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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8550517" data-attributes="member: 93670">Pretty much an insistence that fighters apparently spend the majority of encounters engaging monsters hovering 20 feet up as summarized <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/truly-understanding-the-martials-casters-discussion.686063/post-8549476" target="_blank">here</a> and that strength based fighters are incapable of using a bow or thrown weapon because they would need to be suboptimal with a nonmaxed dex for the bow or limited number of attacks that could be made with strength based weapons because unlike the quantum spellbook where the perfect spell is always available the quantum fighter is  always designed to bne worst at any given situation.  That and average<a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/truly-understanding-the-martials-casters-discussion.686063/post-8550031" target="_blank"> 5.5 damage per die is greater than average 6.5 per attack with the same scaling on dice/attack numbers</a>I assume you are talking about <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/truly-understanding-the-martials-casters-discussion.686063/post-8550404" target="_blank">this post</a>.  Yes you did math, but that math is not done in a way that models what you are trying to model for several reasons.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The math you did is the kind of breakdown you would want to do if you were looking at a situation like one of those world of warcraft raid trackers that looks at everyone's damage per second across  hundreds of attacks.  Even then it's an oversimplification that distorts things in that situation</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It's not a race where turtle & the hare style slow & steady vrs fast & intermittent averages out in meaningful ways .  Hitrates in o5e are usually around 60% or better so there is no reason  to  fractionalize the attacks that do hit<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Even if the hitrate drops  significantly due to an unusual high ac monster it still favors the  numbers still favor the higher damage attack because the smaller but reliable attacker is also affected by that AC  & in this case the attacker with the higher damage attacks also has more chances (one Xd10 firebolt vrs X[1d8+statmod+weaponmod+featmods+fighting style mods] attacks)  in a true inversion of the tortoise & the hare type of averaging you are doing.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Both firebolt and the bow need to hit the same AC so it's not like 3.x where the spell was targeting touch AC.  The only reason the fighter with a bow & 14 dex is lacking in tohit is because this situation of a monster hovering 20 feet up is one that fits squarely into the strength fighter's weak area in a way that makes them find using a less than optimal damage per round weapon to be the most optimal choice for them to make that round.  Even with that situation being their "weak" area  they still pull slightly ahead of the wizard with firebolt getting to make use of a strength it has.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This is why the spreadsheet <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BGyYy9W5Vf9xeNyIrTrJog9YdkJOTImyhmklvdKKMtI/edit?usp=sharing" target="_blank">here</a> draws out the whole process in a step by step thing you can analyze attack by attack & round by round for the various hit percentages it offers.  To quote the FAQ on it "Q: weren't there easier ways you could have modeled results of hit & resist chances?  Why show every step? A: oh heck yes.  I deliberately did the hit/miss/resist pages trying to show as much math as I could to give a peek behind the curtain & hopefully improve the level of discourse around a few areas with conventional wisdom in conflict with the reality to a shocking degree"</li> </ul>In a way that math you did is almost as bad as the earlier 5.5*X cantrip damage is greater than 6.5*X bow damage where X is number of dice/attacks. math.</blockquote>

Verification