Average DPR on Hit for Average Characters?

[GhostwheelZ]

I'm attempting to recreate the "Quick Monster Creation" table from the DMG, but instead more in-line with the abilities that PCs would have from levels 1-20 in order for it to work well. Does anyone by any chance have the average damage per round of characters, assuming that all attacks hit? It would take me forever to do the math, so if someone has already done the work I'd be grateful.

It doesn't need to be exact, just a rough estimate per level of the amount of damage a given PC would deal if their attack hit a single target enemy. For super-optimized or completely unoptimized PCs, moving the health slider for monsters isn't too hard, but I need a midpoint from which I can start.

[steeldragons]

My initial thought was, "It's not possible to come up with an 'average' damage for classed individuals" [as you said, without doing the math]. The attack types/options are too broad.

But then, it occurred to me...if you just want a level playing field/median on which to "scale up/down" as necessary...take a page from Basic/BX/BECM...and go with set weapon [attack] damage.

Everyone does a d6.

Using what seems to be 5e's "averaging formula", used for HPs of PCs and attack damage, namely: (half of xdY) +1 = z, any generic "attack" by an average person would be/do 4(d6) HP of [type] damage. "Type" is just determined by whatever weapon or spell you have them using.

A, specifically, "average [classed character] person" is going to have no ability modifier, so dagger, staff, short or longsword, battleaxe, unarmed strike, cantrip, invocation, spiritual weapon or fireball doesn't really matter...

You can scale it "up" for more capable or dangerous individuals, adding modifier bonuses +1 to +4 (I'd say, if someone has better than a +4 mod in their attack stat, that NPC deserves their own write up) and/or additional d6s. Scale down by modifiying -1 to, well, -3 at which point the person is doing 1 HP of damage...after that, it's just a miss (or, narratively, if you want to be technical, a hit that does no damage -glancing blow, doesn't pierce the armor, glides across the robes as the mage dodges, etc...).

Using another page from early editions, if you want a bit more granularity, take a page from Fighter attacks to figure your damage. Namely, you can tack on HD per 5 levels/HD of the character, as the fighter classes receive extra attacks at 5th and whatever later levels, just make it every 5 levels and call it a day for the "average" character.

So if your table will include characters of all levels up to 20th, "average damage" would then be 8 (2d6 +1 per die) @ 5th, 12 (3d6 +1 per die) @10th, etc...

[GhostwheelZ]

The thing is, I would like to take into account rogues using two-weapon fighting, fighters using greatswords along with the relevant class features (the most vanilla and easy to figure out ones), as well as feats and ability score increases. Since I'm fairly new to 5e, I'm not sure of the semi-optimal build path that most characters take, which is why I hoped that someone might have already done the work. Might you know if anyone has done so by any chance?

[bid]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1836167129 good enough?

If you always hit, a simple S&B fighter does from 1d8+2+3 to 4x(1d8+2+5):
- level 1 = 10 damage
- level 4 = 11 damage
- level 5 = 21 damage
- level 6 = 23 damage
- level 11 = 35 damage
- level 20 = 46 damage

Barbarian 19 does 32
Rogue 19 would do 52

All others are spell-dependant.

[GhostwheelZ]

Works very well, thank you :-)

[oxybe]

i would say pick a decent AC, 15-16 which i find is common enough by armored enemies or lightly armored & dexterous ones to use as your "benchmark" to hit.

afterwords, you figure out your chance to hit. so assuming you're a level 1 rogue with 16 dex, you have a +5 to hit with a shortbow.

hitting that AC 16 on 11+ means you're hitting 50% of the time. figure out your average damage (1d6+3, 6.5, the extra d6 for SA would bring it up to 10) and multiply your hit% by average damage. Since you likely have advantage on the SA, your chance to hit goes up to 75% (2 chances to get 11+, pick highest)

So your expected DPR on an AC 16 monster with your shortbow is 6.5x50% and 10x75% with SA.

or a DPR of 3.25 & 7.5

[MaxWilson]

I'm attempting to recreate the "Quick Monster Creation" table from the DMG, but instead more in-line with the abilities that PCs would have from levels 1-20 in order for it to work well. Does anyone by any chance have the average damage per round of characters, assuming that all attacks hit? It would take me forever to do the math, so if someone has already done the work I'd be grateful.

It doesn't need to be exact, just a rough estimate per level of the amount of damage a given PC would deal if their attack hit a single target enemy. For super-optimized or completely unoptimized PCs, moving the health slider for monsters isn't too hard, but I need a midpoint from which I can start.

This tool might be useful: http://maxwilson.github.io/RollWeb/Roll/

For instance, if you want to know how much damage you'll do if you hit on a 9 or better for 1d10+1d6+15 points of damage, four times per round:

avg.4.9?d10+d6+15 [answer is 59.40]

This accounts for critical hits BTW.

It handles advantage and disadvantage too. At advantage:

avg.4.9a?d10+d6+15=84.15.

At disadvantage:

avg.4.9d?d10+d6+15=34.65.

[Madeiner]

Summon Kryx (or search for his posts), he made extremely detailed math on DPR
But you need to be able to read graphics and understand basic math

[Aribar]

You may want to take a look at songoftheblade.wordpress.com/2015/09/09/improved-monster-stats-table-for-dd-5th-edition/ this blog post to see if it does what you're trying to set out to do. It makes the math a lot more sensible and explains the reasoning behind every choice made.

[Kryx]

But you need to be able to read graphics and understand basic math
Lulz.
Just to clarify: some do disagree with my methodology that arrives at 25 rounds per day, but I think the actual amount in most groups would be closer to 15. And some also disagree with some of my assumptions about how often something will happen (like hunter's mark and bonus action TWF splitting, or how often a OA happens), but those are principled arguments of "you can't make an average of that"

Overall I think my numbers are very close to actual play within the recommended encounter limits.

[Xetheral]

Overall I think my numbers are very close to actual play within the recommended encounter limits.

Out of curiousity, what are you actually claiming here? That your numbers are the average career DRP for each class across all 5e tables? That your numbers are the average daily DPR over time for the specified builds at every 5e table? Something in between? Something else?

[Kryx]

The goal of the sheet is to provide a baseline DPR for as many class/build options as possible.
DPR is based on 5e's adventuring day as outlined on DMG 84.

Groups can vary from that adventuring day. Based on In a day with combat, how many combats do you typically have between long rests? (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?469399-How-many-combats-does-your-5e-group-typically-have-between-long-rests-if-you-have-at-least-one) the DMG's recommendation is not followed by most groups and I'd expect total amount of rounds to actually be 10-20 for most groups. I aim for 25 to try to meet the expectations as it's quite important.

There is much that could affect these numbers. Fighting in dungeons often would be quite different from open world. A dungeon would likely have more cover, less ranged attacks, better AoE options, etc.

The goal, like any DPR metric, is to estimate the power level of classes and standard builds.

[Finieous]

Speaking for myself, the model is also transparent enough that you can change the assumptions (to better match a specific table or campaign, for example) and see how that changes the results. This can be very helpful even if you never plan to actually use the optimized builds and tactics (e.g. a tripmaster fighter) the model describes.

[Xetheral]

Let me rephrase my question: which measure of DPR in actual play do you expect the DPR calculations from your sheet to be close to?

[Kryx]

Let me rephrase my question: which measure of DPR in actual play do you expect the DPR calculations from your sheet to be close to?
I expect every DPR number presented to match the average DPR on a typical adventuring day given average circumstances.

You've voiced your concerns in the past. You, and some others, expect a perfect system or think it isn't valuable. The feedback that I've received from others (here, reddit, enworld) has been nearly all positive.

[Doof]

At least EVERYONE beats the poor Moon Druid :(

edit: Time to wipe my tears on my 9th-level spell slot I guess :smallfrown:

[Kryx]

At least EVERYONE beats the poor Moon Druid :(
That needs serious buffs post level 4. Currently moon druid is just a huge bag of onion HP, some utility, and spells. Not really what a shapeshifter is after imo.

I've suggested some houserules elsewhere that basically makes a Moon Druid able to boost his Wild Shape CR by burning Spells. To get rid of the onion HP I reduce the "special" wildshape usage to 1 while keeping 2 normal utility wildshapes.
Moon Druid Potential Houserules (https://docs.google.com/document/d/10oMeRVNt26eoC_i1ueWAN3lxDXZe2YkRzq7XxUWfZw4/edit?usp=sharing). Still a huge work in progress.

[Saggo]

That needs serious buffs post level 4. Currently moon druid is just a huge bag of onion HP, some utility, and spells. Not really what a shapeshifter is after imo.

I've suggested some houserules elsewhere that basically makes a Moon Druid able to boost his Wild Shape CR by burning Spells. To get rid of the onion HP I reduce the "special" wildshape usage to 1 while keeping 2 normal utility wildshapes.
Moon Druid Potential Houserules. Still a huge work in progress.

I saw you modeled the beast shapes but not the elemental shapes, there a reason for it or just a time thing?

[Xetheral]

I expect every DPR number presented to match the average DPR on a typical adventuring day given average circumstances.

You've voiced your concerns in the past. You, and some others, expect a perfect system or think it isn't valuable. The feedback that I've received from others (here, reddit, enworld) has been nearly all positive.

I apologize if I've come across as overly critical! I think your work is fantastic, and your attention to detail is commendable. I recognize that a perfect model is impossible, and I think your work has a great deal of value. You've produced a very detailed model, and, having looked over it at some depth (although not exhaustively), I'm confident in your calculations and general methodology (even if I disagree with you on your model's level of precision).

Where I'm less confident is the interpretation of the results. The more complex a model becomes the easier it becomes to misinterpret, particularly as the number of potential interactions between the variables grows. Additionally, communicating an interpretation of a model can be tricky, particularly in a venue like a forum.

For example, you claim that you expect your model's results "to match the average DPR on a typical adventuring day given average circumstances". That's ambiguous, because there are multiple possible average DPRs to which you could be referring. You could be referring to "average DPR over an adventuring day" or you could be referring to "average daily DPR over time". These are two different concepts (the second is an average of the first), and I'd argue that only the latter option describes your model.

Put differently, the former interpretation tells a user of your model that if they add up all the damage they do on a particular adventuring day, and divide that sum by the number of rounds of combat, the result will closely match your model. The latter interpretation tells a user that if they do the same thing every adventuring day, over time the average of those daily figures will match your model.

[Kryx]

I saw you modeled the beast shapes but not the elemental shapes, there a reason for it or just a time thing?
It's intended to use the creatures from the MM. The two I put below are just 2 of the highest cr possible from pf that I ported to 5e using the pf->5e converter in my sig. It made me realize that beasts only go so high and monstrosities would be needed.

I'd have to port lots more beasts and elementals to make this idea fully usable.

I have a moon druid player now, but he's a bit lazy in telling me what forms he'd like.

[Saggo]

It's intended to use the creatures from the MM. The two I put below are just 2 of the highest cr possible from pf that I ported to 5e using the pf->5e converter in my sig. It made me realize that beasts only go so high and monstrosities would be needed.

I'd have to port lots more beasts and elementals to make this idea fully usable.

I have a moon druid player now, but he's a bit lazy in telling me what forms he'd like.

I see. I'm playing Moon Druid right now. What about your DPR sheet? Or are you just sticking with single charge beasts for adventuring days, since elementals take 2.

[Kryx]

What about my DPR sheet? I'll have to do some better math once this idea is fully fleshed out.

1 special shape per short rest is intended to get rid of the onion druid who is just hp. Allowing higher cr allows higher hp, more damage, more interesting abilities.

It also uses resources to get that higher CR.

Not sure if elemental is balanced vs beasts/monstrosities. I'll have to compare some creatures and port more. Ideally CR would say they are equal, but who knows.

[Saggo]

What about my DPR sheet? I'll have to do some better math once this idea is fully fleshed out.

I only see beast shapes modeled in the DPS sheet, no elementals, was curious if there was a reason or if it just wasn't done.

[Kryx]

I only see beast shapes modeled in the DPS sheet, no elementals, was curious if there was a reason or if it just wasn't done.
I've only done the RAW version. That's why. Still thinking through this other version.

[Saggo]

I've only done the RAW version. That's why. Still thinking through this other version.

Moon Druid RAW gets Elemental Wild Shape at 10, so Earth, Air, Water, or Fire Elemental shapes per 2 charges. Earth and Air get Multiattack(x2) Slam for 2d8+5 (+8 To Hit). Damage die overall is strictly less than Giant Scorpion, but to hit is doubled. Assuming I made the correct modifications to your model, that to hit increases Druid DPR from 16.6 to 19.7. I only modified levels 11 and 12 and to be honest I'm not sure if/where you account for Wild Shape charges use, so it's just a rough draft.

Edit: Found a couple mistakes I made and it came out 18.8 at level 11 and 12 instead. But still an increase.

[Kryx]

Ya, it has elemental which I didn't do. Though depending how it's played 3 uses might not last the whole day.

I didn't look at it heavy, just enough to get a baseline for beasts.