Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AngryPurpleCyclops" data-source="post: 4695374" data-attributes="member: 82732">You're kind of obtuse.  Because you don't actually know the chance that a character will be hit by an attack, (we've been using 50% but that's not the correct number just an estimation) but you do know the exact chance that shield is going to come into play on any attack using attacks is better than hits.  Shield always affects 4 numbers out of 20 of any attack vs AC or reflex (unless the creature needs to roll a 16 or above in which case it affects less but I haven't seen a monster that needed to roll a 16 yet so I didn't factor that in.)Well it's pretty clear you're the master of the obvious, but we've digressed far away from the OP.  The intent of this thread was to determine if shield was too powerful.  We've spent a lot of time comparing it to a racial power with a similar effect.  I think it's clear to virtually everyone on the thread second chance out performs shield in utility.  This doesn't even factor in how your use of shield totally devastates shields utility.  All these numbers are based upon the "full disclosure" method.And if you want to talk about "funny math" I'm still waiting on you to explain how shield blocks nearly 6 hits out of 20 with your previous example.  No, this is you applying the straw man logical fallacy to my argument.  You're doubling up here and trying to apply the appeal to popularity logical fallacy simultaneously.  If you want to "appeal to popularity" take a look at both this thread and the ones on several other rpg forums (gleemax, pen and paper, etc) the vast majority of people feel it's not over powered. On this thread you're one of only two people who have posted it's over powered and the other stopped posting.actually all my posts have been serious, you just try to circumvent the reality by proposing preposterous counter arguments with horrible math based upon unsupported assumption.  You don't seem to have even a rudimentary grasp of intellectual debate, logic, probability or the scientific method.  Now you're switching gears and attacking me (ad hominem fallacy) instead of actually rebutting any points being made with anything other than superfluous fluff. This is you projecting.  You did exactly what you accuse me of doing I never implied second chance had a 25% chance of impacting each hit.  YOU ACTUALLY MADE CALCULATIONS based upon shield reducing each hit by 29+%.  From the get go I have stated that I was calculating the odds on any given hit.  You have math on this thread that openly states shield can block more than one hit.  You're just becoming an obnoxious forum troll at this point looking to move your baseless off topic arguments into flames.  The thread is supposed to be about shield being over powered.  I defy you to show with real math that shield is more powerful than shield of faith (another level 2 utility power).  You rant and ramble endlessly about missed opportunity to use second chance having some meaning but I have stated a half dozen times on here why it doesn't.  You can't refute that so you ignore it.Elric has disputed your math but he is also moving very tangentially into a dissertation on probability of lower expected average damage which really isn't what this is about either.  The real question is how will shield impact the game from a play balance perspective.  You've pontificated endlessly with horrible math and baseless assumptions about it's relative power being too great but you haven't shown that to be the case at all.I tried repeatedly to explain that when you just focus on hits you're introducing more error in the calculation but you refuse to accept that.  Elric's last post went to great detail to explain this to you:He's obviously been in college much more recently than I have but I worked at Intel for 6 years and statistical analysis and probability were part of my every day job.  I couldn't have pointed you to Jensen but I repeatedly tried to make you understand that your position was faulty.  I think it goes beyond this, in that looking at the entire 20 number range also eliminates half the error created by assuming 50% hits.  These calculation still don't take into account that minions probably account for 10% of all the attacks so we should be starting from 70% and not 75% and we're still discounting the fact that second chance is much more likely to block a power with a debilitating ongoing effect.</blockquote>

Verification