Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pyromantic" data-source="post: 5848336" data-attributes="member: 6690699">That post was intended in part to show the real complexity behind the study of probability. The difference between 6 and 6.02 is very minor, but that particular example is very narrow since it will almost always require 6 attacks.&nbsp;d4 damage per attack to do 5 or more damage is a better example to show how far off the method can be. Just taking 5 divided by the average damage of a d4 (2.5) would suggest 2, but the actual number of expected hits is around 2.44.&nbsp;&nbsp;As I said before I'm not opposed to the idea in principle, but I think we should first establish how much variance you want to see in a quantity like damage. While I tend to agree d4-1 for the wizard and d10+4 (as examples) for a fighter might be too big a range in melee damage potential, there are other ways to potentially narrow that range. These are some ideas off the top of my head that could be implemented as standard or readily accessible options:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Weapon proficiencies for weapons with better damage types.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">At-wills, so that even if they aren't doing better than d4-1 damage in melee, they can routinely do more damage on their turn anyway.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Attacks based on stats other than strength, either in whole or in part. You could allow everyone to add their best stat modifier to damage in addition to strength for example.</li>
</ul>Any of these are potentially options, and IMO probably better than increasing all stat modifiers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pyromantic, post: 5848336, member: 6690699"] That post was intended in part to show the real complexity behind the study of probability. The difference between 6 and 6.02 is very minor, but that particular example is very narrow since it will almost always require 6 attacks. d4 damage per attack to do 5 or more damage is a better example to show how far off the method can be. Just taking 5 divided by the average damage of a d4 (2.5) would suggest 2, but the actual number of expected hits is around 2.44. As I said before I'm not opposed to the idea in principle, but I think we should first establish how much variance you want to see in a quantity like damage. While I tend to agree d4-1 for the wizard and d10+4 (as examples) for a fighter might be too big a range in melee damage potential, there are other ways to potentially narrow that range. These are some ideas off the top of my head that could be implemented as standard or readily accessible options: [LIST] [*]Weapon proficiencies for weapons with better damage types. [*]At-wills, so that even if they aren't doing better than d4-1 damage in melee, they can routinely do more damage on their turn anyway. [*]Attacks based on stats other than strength, either in whole or in part. You could allow everyone to add their best stat modifier to damage in [I]addition[/I] to strength for example. [/LIST]Any of these are potentially options, and IMO probably better than increasing all stat modifiers. [/QUOTE]

Verification