PC Lifeplanner Spreadsheet - damage/defense statistics

[MarauderX]

Thanks for providing this. It will be a very useful springboard into more complex computing. I wonder if Bill Slavisek's spreadsheets were anywhere near as nice. I guess he better be able to back up his work, as no one thoroughly double checked his numbers before 4E was released.

 

[loisel]

Thanks, Loisel. You caught a mistake in my damage formula. It was adding lvl/2 damage, since I copied it from the TH formula. I've corrected now.

I'm not understanding the AC either. Take the scim elf ranger (I always look at that one because it's simple and I know it well.)

At level 2 (say), by my count, he should have +3 (hide) +1 (enh) +4 (dex) +1 (level) +1 (TWD) +10 (base) = 20. (EDIT: I had an error here before.) Did you not give him TWD or something?

The Archer ranger also has a mysterious AC, but also I don't understand why there isn't a +1 difference between the archer and the TWF rangers, because of TWD. (Likewise for Reflex.)

EDIT: also, the difference in AC between a TWF Ranger and a shielded Rogue should be approx. 1, no? That's because a shielded Rogue with a heavy shield gets +2 from his shield. He can also get either armor spec, or shield spec, for another +1. So Hide+Shield is +6 max. Whereas the TWF Ranger gets Hide +3, Hide spec +1, TWD +1, so +5...

 

[Splart]

Thanks all for the feedback. I've gone through the sheets and found some errors and improvements in feat orders in my sheets and an error in the formulas.

I've removed the second armor specialization feat from as appropriate. Since both are typed feat bonuses, they don't stack.

The TWD has been removed from the longbow ranger.

I added a pit fighter ranger just to see how it looks. Not bad, but the Stormwarden path still is better because the sheer damage output makes up for the +1 AC for the Pitfighter.

TWD moved earlier in the feats for the melee rangers.

I found an error in the Miss damage formulas using the wrong stat. I've fixed, and this has put the Stormwarden again as the solid owner of sheer damage output.

New pics and sheet above.

Other comments?

 

[loisel]

Other comments?

I think your Ranger SW damage is wrong from levels 1-10 and levels 16-30. From 1-10, you're counting some auto damage and some miss damage which isn't there. You should really fix that, it's a difference of as much as 10DPR. For 16-30, you're forgetting the second auto damage ability, there should be 2x Dex damage as auto damage, per round, so again you're making an error of 6-8DPR. This is pretty substantial.

Uhm, I hope the other characters don't have as many errors as this one.

 

[Nail]

I wonder if Bill Slavisek's spreadsheets were anywhere near as nice.

Erm....Bill used spreadsheets? It sure would be great if this were true.

Although the AC and Atk progression does look like someone went over the numbers once or twice, there are enough "Huh?" moments when I look over the numbers that I'm not convinced he did a lot of numerical analysis.

YMMV, and really: I hope I'm wrong. It sure would be nice if the core chassis (at least) of 4e was numerically solid. Of course, we all know it's gonna get broken with future splatbooks.....

 

[Nail]

On the other hand, I find that because of the heavy damage rogues do when flanking, if partnered with a marking fighter, they often give the fighter free attacks. It's not exact, but it does account for some additional damage when the rogue does have CA.

Don't I know it! (DMed Splart et al thru part of KotS, and the tactic became SOP in short order.)

So Splart, give us the bottom line: What's the best (has the best "give to get" ratio) Ranger path, the best Rogue path, etc? Sum it up, man!

 

[Splart]

I think your Ranger SW damage is wrong from levels 1-10 and levels 16-30. From 1-10, you're counting some auto damage and some miss damage which isn't there.

This was a known design "feature," but since it bothered you, I've fixed it. I've added a level qualifier to both stat auto and stat miss damage above.

For 16-30, you're forgetting the second auto damage ability, there should be 2x Dex damage as auto damage, per round

Not forgotten. PHB 115 reads, "two adjacent enemies (your choice) take lightning damage. . ." My DM would rule that two adjacent enemies means two different adjacent enemies, not one adjacent enemy twice. Your DM may vary. . . Feel free to calculate by adding in manual bonuses to damage to lines 160 - 174 in line with the dex bonus at those levels if you want to see the effect of allowing double strikes on the same enemy.

Uhm, I hope the other characters don't have as many errors as this one.

I'll admit I've enjoyed creating the spreadsheet itself more than optimizing each character on it. There's plenty of room for changing up the characters, and my first goal was to put together the structure to enable that. For the formulas, I've trued up my DPR against both your 1st level ranger and 11th level stormwarden, and they are nearly a perfect match. If you find my spreadsheet interesting or useful, then I'd enjoy continuing working out other enhancements and optimized feat ladders. If that's not something you want to do, no hard feelings.

In any case, I'm now starting on a new spreadsheet to put the statistical spotlight on one PC at a time, and hopefully provide more guidance on which feat or paragon path to choose when. More on that later.

-Splart

 

[Revinor]

Not forgotten. PHB 115 reads, "two adjacent enemies (your choice) take lightning damage. . ." My DM would rule that two adjacent enemies means two different adjacent enemies, not one adjacent enemy twice.

That's correct. This is why you deal 2xDex to one foe (one time from 11th lvl ability and once from 16th lvl ability), plus another 1xDex to another (from other half of 16th lvl power). Of course, you can also deal 1xDex to 3 enemies.

 

[loisel]

Not forgotten. PHB 115 reads, "two adjacent enemies (your choice) take lightning damage. . ."

Like Revinor says, I'm not talking about applying the L16 paragon path feature twice to the same guy. It's the L11 and L16 path features, which are different features (with different type damage!) and you can put both of them on the same guy. So in a round, you can do 2x dex to one guy plus 1x dex to another, or 1x dex to three guys, etc...

If you find my spreadsheet interesting or useful, then I'd enjoy continuing working out other enhancements and optimized feat ladders. If that's not something you want to do, no hard feelings.

I think this is a good idea, people are using this and will be using this (as well as the other statistical threads I've linked to in the DPR thread) for sure. Your ideas for more spreadsheets are good, but I think a well debugged spreadsheet (and you can see that it takes a while to debug) is much more valuable to the community.

Please continue with this spreadsheet!

 

[Splart]

Whoa. Ok, you're right. It is 2 * Dex for one target. Well, that puts our Stormwarden solidly out in front again on DPR, and about equal on Gives to Get even after the lower AC. I've added in the second auto damage into the manual columns since it's a special case that's not worth recoding the general formulas for.

As a free throw-in bonus, I fixed the 2 W at level 21+ function as well. New pics and spreadsheet above.

I think this is a good idea, people are using this and will be using this (as well as the other statistical threads I've linked to in the DPR thread) for sure. Your ideas for more spreadsheets are good, but I think a well debugged spreadsheet (and you can see that it takes a while to debug) is much more valuable to the community.

Please continue with this spreadsheet!

Thanks! I'm not sure that anyone actually is using it. :/ Is it clear how to enter data? I haven't seen anyone with an optimized char suggestion for other classes or corrections other than ranger. . .

--Splart