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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Plane Sailing" data-source="post: 236671" data-attributes="member: 114">While that might be true, it still obscures the issue of the reduced chance of missing with all attacks.I think the proper maths for probability is so simple that there is no point in taking the chance of attempting a simplistic solution (which in the case of S&F has some things which are just plain wrong)????? I'm afraid I don't understand how you derived this bit? (not doubting you, just don't understand it). In the example you give (two attacks, both hitting on a 17) I'm sure that the chance of -at least one- hitting is 36%. (I wonder if we are talking at slightly cross purposes? In order to get the "average number of attacks", are you effectively adding in the attack "twice" in the circumstance where both hit? Although that would apparently count for the "missing 4%" between our two expectations, I don't think that is right... but I guess I'm probably talking about the "probability at this point", while you are talking about the "effective average over a long period of time" ??Anyhow, as I mention at the end of my post, the issue *isn't* average damage - which is rarely important to know because of the significance of all the other variables - but how likely you are to get at least one hit in (which as you note at one point is sometimes the critical issue - if the target is on his last legs, with only a couple of hit points left, for instance). The chance of hitting with at least one attack in a multiple attack flurry is easy to calculate BTW, sicne it is merely the opposite of the chance of all attacks missing... just multiplying the figures together again.e.g.A Monk who normally gets +4/+1, and attacking an AC 17 Wizard (for instance), could take his normal full attack (chance of missing = 0.6 x 0.75 = 0.45, thus 55% of hitting at least once.) Or he could flurry for +2/+2/-1 (chance of missing = 0.7 x 0.7 x 0.85 = 0.4165, thus 58% chance of hitting at least once)Apologies for the above to those with no interest in maths... move along, nothing to see here <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I know that we are both on the same side here <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Flurry of Blows is an excellent ability, and especially since you can get full Str on both attacks if I were to create a Monk character I would make his Str (and then Con) his highest stats, without a doubt. I wouldn't bother with Wis for the AC bonus because although it is really handy and cool... I'd rather get the benefit elsewhere.I'd love to play my next character as a monk. Heck I've got about half a dozen character concepts that I'd love to play!I wonder how it would work out playing a LN druid-monk? From a RP angle he could be an interesting "one with nature" guy, from a metagaming angle it would be great to get that Magic Fang spell <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Shillelagh isn't too shabby either <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Cheers</blockquote>

Verification