that the first PC with higher DPR is probably better.

You will never be able to recreate that in a white room.
You don't need to though.

You need some damage metrics.
Single Target, Burst, AOE, etc.

You need some survivability metrics.
AC, HP, Damage Reduction, Healing. Possibly can convert this to EHP.

Mobility Metrics are a solid addition as well.
Speed, Movement Types, resource abilities that can be used for extra movement.

You don't have to combine this into one number. Simply a separate rating for each of these 10 to 20 things. Then we can spend pages and pages trying to estimate relative value of each of those stats to each other.

Yes. But listing one without the other gives a wrong picture more often than not.
Wrong picture? Howso? Do you believe people are actually building characters that ignore defensive abilities/healing/control/etc in actual play?

Or are you suggesting that claiming a character is best at damage due to having the best damage numbers is actually a claim that such a character is the best? Instead of just the best at doing damage when it can hit things in it's preferred style?

I'd also add mobilitiy as another metric. Bringing your damage where it counts most or retreating if things go sideways is never rated correctly when speaking about damage*, except for ranged builds that kite enemies... which are usually useless in play.

*though treantmonk does value it high.
Sure. The thing is, the usefulness of high mobility depends a great deal on how the DM sets up encounters. So it's really hard to value in general. There's also not much in the way of big bonuses for it. It's mostly locked by class.

But yes, we should metric it. But it's something a player really has to evaluate for their campaign when comparing to the others.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

=EHP * DPR
That gives you a number you can compare characters with, but it's not a very real world meaningful number.

Like if EHP is 100 and DPR is 30 that's 3000.
If EHP is 300 and DPR is 10 then that's also 3000.

But it's fairly clear that the first PC with higher DPR is probably better.


You don't need to though.

You need some damage metrics.
Single Target, Burst, AOE, etc.

You need some survivability metrics.
AC, HP, Damage Reduction, Healing. Possibly can convert this to EHP.

Mobility Metrics are a solid addition as well.
Speed, Movement Types, resource abilities that can be used for extra movement.

You don't have to combine this into one number. Simply a separate rating for each of these 10 to 20 things. Then we can spend pages and pages trying to estimate relative value of each of those stats to each other.


Wrong picture? Howso? Do you believe people are actually building characters that ignore defensive abilities/healing/control/etc in actual play?

Or are you suggesting that claiming a character is best at damage due to having the best damage numbers is actually a claim that such a character is the best? Instead of just the best at doing damage when it can hit things in it's preferred style?
You lost me a bit here. But essentially: if you theoretically do highest dps, but conditions to do so are usually not met, the highest dpr does not matter.

Then there is the whole thing about swinginess.

1000 Damage with a 1% chace to hit (for example rolling 19+ to hit with disadvantage*), or dealing 10 dpr with 50% chance to hit.

The former deals twice as much damage per round. But if you are not fighing an enemy with 500 - 1000 hp preferably alone, the former character usually is not delivering in an actual game...

*such a scenario is not totally unrealistic, as vorpal swords work similarily. Chances to actually decapitate someone are very slim. 5% chance to deal unlimited amount of damage, if the enemy has no legendary resistance. (With 4 legendary resistances, your average number of attacks to get through is 100).
Having a weapon that does extra 3d6 damage like a dragon lance might serve you better overall.

So DPR is only a rough metric, even for damage.
 
Last edited:

Dead PCs deal no damage.

13AC dealing 21 damage is not better than 20 AC dealing 19 damage.
But it seems that way if we only calculate is DPR.
dead people have no attack roll, that is why barbarian has reckless attack.

but there is a value in AC, not always will you start a battle and "tanking" the surprise is paramount if you want to be able to do damage.

while in most cases it is true that you beat encounters by killing faster and not dying slower, some minimum investments in defense needs to be made.
be that features, spells, ability allocation.

also, saves are important, no use for your uber damage if you spend 5 round failing hold person saves.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top