D&D 5E The impact of overkill damage

[FrogReaver]

Yes, it's because frequency of killing blows. Which I said, and which CR distribution is a red herring for, largely because the sim treats targets as bags of hitpoints the single PC chews through to arrive at the frequency of killing blows. The important consideration is this frequency of killing blows -- this is the only place overkill happens. Arguing over the which CR distribution is better is therefor a red herring -- it's an artificial method of generating frequency of killing blows that doesn't look like any real game but creates arguments as if it does matter.

It does matter for the sim. If you change the hp frequencies it randomly generates then it's output on overkill damage will change. I'm not sure how you can argue against this point. That it has that effect and a decent portion of this conversation has been about a particular sim makes it not a red herring. In fact you just noted the mechanism by which it has that particular effect - by modifying the sims frequency of killing blows.

And I'll repeat again that it doesn't have any bearing on our particular discussion other than incorrect claims that it's a red herring. Not everything in this discussion is about your points.

What matters is making an assumption about how often killing blows occur and seeing what that does to overkill. This is why I used your suggestion of 1 kill per combat, paired with an assumption of average 3 rounds per combat and then looking to see how many attacks the PC builds do in 3 rounds, 1 of which is a killing blow. Viola, frequency of killing blows is 1 out of 6 attacks. The higher f is (the denominator), the better overkill looks for all builds.

Right. I don't think we are in actual disagreement on this point other than your desire to call counterpoints about the sims methodology red herrings.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Now you've lost me. Let's say you there are 2 PC's with identical DPR. The first has 2 attacks and kills the enemy on his first attack and has nothing to swing at with his 2nd. The other has 1 attack and kills the enemy on his first attack. Why would you not be counting that 2nd unmade attack in any numbers? It matters just as much as the single attack character wasting more damage on his last attack. That is Attacks not made that could be made if more enemies were present need accounted for. Whether you count it as overkill or name it something different it has the same effect.

You answered the question in the first line -- if they have the same DPR, it's because you're assuming that PC 1's damage all lands, and so does PC 2's. Then you immediately switch to a different frame and ask what happens if not all of PC 1's damage lands? Well, for starters, they don't have the same DPR anymore.

This is my point -- if you're using DPR as it's usually calculated, you cannot ignore final blows because the DPR calculation didn't.

It's also why I made my model using DPA - damage per attack - and then calculated final DPR.

 

[FrogReaver]

You answered the question in the first line -- if they have the same DPR, it's because you're assuming that PC 1's damage all lands, and so does PC 2's. Then you immediately switch to a different frame and ask what happens if not all of PC 1's damage lands? Well, for starters, they don't have the same DPR anymore.

This is my point -- if you're using DPR as it's usually calculated, you cannot ignore final blows because the DPR calculation didn't.

It's also why I made my model using DPA - damage per attack - and then calculated final DPR.

I don't think it matters whether you aren't apply applying damage due to doing more damage than an enemies hp or whether you aren't applying damage because your 2nd attack on this current round has nothing left to hit.

 

[Ovinomancer]

It does matter for the sim. If you change the hp frequencies it randomly generates then it's output on overkill damage will change. I'm not sure how you can argue against this point. That it has that effect and a decent portion of this conversation has been about a particular sim makes it not a red herring. In fact you just noted the mechanism by which it has that particular effect - by modifying the sims frequency of killing blows.

And I'll repeat again that it doesn't have any bearing on our particular discussion other than incorrect claims that it's a red herring. Not everything in this discussion is about your points.

That you continue to think it does matter means that you're locked into arguing the parameters of the sim rather than realizing that the sim is just looking for the frequency of killing blows in a flawed way and moving past that to just looking at how to estimate frequency of killing blows. Arguing about the CR distribution in that sim is a red herring -- it won't go anywhere because it has nowhere to go.

Right. I don't think we are in actual disagreement on this point other than your desire to call counterpoints about the sims methodology red herrings.

If you're in agreement with me, then you've already realized that the CR distribution in the sim is arbitrary and that it's function is to estimate frequency of killing blows. If you've done that, then you've also realized that arguing over arbitrary things is a red herring -- it won't ever answer any questions. Or, do you think that if you get the right CR distribution that the sim will suddenly spit out answers you like? If so, you're just data mining, which is another red herring.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I don't think it matters whether you aren't apply applying damage due to doing more damage than an enemies hp or whether you aren't applying damage because your 2nd attack on this current round has nothing left to hit.

For DPR it doesn't. You do not consider how many attacks are used in DPR calculations, you use all attacks and all damage applies. If you want to evaluate overkill's impact on DPR, you have to use the same assumption set, not arbitrarily use new criteria to evaluate things.

By the by, in your example, the overkill for both if you do consider the useless attack is the same -- assuming the target hp is the same. If it isn't, then you're looking at specific instances and not using the infinite trials assumption that DPR rest on, thereby using another new assumption that doesn't underpin DPR.

Again, this is why I used DPA rather than DPR.

 

[FrogReaver]

That you continue to think it does matter means that you're locked into arguing the parameters of the sim rather than realizing that the sim is just looking for the frequency of killing blows in a flawed way and moving past that to just looking at how to estimate frequency of killing blows. Arguing about the CR distribution in that sim is a red herring -- it won't go anywhere because it has nowhere to go.

It isn't a red herring when talking about the sim. You apparently can't believe I can discuss points about the sim while simultaneously discussing points not related to the sim. I assure you I can.

If you're in agreement with me, then you've already realized that the CR distribution in the sim is arbitrary and that it's function is to estimate frequency of killing blows.

That's agreed.

If you've done that, then you've also realized that arguing over arbitrary things is a red herring -- it won't ever answer any questions. Or, do you think that if you get the right CR distribution that the sim will suddenly spit out answers you like? If so, you're just data mining, which is another red herring.

This is not. It's not a red herring in relation to the sim. Showing the sim used incorrect assumptions was an important part of the discussion. Defend that work against claims it was a red herring is also an important part of the discussion.

I believe D&D sims when placed with lifelike assumptions will spit out lifelike results. Do you not believe that?

 

[FrogReaver]

By the by, in your example, the overkill for both if you do consider the useless attack is the same -- assuming the target hp is the same. If it isn't, then you're looking at specific instances and not using the infinite trials assumption that DPR rest on, thereby using another new assumption that doesn't underpin DPR.

Right, that's why I am saying the overkill effect on the last enemy in the encounter is equal for all PC's so long as DPR is equal. That's an important point in this discussion IMO and why I insist on looking at overkill effects in terms of an infinite trial of encounters instead of an infinite trail of enemy after enemy.

 

[Ovinomancer]

It isn't a red herring when talking about the sim. You apparently can't believe I can discuss points about the sim while simultaneously discussing points not related to the sim. I assure you I can.



That's agreed.



This is not. It's not a red herring in relation to the sim. Showing the sim used incorrect assumptions was an important part of the discussion. Defend that work against claims it was a red herring is also an important part of the discussion.

I believe D&D sims when placed with lifelike assumptions will spit out lifelike results. Do you not believe that?

So, you agree it doesn't matter, unless you decide it matters so that it's not a red herring? I mean, okay, knock yourself out arguing for the relevance of something you agree is ultimately irrelevant.

 

[FrogReaver]

So, you agree it doesn't matter, unless you decide it matters so that it's not a red herring? I mean, okay, knock yourself out arguing for the relevance of something you agree is ultimately irrelevant.

I've maintained my position that it's not a red herring in relation to the sim. Yet here you are going down a rabbit hole about whether something is a red herring or not - a totally unproductive discussion. Serious question... do you set out to try and start unproductive discussions just because someone disagrees with you about something as trivial as whether something is a red herring? I mean why are you even going back and forth with me on that?

 

[FrogReaver]

Personally I think this whole red herring discussion is itself the true red herring.