KPR King Candidates 5e [cross post]

[borg286]

Please see my thread (https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/tips-tactics/898-kpr-king-candidates-5e) on D&D Beyond
Here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Bwv7pfPC90BqZVPMu19T075-6cwkphdPJQe1d8gTVbQ/edit#gid=1028089952) is the Google Doc spreadsheet. If you post here, or simply update the spreadsheet it will make it onto the main thread for others to see.

[LudicSavant]

I have a few questions about the rules and how they were arrived at. It says they are based on "some discussion" but I am not sure where said discussions are listed.

1) Do the AC numbers account for only the base AC of monsters, or is it intended to account for monsters making proper use of their defensive abilities, like the "effective AC" guidelines? For example, a creature with a base AC of 17 that casts Shield and Greater Invisibility obviously is harder to hit than a creature with just 17 AC.
2) How did you arrive at 4.2 rounds per encounter?
3) How did you arrive at 4.4 encounters against a challenge = level monster per day? Isn't the DMG guidelines 6-8 Medium-Hard encounters per adventuring day?
4) What is the amount of time between encounters? After all, it's not unusual for a spell with 10 minute or 1 hour duration to last for multiple encounters in a dungeon environment.
5) How did you arrive at 10% chance of opportunity attack, 15% for polearms (despite these actually allowing a larger range of movement for enemies without triggering OAs), and 50% for polearm master? Is it conceivable that any other factors may be judged as increasing the likelihood of opportunity attacks?
6) Under your rules, how does one calculate the damage contribution from party buffs? I know, for example, that Bless potentially adds a great deal of DPR, but how much it would add over 4.2 rounds obviously depends on your party composition.
7) What are the rules for multiple target attacks, such as Fireball?
8) What are the rules for conditional attacks, like Booming Blade? Surely a higher chance than opportunity attacks (since "any movement" is an easier condition than "leaves your range")
9) Why is the concentration duration assumed to be the same for all builds? Wouldn't a character with, say, Resilient (Constitution), War Caster, and 28 AC be much less likely to fail concentration saves than a more typical caster?
10) What's a "chance to kill modifier" and why is it 80%?
11) What's the difference between "Provoke Normal OA %(how often a normal opportunity attack will proc)" and "opportunity attack chance"?

[borg286]

To preface, I did not come up with these numbers. I am relying on another that I trust has gone through a fair bit of vetting, and discussion.

I have a few questions about the rules and how they were arrived at. It says they are based on "some discussion" but I am not sure where said discussions are listed.
This spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=2091322934) has the numbers. In the notes of the specific number is either a description, or in some cases a link to the discussion. Polearm Provoke is one of those. If there wasn't a discussion, and you feel the number is wrong, and would significantly favor one class of builds over another I'm happy to have that discussion here or in the Beyond thread.




1) Do the AC numbers account for only the base AC of monsters, or is it intended to account for monsters making proper use of their defensive abilities, like the "effective AC" guidelines? For example, a creature with a base AC of 17 that casts Shield and Greater Invisibility obviously is harder to hit than a creature with just 17 AC.
It only accounts for base AC. Much like in 4e, we had some base AC and tried to target that. In the end your DPR will diminish when the monsters have a higher AC. The point is that we had some agreed upon number. While we could try to account for all the different defensive abilities monsters could do, nothing is going to stop the expected DPR being different from the observed DPR. The main point is that this sort of thread helps identify broken options, as well as numerically superior options, that, on average, help damage more than others in most circumstances.


2) How did you arrive at 4.2 rounds per encounter?
I didn't. Kryx did which he mentioned in the notes on that cell
Discussion: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?446568-Thought-Process-around-Optimizing-a-Greatsword-Wielder-WIP-PEACH&p=19897323#post19897323


3) How did you arrive at 4.4 encounters against a challenge = level monster per day? Isn't the DMG guidelines 6-8 Medium-Hard encounters per adventuring day?
Go to post 13 here http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?446568-Thought-Process-around-Optimizing-a-Greatsword-Wielder-WIP-PEACH
That is the start of the discussion on encounters per day. I also feel 6-8 would be rather high/deadly. I've rounded it to 5 encounters per day.


4) What is the amount of time between encounters? After all, it's not unusual for a spell with 10 minute or 1 hour duration to last for multiple encounters in a dungeon environment.
Good question. It seems kryx has deemed that there are 2 short rests per day, but leaves open the question of time between the 2 pairs of encounters with short breaks. I've updated it to show how much time between 2 of the day's encounters.


5) How did you arrive at 10% chance of opportunity attack, 15% for polearms (despite these actually allowing a larger range of movement for enemies without triggering OAs), and 50% for polearm master? Is it conceivable that any other factors may be judged as increasing the likelihood of opportunity attacks?
From experience Character Optimization usually doesn't rely on these numbers. Instead they force the monster into a catch-22, and we assume the monster picks the better option. The challenge then turns into how much the DM thinks the monster would be willing to risk? Do I risk taking more damage if I can deal more damage, or do I stay put and do nothing. I will agree with you that having a larger threat area gives more freedom to the monster to move about, but you do end up threatening more foes, increasing the liklihood that someone tries to move into a better position. In the end, I don't think that a monster will want to provoke from you at all, if you've optimized for OA.



6) Under your rules, how does one calculate the damage contribution from party buffs? I know, for example, that Bless potentially adds a great deal of DPR, but how much it would add over 4.2 rounds obviously depends on your party composition.
I don't. Party buffs, while great, cannot be relied upon for the purpose of this thread. Just like situational monster AC boosts will decrease your DPR, so will party boosts increase it. The only thing I could do on this front would be to have candidates calculate the DPR boost if they were given a +1. This way lurkers would be able to pick ones that are more conducive to a cleric inthe party. But in the end I felt that this extra burden of calculation would deter more candidates than lurkers it brings in.


7) What are the rules for multiple target attacks, such as Fireball?
Good point. I'll add a section that standardizes how many targets you can expect to hit for AoE attacks. This is going to be very contravertial. In 4e, we had so few AoE candidates that I usually just noted their DPR as applying to what area, but this edition we must rely on daily planning of what spells we use, which have different areas and damage. Tedious, but it must be done. I added a table outlining them. Again this is up for debate, and I know there will be lots.


8) What are the rules for conditional attacks, like Booming Blade? Surely a higher chance than opportunity attacks (since "any movement" is an easier condition than "leaves your range")
Answering this exact question will be very important, as I predict Booming Blade will be seen quite a bit on this thread. I'll add this to a FAQ and answer it there. The question that will arise is how often you are facing foes with reach that won't care about moving away from you.


9) Why is the concentration duration assumed to be the same for all builds? Wouldn't a character with, say, Resilient (Constitution), War Caster, and 28 AC be much less likely to fail concentration saves than a more typical caster?
They would. Good point. I may need to replace those numbers with some lookup table based on your level and concentration bonus. Based on my analysis, the average damage per hit does not go up linearly. Instead number of attacks does. This makes it real tricky when estimating how long your buff should stay up.


10) What's a "chance to kill modifier" and why is it 80%?
I'll notate it in the main thread. Thx.


11) What's the difference between "Provoke Normal OA %(how often a normal opportunity attack will proc)" and "opportunity attack chance"?
I have since updated it to say
Polearm Provoke(How often an enemy will provoke an OA for Polearm Master): 50%
Provoke Normal OA %(how often a normal opportunity attack will proc): 7.5%
I hope this clears it up.

[LudicSavant]

I have created a DPR calculator, which you may find useful for your arena.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?517267-Comprehensive-DPR-Calculator

I am still adding features, but it can already calculate just about every mechanic in the game, including things like GWF, elemental adept, bless, sword of wounding, save for half, sneak attack, crit riders, natural 1s/20s, and so forth. It also takes into account things like rounding factors that other spreadsheets I've seen miss (for example, when you save for half, you actually take slightly less than half damage on average, because of the fact that you round down).


would significantly favor one class of builds over another I'm happy to have that discussion here or in the Beyond thread.

Here is my initial impression on types of builds that would be over or underrated by this rulesset:
The ability to target a wide variety of saves and defenses makes a large difference in contribution, since you can always go for the lowest one. In the given ruleset, this advantage doesn't count (all enemies have the same stats, so versatility doesn't matter).
Differences in Concentration reliability are wholly discounted. Someone with 28 AC, a Paladin aura, Resilient Constitution, and War Caster will almost never actually lose concentration, but in this ruleset they lose it just as fast as someone with 10 AC, no paladin aura, and no feats.
The ability to bypass defensive abilities (like flight, invisibility, etc) is wholly discounted, so characters who can disable enemy defenses are discouraged.
The ability to buff your party would be underrepresented. Ergo, characters who can use abilities like Bless (which in real games is a large boost to DPR) would be underrepresented.
The ability to debuff your enemies is underrepresented. For example, a Mounted Combatant (who provides advantage only for themselves) and a Shield Master (who provides advantage for the whole party) are making different levels of contribution which are not accounted for. The more "selfish" build would be favored by the given arena rules.
Characters who can buff allies and create allies (like via Animate Dead) would get more mileage out of their buffs than someone who cannot add allies (even though in a real game, you are generally better off buffing your team rather than skeletons).
The ability to force "catch-22" tactical choices (something you mention yourself as being common to optimized builds) is discounted.
The fact that the rules make combat durations entirely independent of your offensive output favors some builds over others when determining the value of rest-limited resources or alpha strikes (such as assassin builds that can end many fights in 1 round).
The rules don't seem to mention anything about equipment limitations.
The "ten minute breather" rule means that there is no advantage to a ten minute duration over a 1 minute duration, when in a dungeon environment it's not unusual to be able to do things like take 3 encounters with one ten minute spell and then short rest when it runs out (while getting multiple encounters from a 1 minute duration is more unusual).


From experience Character Optimization usually doesn't rely on these numbers. Instead they force the monster into a catch-22, and we assume the monster picks the better option. Agreed.


I don't. Party buffs, while great, cannot be relied upon for the purpose of this thread. Just like situational monster AC boosts will decrease your DPR, so will party boosts increase it. The only thing I could do on this front would be to have candidates calculate the DPR boost if they were given a +1. This way lurkers would be able to pick ones that are more conducive to a cleric inthe party. But in the end I felt that this extra burden of calculation would deter more candidates than lurkers it brings in.

I wasn't referring to the character being buffed by their party mates. I meant that when calculating the DPR (or KPR) output of the Cleric herself, abilities like Bless are a significant part of that.

You assumed that the Rogue existed in a party to get off their sneak attacks. Shouldn't it be assumed that the Cleric exists in one, as well? Doing so can more than triple the damage output of some of their spells.

This isn't just for casters and rogues, either. For example, a Shield Master fighter can contribute a great deal of their DPR by granting advantage to their allies, whereas a Mounted Combat fighter only provides advantage to themselves. It's a big part of one's damage contribution to the party for a lot of builds.

[borg286]

I have created a DPR calculator, which you may find useful for your arena.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?517267-Comprehensive-DPR-Calculator

I am still adding features, but it can already calculate just about every mechanic in the game, including things like GWF, elemental adept, bless, sword of wounding, save for half, sneak attack, crit riders, natural 1s/20s, and so forth. It also takes into account things like rounding factors that other spreadsheets I've seen miss (for example, when you save for half, you actually take slightly less than half damage on average, because of the fact that you round down).

I'll be adding this spreadsheet as a great way to make builds. Looks good. Thanks.



Here is my initial impression on types of builds that would be over or underrated by this rulesset:
- The ability to target a wide variety of saves and defenses makes a large difference in contribution, since you can always go for the lowest one. In the given ruleset, this advantage doesn't count (all enemies have the same stats, so versatility doesn't matter).
Obviously we can't reward metagaming, and expecting players to memorize the stats of various monsters. Increased DPR would therefore come after the character knows which stats are lower (for example after a knowledge check or some special spell). I would like to reward the versatility, but what would it look like? "If you have DPR calculations against 2 stats, you can assume their save bonus is 2 lower for the lesser of the DPR calculations."



- Differences in Concentration reliability are wholly discounted. Someone with 28 AC, a Paladin aura, Resilient Constitution, and War Caster will almost never actually lose concentration, but in this ruleset they lose it just as fast as someone with 10 AC, no paladin aura, and no feats.
This touches on a difficult topic that has plagued DPR king candidates in years past, namely that some candidates sacrifice all survivability, while many sacrifice a sizable handful of defense. A build's defense is a separate number, ie. the normal monster's DPR against the character. Do I now require the average monster's KPR vs. you? How many attacks are being made against you? I usually just left defense out of the equation, but concentration rules tie the 2 loosly. I am in favor of just letting all buffs last the whole encounter and have a separate number being reported on concentration bonus, as an optional number. This thread is usually biased towards strikers, which are commonly accepted as glass cannons. Do I want to continue to not punish glass? Hard question.


- The ability to bypass defensive abilities (like flight, invisibility, etc) is wholly discounted, so characters who can disable enemy defenses are discouraged.
- The ability to buff your party would be underrepresented. Ergo, characters who can use abilities like Bless (which in real games is a large boost to DPR) would be underrepresented.
- The ability to debuff your enemies is underrepresented. For example, a Mounted Combatant (who provides advantage only for themselves) and a Shield Master (who provides advantage for the whole party) are making different levels of contribution which are not accounted for. The more "selfish" build would be favored by the rules.
- Characters who can buff allies and create allies (like via Animate Dead) would get more mileage out of their buffs than someone who cannot add allies (even though in a real game, you are generally better off buffing your team rather than skeletons).
These are true. I have seen the challenge that other threads have encountered when they tried to do a similar thing for defenders and leaders. They came up with a point reward system for solving various problems (Recovering an incapacitated ally: 20 pts, Pulling a foe off an ally: 40 pts...). It looked really challenging because of the touchy-feely nature of these other rolls. Striker has easy ranking with DPR, but these other jobs should be rewarded. Getting to the BBEG. Striking fliers. This quickly gets into the territory of caster which needs to have solutions for every problem under the sun. What other jobs than "kill team-monster" should the striker be expected to fulfill? Would simply having a notes column that briefly describes the striker-y related abilities be good enough? So few highlight their non-killing-yet-striker-related skills that these often get ignored by builders.



- The ability to force "catch-22" tactical choices (something you mention yourself as being common to optimized builds) is discounted.
I felt that I answered this by having the builder assume the best option from the monster's perspective. Are you talking about other kinds of catch-22's?



- The fact that the rules make combat durations entirely independent of your offensive output favors some builds over others when determining the value of rest-limited resources.
Can you elaborate? I think I understand your concern, but I want to be sure I'm on the same page.



Agreed.



I wasn't referring to the character being buffed by their party mates. I meant that when calculating the DPR (or KPR) output of the Cleric herself, abilities like Bless are a significant part of that.
In times past when a build grants themselves a buff they can rely on it. For example if you take a dip in cleric for bless and assume that is what you're concentrating on, then so be it. Same for haste if you can cast it.



You assumed that the Rogue existed in a party to get off their sneak attacks. Shouldn't it be assumed that the Cleric exists in one, as well? Doing so can more than triple the damage output of some of their spells.

This isn't just for casters and rogues, either. For example, a Shield Master fighter can contribute a great deal of their DPR by granting advantage to their allies, whereas a Mounted Combat fighter only provides advantage to themselves. It's a big part of one's damage contribution to the party for a lot of builds.
Assuming a melee ally is one thing. Assuming a cleric is in the team and sacrificing their concentration slot on bless is another entirely. Every class that can cast bless also has good spells to concentrate on also. No, however awesome bless, haste and darkness is you cannot simply assume they are around. Having everyone play "not it[cleric]" when building a team was not fun in the past. I don't like that it has returned. In the end getting a +1d4 to attack should feel like a reward, rather than an expectation. 2/3 character optimization can be left to another competition. I've tried them and they quick get out of hand and lose popularity.

[LudicSavant]

Assuming a melee ally is one thing. Assuming a cleric is in the team and sacrificing their concentration slot on bless is another entirely.

Agreed. However, that's not what I was talking about. I am not talking about assuming an ally is in the team providing you with buffs. I am talking about when the guy providing the buffs is the build being submitted that we are evaluating the DPR/KPR of.

For example, in order to calculate how much DPR you are contributing to the party by casting Bless, you must account for the fact that you target 3 people, not 1.

Having the rules cover this sort of thing is essential to measuring the value of some builds like Arcana Cleric Tanks or Shield Master Fighters, just as surely as your assumption of a melee ally is essential to the Rogue.

[borg286]

Agreed. However, that's not what I was talking about. I am not talking about assuming an ally is in the team providing you with buffs. I am talking about when the guy providing the buffs is the build being submitted that we are evaluating the DPR/KPR of.

For example, in order to calculate how much DPR you are contributing to the party by casting Bless, you must account for the fact that you target 3 people, not 1.

Having the rules cover this sort of thing is essential to measuring the value of some builds like Arcana Cleric Tanks or Shield Master Fighters, just as surely as your assumption of a melee ally is essential to the Rogue.

You are right. I was misunderstanding you. We could have some dummy allies (one ranged, one melee) with some medium attack bonus, and damage. If you are casting bless on the 3 of you, then you would be able to count their DPR boost as yours. I agree. What do you propose as good KPR values for these 2 allies. Not everyone is going to be a .28 KPR striker.

[8wGremlin]

How do you submit a build for consideration?

Also what about UA material, is it allowed or not?

How are things like Advantage on Initiative and first round bonus attacks, or advantage on attacks for those that haven't acted yet?

Idea 1: Revised Ranger(deep-stalker) Crossbow Master would like to play.

Level 3 Revised Ranger (deep stalker), crossbow master, Dex 16 used hand crossbow in off hand, and nothing in the other hand, thus no loading issues, archery fighting style.

Attack sequence - advantage initiative, if before monsters then 2 attacks at +7 1d6+3 damage (+2 if humanoid) bonus action attack +7 1d6+3 damage.
if after monsters then 1 attack at +7 1d6+3 damage (+2 if humanoid) bonus action attack +7 1d6+3 damage.

Then goes to ranger 5, then takes fighter 4
taking Sharpshooter feat @ ranger 4, and Dex increase @ fighter 4.

This 2 attacks per attack action, + 1 attack for going first, +1 bonus action attack,
plus action surge for 2 more attacks, + 1 attack for going first again.

oh and sharpshooter for -5 to attack but +10 damage on all the attacks that hit.

[CaptainSarathai]

So many variables. For instance, I have a character right now, who can get Reaction hits of various values, against almost anything.
Hit me? Armor of Agathys and/or Hellish Rebuke
Miss me? Riposte
Attack an Ally? Sentinel
OA? Warcaster Booming Blade
--But a great deal of this is on limited resources.

I also typically have Hex up on my primary target. So add damage to those attacks if it's the guy I'm already fighting who's triggering them.

Now, in play, the character has proven to have the highest DPR/KPR of anyone else in the party. However, I have zero idea as to how I should figure out an actual number for this.

[borg286]

How do you submit a build for consideration?
See the thread in Beyond as I've answered that question there.


Also what about UA material, is it allowed or not?
I think I'll simply reuse the tags mechanism I did for the previous DPR king candidates. I'll simply have a UA tag, which signifies that this build relies on content in Unearthed Arcana and needs DM approval. While you may feel that not all UA content is the same, so why not just use the most broken stuff out there, Unearthed Arcana is, at its core, minimally tested. While I have yet to spell out how to use tags for candidates, here it is simply. Just make your build and at the top or bottom have something like Tags: UA, PAMWC...




How are things like Advantage on Initiative and first round bonus attacks, or advantage on attacks for those that haven't acted yet?
Not accounted in the slightest. Sorry. Initiative is a level of complication far beyond the scope of my thread. By limiting myself to a simpler set of rules, it opens the doors to more people submitting builds, and generally results in more creativity and new combos explored.
For the case of your ranger, that makes it tricky. Does the average daily DPR contribution really budge the needle that much? If it bumps you from .26 KPR to .28 KPR then let's talk about it. But My guess is that it won't.



Idea 1: Revised Ranger(deep-stalker) Crossbow Master would like to play.

Level 3 Revised Ranger (deep stalker), crossbow master, Dex 16 used hand crossbow in off hand, and nothing in the other hand, thus no loading issues, archery fighting style.

Attack sequence - advantage initiative, if before monsters then 2 attacks at +7 1d6+3 damage (+2 if humanoid) bonus action attack +7 1d6+3 damage.
if after monsters then 1 attack at +7 1d6+3 damage (+2 if humanoid) bonus action attack +7 1d6+3 damage.

Then goes to ranger 5, then takes fighter 4
taking Sharpshooter feat @ ranger 4, and Dex increase @ fighter 4.

This 2 attacks per attack action, + 1 attack for going first, +1 bonus action attack,
plus action surge for 2 more attacks, + 1 attack for going first again.

oh and sharpshooter for -5 to attack but +10 damage on all the attacks that hit.
Now what you need to do with this idea is to calculate DPR. Pick a level to calculate for, find the AC of your foe. Find if sharpshooter helps enough, or if another feat is better. Then calculate DPR and divide by that level monster's HP to get your KPR. List that at the bottom of your build with some explination for your calculations and you have a build. I'm not going to do that for you. You'll find that by doing these calculations you get a better feel for what really help out in the end. You will probably find that your KPR doesn't match up to a standard fighter holding a crossbow. Now you have to answer the question, if damage is your goal, why settle for less?

[borg286]

So many variables. For instance, I have a character right now, who can get Reaction hits of various values, against almost anything.
Hit me? Armor of Agathys and/or Hellish Rebuke
Miss me? Riposte
Attack an Ally? Sentinel
OA? Warcaster Booming Blade
--But a great deal of this is on limited resources.

I also typically have Hex up on my primary target. So add damage to those attacks if it's the guy I'm already fighting who's triggering them.

Now, in play, the character has proven to have the highest DPR/KPR of anyone else in the party. However, I have zero idea as to how I should figure out an actual number for this.

Commonly you just assume either a block of tofu with infinite HP, or you start taking monster attack bonuses into account and put yourself in the monster's shoes. Would you really attack an ally if you had a mark from the KPR king? No, i'll take the armor of agathys. Now with that damage soaked, the monster doesn't need to worry about it any more for next round. you've got your 5 damage in, good for you. The next round the question of what the monster does is easier to answer.

One question that is really hard is can you cast booming blade on a foe entering your reach if you were weilding a quarterstaff(assumming polearm master). It obviously doesn't work with a polearm as the range of BB is too short. But quarterstaff might be argued. It all depends on what order you feel specifics override generals. Does the opportunity attack happen before they enter the square adjacent? If not, then the foe is technically out of reach, requiring you to cast a higher range spell. If you feel that polearm master grants the attack after they have entered your reach, overriding the specifics of the opportunity attack rules (not the opportunity attack attack).
These sorts of questions happened all the time on my DPR King Candidates thread, and we often fell on the side of rules as written. With as many rules lawyers as I expect will be on these threads, I expect the same outcome again.

[LudicSavant]

For the case of your ranger, that makes it tricky. Does the average daily DPR contribution really budge the needle that much? If it bumps you from .26 KPR to .28 KPR then let's talk about it. But My guess is that it won't.

For Revised Deep Stalker Assassins (which can sometimes end CR=level encounters before enemies can act at all), I wouldn't be surprised if adjusting for initiative and encounter duration accounts for a change significantly more than .02 KPR.

[joaber]

One question that is really hard is can you cast booming blade on a foe entering your reach if you were weilding a quarterstaff(assumming polearm master). It obviously doesn't work with a polearm as the range of BB is too short.

In fact work if you have spell sniper. But probably just human v fighter can have polearm master + gwm + warcaster + spell sniper + magic iniciate (BB, GFB and hex) and still max str.

I didn't checked all, but I desagree that a polearm master reaction + normal reaction get only 15% chance to happen.

battlemaster damage increase too if you use precision strike on a miss, ripose when you can and trip attack only in a non advantage action surge.

the easier KPR king that I calculated in lvl 20 I got was sorcerer 18/ warlock 2... burn spell slots to always quick always quick EB with hex and let the high ones for things like meteor swarm got the headship.

by the way, congratulation by the work.

[borg286]

In fact work if you have spell sniper. But probably just human v fighter can have polearm master + gwm + warcaster + spell sniper + magic iniciate (BB, GFB and hex) and still max str.

I didn't checked all, but I desagree that a polearm master reaction + normal reaction get only 15% chance to happen.

battlemaster damage increase too if you use precision strike on a miss, ripose when you can and trip attack only in a non advantage action surge.

the easier KPR king that I calculated in lvl 20 I got was sorcerer 18/ warlock 2... burn spell slots to always quick always quick EB with hex and let the high ones for things like meteor swarm got the headship.

by the way, congratulation by the work.

I'm curious if you feel darkness was superior or inferior to hex as your concentration slot. The darkness being a full action might cost more in the action economy, but I felt that the constant advantage more than made up for it.
Analyzing this sorlock helped me understand damage per spell point analysis. The Twin booming blade seemed quite appealing, but I'm curious if the action economy would allow such a build (paladin or sorcerer as main class) to get enough damage in the end game. twin BB does rank high on the damage / SP.

[joaber]

I'm curious if you feel darkness was superior or inferior to hex as your concentration slot. The darkness being a full action might cost more in the action economy, but I felt that the constant advantage more than made up for it.
Analyzing this sorlock helped me understand damage per spell point analysis. The Twin booming blade seemed quite appealing, but I'm curious if the action economy would allow such a build (paladin or sorcerer as main class) to get enough damage in the end game. twin BB does rank high on the damage / SP.

In fact sor18 lock2 was the only multiclass I tested. 5 combat encounters day and 4 rounds each.
Even thinked about darkness, in fact. Darkness has potential, more as sor17 lock 3 than you get second lvl spell with short rest. The bog lose to hex would be when you cast a high level scorching ray.

Twin booming blade is great, and cost just 1 sp, so you can do that all day in high levels. But isn't always that you get two enemies at melee to use it. As pali/sorc, sorcerer main class for sure, full caster and the second booming blade for just 1 sp is better and cheaper than divine smite.

[LudicSavant]

I'll be adding this spreadsheet as a great way to make builds. Looks good. Thanks. No problem :smallsmile:


Can you elaborate? I think I understand your concern, but I want to be sure I'm on the same page.

Sure.

Very hypothetical example: Nova character deals 200 damage (100% of a monster's hp) in round 1. They then need to proceed for 3 more rounds, dealing 50 damage, even though the monster would already be dead. Their DPR in actual encounter would be 200. Their DPR in arena would be 87.5.

Basically, nova damage would appear to be worth less than it actually is, simply because it has no effect on ending combats faster.


You are right. I was misunderstanding you. We could have some dummy allies (one ranged, one melee) with some medium attack bonus, and damage. If you are casting bless on the 3 of you, then you would be able to count their DPR boost as yours. I agree. What do you propose as good KPR values for these 2 allies. Not everyone is going to be a .28 KPR striker.

Any values would of course be an approximation. But even mediocre dummy allies would be much more representative of the contribution of force-multiplier abilities than nothing at all.


I'll notate it in the main thread. Thx.
Okay, so it's the chance that an enemy dies and you get an extra attack from heavy weapon master, but why is it 80%? In any combat with a single monster, the chance is 0%. In cases with multiple monsters, a number of situations have to coincide: An enemy dying during the round, and doing so while right next to a second enemy.

But at 80%, it's basically assuming that this is an almost constant occurrence. What justifies that?