Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 8054269" data-attributes="member: 72555">DPR calculations answer questions of value.I mean, the fact that DPR calculations say that Monks and Rangers have issues, and then we actually add up damage done by said classes and ... they are only above a grapple-bard ... it sort of indicates that they (as classes) aren't very good at helping reduce HP to 0.How deadly a class feels is part of its identity, and how fast it reduces opponents HP to 0 is part of that.Arguing &quot;I felt deadly&quot; and &quot;the fact you didn't feel deadly is just your opinion&quot; is nearly pointless.&nbsp; Arguing &quot;actually, when everything is going my way, I still am less than 2/3 as deadly as that dude over there&quot; is a nice, solid point to make.I mean, I get that Paladins have good burst damage.&nbsp; But if it turns out their adventuring day damage contribution also matches the &quot;sustained&quot; damage classes while also being able to burst heavier when it matters is something that is really hard to determine the answer to without doing DPR calculations.Not just naive ones.&nbsp; Doing ones with various AC, with various assumptions, with various numbers of foes, etc.&nbsp; Doing them when you pretend &quot;there is only one fight that matters, burn all resources&quot; vs &quot;how can you efficiently pour out damage over a day&quot;.&nbsp; And when you efficiently pour out damage, what is the focus trade off?Suppose I am playing with a frankenbuild paladin/warlock/bard and another barbarian/rogue and a pure fighter.&nbsp; Is my frankenbuild's damage output actually big, or does it just look like it because I threw the kitchen sink at it?&nbsp; Do I tone it back because it will make other less insane builds useless, or can I have fun with a frankenbuild without breaking the game?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 8054269, member: 72555"] DPR calculations answer questions of value. I mean, the fact that DPR calculations say that Monks and Rangers have issues, and then we actually add up damage done by said classes and ... they are only above a grapple-bard ... it sort of indicates that they (as classes) aren't very good at helping reduce HP to 0. How [b]deadly[/b] a class feels is part of its identity, and how fast it reduces opponents HP to 0 is part of that. Arguing "I felt deadly" and "the fact you didn't feel deadly is just your opinion" is nearly pointless. Arguing "actually, when everything is going my way, I still am less than 2/3 as deadly as that dude over there" is a nice, solid point to make. I mean, I get that Paladins have good burst damage. But if it turns out their adventuring day damage contribution also matches the "sustained" damage classes while also being able to burst heavier when it matters is something that is [b]really hard[/b] to determine the answer to [b]without doing DPR calculations[/b]. Not just naive ones. Doing ones with various AC, with various assumptions, with various numbers of foes, etc. Doing them when you pretend "there is only one fight that matters, burn all resources" vs "how can you efficiently pour out damage over a day". And when you efficiently pour out damage, what is the focus trade off? Suppose I am playing with a frankenbuild paladin/warlock/bard and another barbarian/rogue and a pure fighter. Is my frankenbuild's damage output actually big, or does it just look like it because I threw the kitchen sink at it? Do I tone it back because it will make other less insane builds useless, or can I have fun with a frankenbuild without breaking the game? [/QUOTE]

Verification