D&D General Why DPR Sucks: Discussing Whiteroom Theorycrafting

[grimslade]

Having only one metric is always going to be skewed. The reason people use DPR is the majority of word count in the rules is related to combat. It is a natural simplification to reduce the majority to the sum total. I also think the clickbait-y nature of InsertTerm Sucks, precludes any actual discussion. Many people love to play their Monks and have tales of their clutch stunning blows or narrow escapes to back up their love. Insert any character class that is built suboptimally and people will still love that character. The game does not need to be played at peak performance for everyone.
But, when there is a feeling that there is mechanically something off in a class, we will need to compare some math. If you are discussing the quality of a baseball player, Batting Average is going to factor. It may not be the end-all and be-all, but it is a metric. It matters a heck of a lot more to a DH as opposed to a pitcher. But if your player is not contributing to the offense, it needs to pick up the slack in other metrics. What metric is going to show favorably on the monk?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

But, when there is a feeling that there is mechanically something off in a class, we will need to compare some math. If you are discussing the quality of a baseball player, Batting Average is going to factor. It may not be the end-all and be-all, but it is a metric.

I feel like I just wrote about this, and either you didn't read it, or you aren't familiar with baseball statistics.

Yes, batting average is a statistic. I could have used RBIs, but that would have been ... cruel ... to the optimizers.

Batting average is a good one to use because it is both very well-known (popular), fairly easy to calculate, and also an incredibly misleading measure of offense .... sound familiar?

Before even getting into really advanced metrics, or adjusting for park/era, anyone with half a thought would quickly identify that:
1. On base percentage is more important that just how often you hit the ball. After all, it doesn't matter if you get there by a walk or a hit.

2. Power (whether you hit a single, double, triple, or home run) is also kinda sorta important.

So a better offensive stat is OPS (on base and slugging). It's better than just DPR.

And, of course, none of this has to do with the key difference of D&D being a game with other players. So DPR is very poor at analyzing group effects (in general).

DPR is fine so long as its limitations are acknowledged; choosing between two options on a single character? It's great! But once you start to get into any serious comparison, the value goes down significantly.

 

[jgsugden]

...
My issue with the Monk is that their damage basically stops scaling here. Sure, they have flurry for an extra attack, and their martial arts die keeps going up, but the rogue's damage continues to scale and the Monk never gets something like an improved flurry to keep up. Past 5th level, the Monk's damage doesn't keep up with the rogue's, when before 5th level it does...0

11th level monk with 20 dex using 1 ki for flurry: 4d8+20 = 38.
11th level rogue with 20 dex using rapier and shortsword with sneak attack attack. d8+7d6+5 = 34.

Want to toss in a rare weapon of choice? Rogue chooses a +2 weapon, Monk Flame tongue short sword. Rogue adds 2 damage, monk adds 14 (but misses out on the raised to hit chance).

Level 17? Monk using 1 ki does 4d10+20 for 42. Rogue does d8+10d6+5 = 44.5. The monk is only slightly behind the rogue there - and again, if you give them a flame tongue they may outdistance that rogue, yet.

A monk can't hold up to the nova damage potential of a paladin or a GWM melee character against a low AC opponent, but their damage is respectable and you can toss in key stuns that change a battle.

 

[ccs]

DPR analysis is only useful when other things are equal.

And only useful when talking about damage.

Right now? I'm playing a PF1 game where I made a PF version of Bree, my 5e Fey/Chain Warlock. It worked out that making her a PF Summoner with some optional rules out of the race guide was the closest way to copy my 5e Warlock stuff.
DPR? Pfft. No matter what character you compare her to she'll always be nigh useless DPRwise. AT BEST (barring crits) she'll only ever do d8-2 damage. And with the DMs approval? I made a tiny eidolon - it looks like a pseudo dragon & does at best 3d4 damage. Sometimes it'll poison you to sleep. It's not a combat beast.
If DPR was what defined a useful/effective character? I'd be banned from the table.
Bree's like that Shane Battier guy used as an example in the opening post though. She makes things better. Or at least more fun.... No matter the scene, even combat, she's doing something useful. She might never do more than incidental damage, but she's got options, skills, is helmed by a creative player who engages with the game, & is backed up by a party.

And she's exactly like that in her guise as a 5e Warlock.
The only difference is the amount of rules needed to do it. (much less effort needed in 5e. )

 

[Xeviat]

11th level monk with 20 dex using 1 ki for flurry: 4d8+20 = 38.
11th level rogue with 20 dex using rapier and shortsword with sneak attack attack. d8+7d6+5 = 34.

Want to toss in a rare weapon of choice? Rogue chooses a +2 weapon, Monk Flame tongue short sword. Rogue adds 2 damage, monk adds 14 (but misses out on the raised to hit chance).

Level 17? Monk using 1 ki does 4d10+20 for 42. Rogue does d8+10d6+5 = 44.5. The monk is only slightly behind the rogue there - and again, if you give them a flame tongue they may outdistance that rogue, yet.

A monk can't hold up to the nova damage potential of a paladin or a GWM melee character against a low AC opponent, but their damage is respectable and you can toss in key stuns that change a battle.

But your monk is using a resource to keep even with the rogue who isn't having to use a resource. Plus, if they're dealing with a 65% hit chance, the rogue's sneak attack chance is 87.5% when using two-weapon fighting.

In a long day, of 6 encounters that each go to 3 rounds, the Monk doesn't have enough ki to get through every round of the day. The monk really should have gotten an extra attack at 11th level.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

But your monk is using a resource to keep even with the rogue who isn't having to use a resource. Plus, if they're dealing with a 65% hit chance, the rogue's sneak attack chance is 87.5% when using two-weapon fighting.

In a long day, of 6 encounters that each go to 3 rounds, the Monk doesn't have enough ki to get through every round of the day. The monk really should have gotten an extra attack at 11th level.

You bring up a good point. However, if you really dig it apart, I'm not sure it supports what it looks like on the surface. See, monks have a limited short rest resource as part of their standard operations, while rogues in general don't have limited resources--they are an at-will class. Therefore, you have to compare a monk using an appropriate amount of his limited resources over the same course of time as the rogue using an appropriate amount of his limited resources (ie, none of none).

Since the design assumption for an adventuring day is 6-8 encounters (1) with 2 short rests. This means a character is assumed to have 3x any short rest resources available.

In the example you gave with 6 encounters of 3 round each, that's 18 total rounds, or 6 rounds between a short rest. Any monk of 6th level or higher has sufficient ki to use one each round.(2)


(1) I know some of you like to claim this doesn't necessarily mean combat encounters, but I think that really is the design intent, even if the wording doesn't make it explicit.
(2) Of course, you may not use one every round, and some times you might use more, but that goes beyond this scope of this post.

 

[Xeviat]

In the example you gave with 6 encounters of 3 round each, that's 18 total rounds, or 6 rounds between a short rest. Any monk of 6th level or higher has sufficient ki to use one each round.(2)

Woops! You're totally right. Ok, so there is a point where the monk will be using flurry every round. But, they have to pay for that with their bonus action, while the Rogue has nifty bonus action stuff for free. If the monk trades their bonus action for a dodge or a dash, they're giving up a ton of damage, while the rogue isn't giving up quite as much.

Then again, maybe the rogue is. Going from an 87.5% chance to land a sneak attack to a 65% is a drop in damage. Hmm, I wonder if it works out in the long run.

Thanks for helping turn my view around!

 

[Guest 6801328]

DPR analysis is fun.

The mistake is to use it as the basis for any conclusions about playing the game.

 

[Xeviat]

DPR analysis is fun.

The mistake is to use it as the basis for any conclusions about playing the game.

I mean, it is useful when comparing two options on an otherwise same character. No one wants to accidentally pick a terrible option that isn't going to do what they wanted it to.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I mean, it is useful when comparing two options on an otherwise same character. No one wants to accidentally pick a terrible option that isn't going to do what they wanted it to.

Yup, that's fair. My wording was poor.