Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Grindy D&D Next Combat
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="keterys" data-source="post: 6133684" data-attributes="member: 43019"><p>Eh, it's a little off topic, but I'm kinda interested so let's break this down.</p><p></p><p>Mathematically speaking:</p><p></p><p>Standard Monster HP = (Lvl + 1) * 8 + Con, and Con = 13 + Lvl / 2 = 21 + 8.5 * Lvl</p><p>So Standard Encounter HP for a group of 5 = 105 + 42 * Lvl</p><p></p><p>Let's look at some PC damages for, say, 8th level, since that's what I played last night.</p><p></p><p>8th: Standard Encounter HP = 441</p><p></p><p>Baseline PC damage is about 2W + Stat (5 or 6) + Enh (2), but most PCs will also have additional options - for example, 2 item, 1 or 2 feat, 1 shard, 2 superior implement, 1-2 dual implement spellcaster, etc. So, let's call this line 2d10 + 10 damage for now, Avg 21. Before folks object that their at-will doesn't do this damage, note that you aren't needing to use your at-wills much under the 2-4 round premise.</p><p></p><p>Baseline PC accuracy is then 4 + Stat (5 or 6) + Enh (2) + Feat (1) + Prof (3), though again it's possible to add to that with superior implement (1), being a fighter, rogue, seeker, thief (1), etc being pretty common. So, +15 vs. AC, +13 vs. NAD for casters, looking for target AC 22, NAD 20. Hit on a 7 is 70% chance to hit, though CA would make that 80%. 75% is probably fair enough for this approximation.</p><p></p><p>So, without factoring in the benefits of strikers, leader bonuses, or any of that jazz, we've turned our entire encounter worth of monster hp into (441 hp / (21 * .75)) = 28 attacks.</p><p></p><p>So, with 5 PCs the encounter is wrapped up in 5.6 rounds, if they only make one attack each. That's pretty far off from 10 rounds, and that's without using any special expenditures at all.</p><p></p><p>But why would they do that? 1 is a controller, so is hitting 2 targets per round? Two are strikers, so are actually hitting for 50% more damage? The leader is giving out bonuses, and also granting attacks to one of those strikers? They've got action points, which should give them 3 more attacks per encounter? Even that defender gets in on it with an immediate (dimensional vortex, guardian's counter, etc) or multiattack (sweeping blow, astral thunder, etc). That gets you comfortably down to 3 rounds.</p><p></p><p>Of course, that's ignoring actual optimization which I encounter in almost every group when I DM at conventions. A charging thief at level 8 deals:</p><p>1d8 (rapier) + 2d8 (sneak attack) + 1d6 (backstab) + 1d8 (vanguard weapon) + 1d8 (surprising charge) + 1d6 (horned helm) + 6 (Dex) + 2 (Finesse) + 2 (Enh) + 2 (Item) with a 95% accuracy = 5d8 + 2d6 + 12, Avg 41.5 dmg, Crit 73</p><p>He needs only 6 attacks to clear an encounter. Somehow the party bard or warlord likes giving him charges too, oddly enough.</p><p></p><p>Unfortunately, it's also possible for a group to have a pacifist cleric, an enchanter wizard, a fighter with a dagger, and contrive to deal no damage, but that's a choice the group can make and avoid. That route can lead to 10 round combats, it's true. I've also played once in a game where the DM threw a massively overleveled solo soldier in, who then hid in a cloud of darkness, intentionally forcing chance to hit into fairly atrocious levels. That's not really a fun or suggested way to play the game, but I'm sure sessions like that are what make people think that 10 rounds is somehow normal. I shudder at the thought it's somehow average, though.</p><p></p><p>So, yeah, whatever Next can do to avoid that, it'd be good.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="keterys, post: 6133684, member: 43019"] Eh, it's a little off topic, but I'm kinda interested so let's break this down. Mathematically speaking: Standard Monster HP = (Lvl + 1) * 8 + Con, and Con = 13 + Lvl / 2 = 21 + 8.5 * Lvl So Standard Encounter HP for a group of 5 = 105 + 42 * Lvl Let's look at some PC damages for, say, 8th level, since that's what I played last night. 8th: Standard Encounter HP = 441 Baseline PC damage is about 2W + Stat (5 or 6) + Enh (2), but most PCs will also have additional options - for example, 2 item, 1 or 2 feat, 1 shard, 2 superior implement, 1-2 dual implement spellcaster, etc. So, let's call this line 2d10 + 10 damage for now, Avg 21. Before folks object that their at-will doesn't do this damage, note that you aren't needing to use your at-wills much under the 2-4 round premise. Baseline PC accuracy is then 4 + Stat (5 or 6) + Enh (2) + Feat (1) + Prof (3), though again it's possible to add to that with superior implement (1), being a fighter, rogue, seeker, thief (1), etc being pretty common. So, +15 vs. AC, +13 vs. NAD for casters, looking for target AC 22, NAD 20. Hit on a 7 is 70% chance to hit, though CA would make that 80%. 75% is probably fair enough for this approximation. So, without factoring in the benefits of strikers, leader bonuses, or any of that jazz, we've turned our entire encounter worth of monster hp into (441 hp / (21 * .75)) = 28 attacks. So, with 5 PCs the encounter is wrapped up in 5.6 rounds, if they only make one attack each. That's pretty far off from 10 rounds, and that's without using any special expenditures at all. But why would they do that? 1 is a controller, so is hitting 2 targets per round? Two are strikers, so are actually hitting for 50% more damage? The leader is giving out bonuses, and also granting attacks to one of those strikers? They've got action points, which should give them 3 more attacks per encounter? Even that defender gets in on it with an immediate (dimensional vortex, guardian's counter, etc) or multiattack (sweeping blow, astral thunder, etc). That gets you comfortably down to 3 rounds. Of course, that's ignoring actual optimization which I encounter in almost every group when I DM at conventions. A charging thief at level 8 deals: 1d8 (rapier) + 2d8 (sneak attack) + 1d6 (backstab) + 1d8 (vanguard weapon) + 1d8 (surprising charge) + 1d6 (horned helm) + 6 (Dex) + 2 (Finesse) + 2 (Enh) + 2 (Item) with a 95% accuracy = 5d8 + 2d6 + 12, Avg 41.5 dmg, Crit 73 He needs only 6 attacks to clear an encounter. Somehow the party bard or warlord likes giving him charges too, oddly enough. Unfortunately, it's also possible for a group to have a pacifist cleric, an enchanter wizard, a fighter with a dagger, and contrive to deal no damage, but that's a choice the group can make and avoid. That route can lead to 10 round combats, it's true. I've also played once in a game where the DM threw a massively overleveled solo soldier in, who then hid in a cloud of darkness, intentionally forcing chance to hit into fairly atrocious levels. That's not really a fun or suggested way to play the game, but I'm sure sessions like that are what make people think that 10 rounds is somehow normal. I shudder at the thought it's somehow average, though. So, yeah, whatever Next can do to avoid that, it'd be good. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Grindy D&D Next Combat
Top