So as my previous post showed this is a little off. This assumes you have advantage on your subsequent attacks, but as noted there is a 30% chance that you wont.
It actually assumes there's a 65% chance you won't -- 50% that you aren't attacking the same target twice in a row, and then 30% that, even if you are, the prior attack was a miss. If you're continually attacking the same target your hit rate gradually approaches 88% (it maxes at 91%, but because you're going to miss sequences, it averages less).
This is correct, but that isn't what your numbers showed. Your numbers assumed you didn't have advantage on your first attack and you did on the second. But this is all around correct. If you have a 70% chance to hit without advantage, the second attack goes up to 84% and subsequent attacks approach 88% until the first target dies or gets out of reach and then it resets. Though, I admit that i may have misinterpreted what you were saying, if so my bad.
My base argument of course is, if people are going to accurately gauge it then they need to not treat it as "always on advantage after first attack". Because it is not.
This is correct, but that isn't what your numbers showed. Your numbers assumed you didn't have advantage on your first attack and you did on the second.
My numbers were 'after a hit'. You always have advantage after a hit, because that's how the ability is defined.
I like the masteries though hope they can streamline topple so saving throw doesn’t slow down as much. I haven’t playtested topple so not sure how much it might slow but extra dice having to be rolled will slow some.
I don’t like the feat. I know that’s just how they are doing things but I really feel it should be a warrior group thing with maybe paladin and Ranger, or just Ranger since paladin is still pretty good, getting it at a later level (maybe level 5)
My math is correct. THIS math is incorrect. Your math is assuming Vex ALWAYS gives advantage after the first attack. It doesn't, it only gives advantage if the first attack hit. In my example that is 60% of the time, the same odds as the sword attack. Which means there is a 40% chance that the vex user will be making there second attack WITHOUT advantage. Which means the second attack has a 60% chance of giving the 84% chance to hit and a 40% chance to have a 60% chance to hit. This results in a roughly 74% chance to hit. Which is the numbers I used. Subsequent attacks against the same target raise this chance, but it NEVER reaches the effect of "always on advantage". Even crit chance is effected because there is a difference in crit chance as well. Your second attack DOESN'T have a 9.75% chance it has a 60% chance to have a 9.75% and a 40% chance to have a 5% which results in a crit chance of around 7.8%
If your numbers are "always on advantage after first attack" than your numbers are wrong and you are massively over valuing vex.
As the chance to hit increases flex does better and better and the value of advantage on next attack stays about the same. If you can increase damage vex gets better of course.
Your numbers still seem confused and just wrong here but I think I see the argument you're trying to make.
So if we are to calculate how likely you are to hit with Vex over two attacks without advantage on the first, you'd calculate the two chances to miss together. So first off we have a straight 60%/40%. So not landing on the first attack is 40%, then the second attack is a 84%/16%. We have a 60% chance of hitting that 16% which is a 9.6% chance. So your chance to not get the advantaged attack of Vex, is 49.6%, conversely you have a 50.4% chance to land it. Further to that, you have a chance of landing a critical at 5.85% (9.75%×0.6)
So we just want to calculate how much damage Vex adds to that attack over not having Vex, well let's use the previous formula for a normal attack
(4.5+2+4) * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 6.525
Next we need to know how much damage we do with advantage, so we again go back to the previous formular
(4.5+2+4) * 0.84 + 4.5 * 0.0975 = 9.25875
So we add 9.25875 - 6.525 = 2.73375 damage from advantage. We have a 60% chance of having triggered this, so 2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025.
Flex is really boring in these equations, it's a 60% chance to hit, 5% chance to critical and increasing a 1d8 to a 1d10 adds an average of 1 damage. The damage Flex adds is 1 * 0.65 per attack, so over those same two attacks Flex adds 1.3 damage. Meaning using 60%, Vex wins.
What if you used 70%? Well Vex would gain 0.1 damage increasing it to 1.5 damage over two attacks but Vex?
So advantage adds 2.41875 and you have a 70% chance of activating it from 1st hit. 2.41875 * 0.7 = 1.693125
Meanwhile the numbers for 50% would be Flex adding 1.1 damage over two hits and vex adding 1.419375
So yes, Flex gets a bit more from attack roll than Vex but Vex generally always does more. Where Vex takes off is when you have a +5 Mod with a +3 weapon. 60% chance to hit with all that?
Where Flex is still only adding 1.3 damage over those two hits, Vex on average is adding 2.21625. Which is a point, while Vex and Flex start off fairly similarly on damage, Vex improves where Flex is basically flat, only changing with chance to hit/crit.
But again, these are just scratching the surface, There can be other boosts too damage, like Hunter's Mark, Hex, Smite spells, etc. The advantage that follows Vex, does not need to be with the Vex weapon, which adds utility that Flex just simply lacks. So while Vex appearing to outperform Flex is small for just normal attacks, Vex also grants advantage for other utilities which can be spellcasting, or could be for triggering Sneak Attack, or could be used in other such ways.
So Vex, while situational, also has utility, Flex is just a relatively flat damage increase only.
There are also other reasons why Vex is OP'ed, like how Vex is usable on a number of ranged weapons, which means it is usable with the archery fighting style... yeah... don't forget about that one.
I like the masteries though hope they can streamline topple so saving throw doesn’t slow down as much. I haven’t playtested topple so not sure how much it might slow but extra dice having to be rolled will slow some.
I don’t like the feat. I know that’s just how they are doing things but I really feel it should be a warrior group thing with maybe paladin and Ranger, or just Ranger since paladin is still pretty good, getting it at a later level (maybe level 5)
What about if topple only triggered when you pass the target’s AC by a certain amount, say 2? So, your AC is 18, I roll a 20, you are knocked prone.
What about if topple only triggered when you pass the target’s AC by a certain amount, say 2? So, your AC is 18, I roll a 20, you are knocked prone.
I'd be wary of conditions that can trigger without saving throws, as that bypasses legendary resistance and similar defensive features.
They could make it once per turn, but maybe the save DC increases each time you hit the same target with the weapon, so the more you press the attack the more likely it becomes to fall over multiple rounds?
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
What about if topple only triggered when you pass the target’s AC by a certain amount, say 2? So, your AC is 18, I roll a 20, you are knocked prone.
I'd be wary of conditions that can trigger without saving throws, as that bypasses legendary resistance and similar defensive features.
They could make it once per turn, but maybe the save DC increases each time you hit the same target with the weapon, so the more you press the attack the more likely it becomes to fall over multiple rounds?
But that still kind of bogs it down. Once per turn, though isn’t terrible. I think it could go either way. With the saving throw being higher than a 15 in most cases, I think it would actually be harder to do by beating the AC by a certain amount and that’s part of the attack as well so it’s quicker. Brainstorm time for better ideas.
My math is correct. THIS math is incorrect. Your math is assuming Vex ALWAYS gives advantage after the first attack. It doesn't, it only gives advantage if the first attack hit. In my example that is 60% of the time, the same odds as the sword attack. Which means there is a 40% chance that the vex user will be making there second attack WITHOUT advantage. Which means the second attack has a 60% chance of giving the 84% chance to hit and a 40% chance to have a 60% chance to hit. This results in a roughly 74% chance to hit. Which is the numbers I used. Subsequent attacks against the same target raise this chance, but it NEVER reaches the effect of "always on advantage". Even crit chance is effected because there is a difference in crit chance as well. Your second attack DOESN'T have a 9.75% chance it has a 60% chance to have a 9.75% and a 40% chance to have a 5% which results in a crit chance of around 7.8%
If your numbers are "always on advantage after first attack" than your numbers are wrong and you are massively over valuing vex.
As the chance to hit increases flex does better and better and the value of advantage on next attack stays about the same. If you can increase damage vex gets better of course.
Your numbers still seem confused and just wrong here but I think I see the argument you're trying to make.
So if we are to calculate how likely you are to hit with Vex over two attacks without advantage on the first, you'd calculate the two chances to miss together. So first off we have a straight 60%/40%. So not landing on the first attack is 40%, then the second attack is a 84%/16%. We have a 60% chance of hitting that 16% which is a 9.6% chance. So your chance to not get the advantaged attack of Vex, is 49.6%, conversely you have a 50.4% chance to land it. Further to that, you have a chance of landing a critical at 5.85% (9.75%×0.6)
So we just want to calculate how much damage Vex adds to that attack over not having Vex, well let's use the previous formula for a normal attack
(4.5+2+4) * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 6.525
Next we need to know how much damage we do with advantage, so we again go back to the previous formular
(4.5+2+4) * 0.84 + 4.5 * 0.0975 = 9.25875
So we add 9.25875 - 6.525 = 2.73375 damage from advantage. We have a 60% chance of having triggered this, so 2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025.
Flex is really boring in these equations, it's a 60% chance to hit, 5% chance to critical and increasing a 1d8 to a 1d10 adds an average of 1 damage. The damage Flex adds is 1 * 0.65 per attack, so over those same two attacks Flex adds 1.3 damage. Meaning using 60%, Vex wins.
What if you used 70%? Well Vex would gain 0.1 damage increasing it to 1.5 damage over two attacks but Vex?
So advantage adds 2.41875 and you have a 70% chance of activating it from 1st hit. 2.41875 * 0.7 = 1.693125
Meanwhile the numbers for 50% would be Flex adding 1.1 damage over two hits and vex adding 1.419375
So yes, Flex gets a bit more from attack roll than Vex but Vex generally always does more. Where Vex takes off is when you have a +5 Mod with a +3 weapon. 60% chance to hit with all that?
Where Flex is still only adding 1.3 damage over those two hits, Vex on average is adding 2.21625. Which is a point, while Vex and Flex start off fairly similarly on damage, Vex improves where Flex is basically flat, only changing with chance to hit/crit.
But again, these are just scratching the surface, There can be other boosts too damage, like Hunter's Mark, Hex, Smite spells, etc. The advantage that follows Vex, does not need to be with the Vex weapon, which adds utility that Flex just simply lacks. So while Vex appearing to outperform Flex is small for just normal attacks, Vex also grants advantage for other utilities which can be spellcasting, or could be for triggering Sneak Attack, or could be used in other such ways.
So Vex, while situational, also has utility, Flex is just a relatively flat damage increase only.
There are also other reasons why Vex is OP'ed, like how Vex is usable on a number of ranged weapons, which means it is usable with the archery fighting style... yeah... don't forget about that one.
Dear god no. Again my numbers are correct yours are wrong.
60% chance to hit on first attack 40% chance to miss.
Second attack hit chance is affected by your first attack. 60% you hit on the first attack and thus have advantage on your attack on the second attack. Thus 60% of the time your second attack will have 84/16 odds and 40% of the time you will have missed your first attack thus you will NOT have advantage on your second attack making it 60/40 again just like you didnt on your first. This basic weighted averages. .6x.84= .504 (chance to hit with advantage × chance the first attack hit) .6×.4= .24 (chance to hit without advantage x chance you missed your first attack and thus do not have advantage on second attack). Add those 2 together for your 100% weighted average of .744. My numbers are correct. Chance to crit, 60% of the time, the first attack hit and you will have advantage resulting in chance to crit of 9.75%. 40% of the time you will not have advantage and thus your crit chance will be 5%. Thus (.6x.0975)+(.4×.05)=7.85% weighted chance to crit.
Flex is boring and easy to calculate it is the same as always.
The whole point of flex is to be boring and easy and reward specifically sword and shield playstyle so I am comparing it to other sword and shield options. Flex isnt an option on ranged. Push and slow and vex are. Compare those to each other.
Edit: very easy weighted average question. Dean comes to work 50% of the time. Sam comes to work 100% of the time dean does but only 25% of the time when dean doesn't. What is the chance sam will come to work?
My math is correct. THIS math is incorrect. Your math is assuming Vex ALWAYS gives advantage after the first attack. It doesn't, it only gives advantage if the first attack hit. In my example that is 60% of the time, the same odds as the sword attack. Which means there is a 40% chance that the vex user will be making there second attack WITHOUT advantage. Which means the second attack has a 60% chance of giving the 84% chance to hit and a 40% chance to have a 60% chance to hit. This results in a roughly 74% chance to hit. Which is the numbers I used. Subsequent attacks against the same target raise this chance, but it NEVER reaches the effect of "always on advantage". Even crit chance is effected because there is a difference in crit chance as well. Your second attack DOESN'T have a 9.75% chance it has a 60% chance to have a 9.75% and a 40% chance to have a 5% which results in a crit chance of around 7.8%
If your numbers are "always on advantage after first attack" than your numbers are wrong and you are massively over valuing vex.
As the chance to hit increases flex does better and better and the value of advantage on next attack stays about the same. If you can increase damage vex gets better of course.
Your numbers still seem confused and just wrong here but I think I see the argument you're trying to make.
So if we are to calculate how likely you are to hit with Vex over two attacks without advantage on the first, you'd calculate the two chances to miss together. So first off we have a straight 60%/40%. So not landing on the first attack is 40%, then the second attack is a 84%/16%. We have a 60% chance of hitting that 16% which is a 9.6% chance. So your chance to not get the advantaged attack of Vex, is 49.6%, conversely you have a 50.4% chance to land it. Further to that, you have a chance of landing a critical at 5.85% (9.75%×0.6)
So we just want to calculate how much damage Vex adds to that attack over not having Vex, well let's use the previous formula for a normal attack
(4.5+2+4) * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 6.525
Next we need to know how much damage we do with advantage, so we again go back to the previous formular
(4.5+2+4) * 0.84 + 4.5 * 0.0975 = 9.25875
So we add 9.25875 - 6.525 = 2.73375 damage from advantage. We have a 60% chance of having triggered this, so 2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025.
Flex is really boring in these equations, it's a 60% chance to hit, 5% chance to critical and increasing a 1d8 to a 1d10 adds an average of 1 damage. The damage Flex adds is 1 * 0.65 per attack, so over those same two attacks Flex adds 1.3 damage. Meaning using 60%, Vex wins.
What if you used 70%? Well Vex would gain 0.1 damage increasing it to 1.5 damage over two attacks but Vex?
So advantage adds 2.41875 and you have a 70% chance of activating it from 1st hit. 2.41875 * 0.7 = 1.693125
Meanwhile the numbers for 50% would be Flex adding 1.1 damage over two hits and vex adding 1.419375
So yes, Flex gets a bit more from attack roll than Vex but Vex generally always does more. Where Vex takes off is when you have a +5 Mod with a +3 weapon. 60% chance to hit with all that?
Where Flex is still only adding 1.3 damage over those two hits, Vex on average is adding 2.21625. Which is a point, while Vex and Flex start off fairly similarly on damage, Vex improves where Flex is basically flat, only changing with chance to hit/crit.
But again, these are just scratching the surface, There can be other boosts too damage, like Hunter's Mark, Hex, Smite spells, etc. The advantage that follows Vex, does not need to be with the Vex weapon, which adds utility that Flex just simply lacks. So while Vex appearing to outperform Flex is small for just normal attacks, Vex also grants advantage for other utilities which can be spellcasting, or could be for triggering Sneak Attack, or could be used in other such ways.
So Vex, while situational, also has utility, Flex is just a relatively flat damage increase only.
There are also other reasons why Vex is OP'ed, like how Vex is usable on a number of ranged weapons, which means it is usable with the archery fighting style... yeah... don't forget about that one.
Dear god no. Again my numbers are correct yours are wrong.
60% chance to hit on first attack 40% chance to miss.
Second attack hit chance is affected by your first attack. 60% you hit on the first attack and thus have advantage on your attack on the second attack. Thus 60% of the time your second attack will have 84/16 odds and 40% of the time you will have missed your first attack thus you will NOT have advantage on your second attack making it 60/40 again just like you didnt on your first. This basic weighted averages. .6x.84= .504 (chance to hit with advantage × chance the first attack hit) .6×.4= .24 (chance to hit without advantage x chance you missed your first attack and thus do not have advantage on second attack). Add those 2 together for your 100% weighted average of .744. My numbers are correct. Chance to crit, 60% of the time, the first attack hit and you will have advantage resulting in chance to crit of 9.75%. 40% of the time you will not have advantage and thus your crit chance will be 5%. Thus (.6x.0975)+(.4×.05)=7.85% weighted chance to crit.
Flex is boring and easy to calculate it is the same as always.
The whole point of flex is to be boring and easy and reward specifically sword and shield playstyle so I am comparing it to other sword and shield options. Flex isnt an option on ranged. Push and slow and vex are. Compare those to each other.
Edit: very easy weighted average question. Dean comes to work 50% of the time. Sam comes to work 100% of the time dean does but only 25% of the time when dean doesn't. What is the chance sam will come to work?
Simple, once, because coming to work and being at work are two very different numbers that are easily confused, if Dean works 50% of the day and only goes in once, but Sam works 62.5% of the day, he still only has to come once. Of course the number could be anything else, but for this example, it'd be once.
So let's break down your mistakes, first let's start with this 5% one.
9.75 × 0.6 = 5.85, even if you are rounding, it'd be the wrong direction, it is more than 5%.
You seem to think I've not applied for the fact it only applies 60% of the time, however I have:
2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025
I don't need to apply the 60% directly to the calculation for damage of an advantaged attack, because I calculate it more simply which simplifies the entire process.
However if I wanted to recalculate this for a champion fighter that crits on a 19 it is simpler to just recalculate that 0.9 * 0.9 = 0.81 and leave the 60% chance it activated from the first hit separately than doing 0.9 * 0.9 * 0.6 = 0.486. Additionally it means I can more easily compare different chances to hit, so I just update 0.6 to 0.7 if I want to calculate based on a 70% chance to hit. The way you're going over the numbers is overly complicated for no benefit.
3rd, you don't need to care about the damage of a single attack, because in that case vex did nothing, this means vex added 0. 24% of 0 is still 0, thus we can safely discard this number, we only care about the 50.4% of the time you get the advantage and it hits, any other case, missing the first hit, or even missing both hits are irrelevant, in those cases Vex added nothing but as an average Vex still adds more damage overall then Flex from two attacks like this.
Obviously Flex is easier to work with and Vex will in practice lose damage because of situational effects but it also gains damage in ways that Flex simply can't and it gives utility that flex can not, for example if hostile targets are out of range, you haste the rogue and the rogue makes two short bow attacks, the first has a 60% chance to hit and then the next attack has a 84% chance to hit AND apply sneak attack, Flex has nothing like this. Obviously it's useless if the Rogue doesn't have access to it (we will need to see how other classes are adapted to weapon mastery, if at all but suspect Nick and Vex are mostly intended for Rogue and Ranger, they make no sense for Barbarian tho some for fighter), but it's just one of the examples of things that likely will be a consideration.
My math is correct. THIS math is incorrect. Your math is assuming Vex ALWAYS gives advantage after the first attack. It doesn't, it only gives advantage if the first attack hit. In my example that is 60% of the time, the same odds as the sword attack. Which means there is a 40% chance that the vex user will be making there second attack WITHOUT advantage. Which means the second attack has a 60% chance of giving the 84% chance to hit and a 40% chance to have a 60% chance to hit. This results in a roughly 74% chance to hit. Which is the numbers I used. Subsequent attacks against the same target raise this chance, but it NEVER reaches the effect of "always on advantage". Even crit chance is effected because there is a difference in crit chance as well. Your second attack DOESN'T have a 9.75% chance it has a 60% chance to have a 9.75% and a 40% chance to have a 5% which results in a crit chance of around 7.8%
If your numbers are "always on advantage after first attack" than your numbers are wrong and you are massively over valuing vex.
As the chance to hit increases flex does better and better and the value of advantage on next attack stays about the same. If you can increase damage vex gets better of course.
Your numbers still seem confused and just wrong here but I think I see the argument you're trying to make.
So if we are to calculate how likely you are to hit with Vex over two attacks without advantage on the first, you'd calculate the two chances to miss together. So first off we have a straight 60%/40%. So not landing on the first attack is 40%, then the second attack is a 84%/16%. We have a 60% chance of hitting that 16% which is a 9.6% chance. So your chance to not get the advantaged attack of Vex, is 49.6%, conversely you have a 50.4% chance to land it. Further to that, you have a chance of landing a critical at 5.85% (9.75%×0.6)
So we just want to calculate how much damage Vex adds to that attack over not having Vex, well let's use the previous formula for a normal attack
(4.5+2+4) * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 6.525
Next we need to know how much damage we do with advantage, so we again go back to the previous formular
(4.5+2+4) * 0.84 + 4.5 * 0.0975 = 9.25875
So we add 9.25875 - 6.525 = 2.73375 damage from advantage. We have a 60% chance of having triggered this, so 2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025.
Flex is really boring in these equations, it's a 60% chance to hit, 5% chance to critical and increasing a 1d8 to a 1d10 adds an average of 1 damage. The damage Flex adds is 1 * 0.65 per attack, so over those same two attacks Flex adds 1.3 damage. Meaning using 60%, Vex wins.
What if you used 70%? Well Vex would gain 0.1 damage increasing it to 1.5 damage over two attacks but Vex?
So advantage adds 2.41875 and you have a 70% chance of activating it from 1st hit. 2.41875 * 0.7 = 1.693125
Meanwhile the numbers for 50% would be Flex adding 1.1 damage over two hits and vex adding 1.419375
So yes, Flex gets a bit more from attack roll than Vex but Vex generally always does more. Where Vex takes off is when you have a +5 Mod with a +3 weapon. 60% chance to hit with all that?
Where Flex is still only adding 1.3 damage over those two hits, Vex on average is adding 2.21625. Which is a point, while Vex and Flex start off fairly similarly on damage, Vex improves where Flex is basically flat, only changing with chance to hit/crit.
But again, these are just scratching the surface, There can be other boosts too damage, like Hunter's Mark, Hex, Smite spells, etc. The advantage that follows Vex, does not need to be with the Vex weapon, which adds utility that Flex just simply lacks. So while Vex appearing to outperform Flex is small for just normal attacks, Vex also grants advantage for other utilities which can be spellcasting, or could be for triggering Sneak Attack, or could be used in other such ways.
So Vex, while situational, also has utility, Flex is just a relatively flat damage increase only.
There are also other reasons why Vex is OP'ed, like how Vex is usable on a number of ranged weapons, which means it is usable with the archery fighting style... yeah... don't forget about that one.
Dear god no. Again my numbers are correct yours are wrong.
60% chance to hit on first attack 40% chance to miss.
Second attack hit chance is affected by your first attack. 60% you hit on the first attack and thus have advantage on your attack on the second attack. Thus 60% of the time your second attack will have 84/16 odds and 40% of the time you will have missed your first attack thus you will NOT have advantage on your second attack making it 60/40 again just like you didnt on your first. This basic weighted averages. .6x.84= .504 (chance to hit with advantage × chance the first attack hit) .6×.4= .24 (chance to hit without advantage x chance you missed your first attack and thus do not have advantage on second attack). Add those 2 together for your 100% weighted average of .744. My numbers are correct. Chance to crit, 60% of the time, the first attack hit and you will have advantage resulting in chance to crit of 9.75%. 40% of the time you will not have advantage and thus your crit chance will be 5%. Thus (.6x.0975)+(.4×.05)=7.85% weighted chance to crit.
Flex is boring and easy to calculate it is the same as always.
The whole point of flex is to be boring and easy and reward specifically sword and shield playstyle so I am comparing it to other sword and shield options. Flex isnt an option on ranged. Push and slow and vex are. Compare those to each other.
Edit: very easy weighted average question. Dean comes to work 50% of the time. Sam comes to work 100% of the time dean does but only 25% of the time when dean doesn't. What is the chance sam will come to work?
Simple, once, because coming to work and being at work are two very different numbers that are easily confused, if Dean works 50% of the day and only goes in once, but Sam works 62.5% of the day, he still only has to come once. Of course the number could be anything else, but for this example, it'd be once.
So let's break down your mistakes, first let's start with this 5% one.
9.75 × 0.6 = 5.85, even if you are rounding, it'd be the wrong direction, it is more than 5%.
You seem to think I've not applied for the fact it only applies 60% of the time, however I have:
2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025
I don't need to apply the 60% directly to the calculation for damage of an advantaged attack, because I calculate it more simply which simplifies the entire process.
However if I wanted to recalculate this for a champion fighter that crits on a 19 it is simpler to just recalculate that 0.9 * 0.9 = 0.81 and leave the 60% chance it activated from the first hit separately than doing 0.9 * 0.9 * 0.6 = 0.486. Additionally it means I can more easily compare different chances to hit, so I just update 0.6 to 0.7 if I want to calculate based on a 70% chance to hit. The way you're going over the numbers is overly complicated for no benefit.
3rd, you don't need to care about the damage of a single attack, because in that case vex did nothing, this means vex added 0. 24% of 0 is still 0, thus we can safely discard this number, we only care about the 50.4% of the time you get the advantage and it hits, any other case, missing the first hit, or even missing both hits are irrelevant, in those cases Vex added nothing but as an average Vex still adds more damage overall then Flex from two attacks like this.
Obviously Flex is easier to work with and Vex will in practice lose damage because of situational effects but it also gains damage in ways that Flex simply can't and it gives utility that flex can not, for example if hostile targets are out of range, you haste the rogue and the rogue makes two short bow attacks, the first has a 60% chance to hit and then the next attack has a 84% chance to hit AND apply sneak attack, Flex has nothing like this. Obviously it's useless if the Rogue doesn't have access to it (we will need to see how other classes are adapted to weapon mastery, if at all but suspect Nick and Vex are mostly intended for Rogue and Ranger, they make no sense for Barbarian tho some for fighter), but it's just one of the examples of things that likely will be a consideration.
Yes sam has a 62.5% CHANCE of showing up to work. Everything else you put there is wrong and non-sense.
The times Vex doesn't add damage are relevant to the average damage it adds. Flex can "add" 0 damage as well if you roll a 1 on the d10. But we dont look at that we look at the average.
I DIDN'T say that the second attack had a 5.8% I said it has a 7.8% chance to crit. Because there is a 60% chance the second attack will be at advantage with a chance to crit of 9.75% and a 40% chance that the second attack WILL NOT have advantage and will only have a 5% chance to crit.
Apply weighted average. (.6×.0975)+(.4×.05)= 7.85% this is the chance the second attack will crit if you have vex and you hit on a 9 or better.
Next weighted averages question. Dean now shows up to work 60% of the time. Sam still shows up 100% of the time dean does, and still only shows up 25% of the time he doesn't. What is the chance that Sam will show up?
Yes sam has a 62.5% CHANCE of showing up to work. Everything else you put there is wrong and non-sense.
The times Vex doesn't add damage are relevant to the average damage it adds. Flex can "add" 0 damage as well if you roll a 1 on the d10. But we dont look at that we look at the average.
I DIDN'T say that the second attack had a 5.8% I said it has a 7.8% chance to crit. Because there is a 60% chance the second attack will be at advantage with a chance to crit of 9.75% and a 40% chance that the second attack WILL NOT have advantage and will only have a 5% chance to crit.
Apply weighted average. (.6×.0975)+(.4×.05)= 7.85% this is the chance the second attack will crit if you have vex and you hit on a 9 or better.
Next weighted averages question. Dean now shows up to work 60% of the time. Sam still shows up 100% of the time dean does, and still only shows up 25% of the time he doesn't. What is the chance that Sam will show up?
1. It's not nonsense.
it is you framing the question badly, you said A is at work 50% of the time, B is at work all that same time and 25% of the time. What is the chance that B turns up to work.
The question you MEANT to ask, was how long is B at work, but that is certainly NOT the question you actually asked.
2. We actually don't care about the times Vex is not in effect.
Pretty simple, when vex isn't applied, we already know the average DPR increase of these attacks is 0. You have a 1 in 10 chance of getting a 1 on Flex for a 1d10 damage die, you have a 1 in 10 chance of getting a 10 instead, this does affect the average but the situation where vex does nothing, it does 0, it's irrelevant to the average DPR increase.
3. Something is very off about your maths here...
I DIDN'T say that the second attack had a 5.8% I said it has a 7.8% chance to crit. Because there is a 60% chance the second attack will be at advantage with a chance to crit of 9.75% and a 40% chance that the second attack WILL NOT have advantage and will only have a 5% chance to crit.
What I think you're doing is, 0.0975 × 0.6 + 0.05 × 0.4 = 0.0785. However this is still wrong and nonsensical. Again, we can entirely dismiss the 40% here since Vex added no damage, it's a normal attack. Where Vex did add damage is in the 60% scenario where the first hit landed, thus 60% of the time, Vex has the ability to give a 0.975% chance to critical instead of a 5%, and a 84% chance to hit instead of a 60% chance to hit.
If we are going by that, then you are seeing a relatively increase of 95% chance to critical on the 2nd attack with advantage compares to not having advantage, we get that 60% of the time, so a 57% increase of chance to critical overall. We see an relative increase of 40% more chance to land the attack on the 2nd attack with advantage compared to not having advantage, since we get that 60% of the time, it's a 24% increase overall. I don't think these numbers are however that useful, since Vex can have so many variables to the damage that it does, it is not boring and simple like Flex where an increase of 10% chance to hit is 0.1 more average damage or that a 35% chance to hit is 0.35 more average damage.
Yes sam has a 62.5% CHANCE of showing up to work. Everything else you put there is wrong and non-sense.
The times Vex doesn't add damage are relevant to the average damage it adds. Flex can "add" 0 damage as well if you roll a 1 on the d10. But we dont look at that we look at the average.
I DIDN'T say that the second attack had a 5.8% I said it has a 7.8% chance to crit. Because there is a 60% chance the second attack will be at advantage with a chance to crit of 9.75% and a 40% chance that the second attack WILL NOT have advantage and will only have a 5% chance to crit.
Apply weighted average. (.6×.0975)+(.4×.05)= 7.85% this is the chance the second attack will crit if you have vex and you hit on a 9 or better.
Next weighted averages question. Dean now shows up to work 60% of the time. Sam still shows up 100% of the time dean does, and still only shows up 25% of the time he doesn't. What is the chance that Sam will show up?
1. It's not nonsense.
it is you framing the question badly, you said A is at work 50% of the time, B is at work all that same time and 25% of the time. What is the chance that B turns up to work.
The question you MEANT to ask, was how long is B at work, but that is certainly NOT the question you actually asked.
2. We actually don't care about the times Vex is not in effect.
Pretty simple, when vex isn't applied, we already know the average DPR increase of these attacks is 0. You have a 1 in 10 chance of getting a 1 on Flex for a 1d10 damage die, you have a 1 in 10 chance of getting a 10 instead, this does affect the average but the situation where vex does nothing, it does 0, it's irrelevant to the average DPR increase.
3. Something is very off about your maths here...
I DIDN'T say that the second attack had a 5.8% I said it has a 7.8% chance to crit. Because there is a 60% chance the second attack will be at advantage with a chance to crit of 9.75% and a 40% chance that the second attack WILL NOT have advantage and will only have a 5% chance to crit.
What I think you're doing is, 0.0975 × 0.6 + 0.05 × 0.4 = 0.0785. However this is still wrong and nonsensical. Again, we can entirely dismiss the 40% here since Vex added no damage, it's a normal attack. Where Vex did add damage is in the 60% scenario where the first hit landed, thus 60% of the time, Vex has the ability to give a 0.975% chance to critical instead of a 5%, and a 84% chance to hit instead of a 60% chance to hit.
If we are going by that, then you are seeing a relatively increase of 95% chance to critical on the 2nd attack with advantage compares to not having advantage, we get that 60% of the time, so a 57% increase of chance to critical overall. We see an relative increase of 40% more chance to land the attack on the 2nd attack with advantage compared to not having advantage, since we get that 60% of the time, it's a 24% increase overall. I don't think these numbers are however that useful, since Vex can have so many variables to the damage that it does, it is not boring and simple like Flex where an increase of 10% chance to hit is 0.1 more average damage or that a 35% chance to hit is 0.35 more average damage.
It isnt irrelevant. That is the problem, assuming it is irrelevant is purely wrong.
Lets give an example
You miss and do 0 damage then you hit and do 12. What is the average damage you did? Hint. It isnt 12. 0's matter when calculating averages. They always have, they always will.
If you are taking hit chance into account for how much flex adds, you need to do the same for vex. That includes the 40% when it does nothing. Just like the 40% when flex does nothing because you missed.
Edit: we are going to account for when graze does nothing because of chance to hit, we are going to account for when flex does nothing because of chance to hit, we are going to account for when cleave does nothing because of chance to hit. NO! we can't account for when Vex does nothing because of chance to hit. Results say Vex OP please fix! Huh I wonder why?
You're forgetting that Vex lasts between turns, so hitting on attack 2 of round 1 grants advantage to attack 1 of round 2. This actually makes it simpler to calculate:
Attack | P(hit)
1 | 0.6
2 | 0.744
3 | 0.78
4+ | 0.79
This is across the entire combat assuming no other factors influencing your chance to hit. If we assume a character makes ~10 attacks in a standard combat and all damage is on a per-hit basis then Vex provides a 27% increase in damage over the same weapon without Vex. (Ignoring criticals)
If we assume a short combat with only 6 attacks then Vex provides a 25% increase in damage on average.
If we include criticals then for 10 attacks Vex provides a 29% increase in damage, and for 6 attacks it provides a 26% increase in damage on average.
For comparison, Flex provides ~10-12% increase in damage using a basic non-magical weapon.
Note that: Vex, Topple, Cleave and Nick improve with magic item acquisition, but Slow, Sap, Push and Graze do not. Indeed if we account for magic weapons Cleave and Nick are the only masteries that improve as your magic items get better, whereas all the others either remain the same or become less potent.
You're forgetting that Vex lasts between turns, so hitting on attack 2 of round 1 grants advantage to attack 1 of round 2. This actually makes it simpler to calculate:
Attack | P(hit)
1 | 0.6
2 | 0.744
3 | 0.78
4+ | 0.79
This is across the entire combat assuming no other factors influencing your chance to hit. If we assume a character makes ~10 attacks in a standard combat and all damage is on a per-hit basis then Vex provides a 27% increase in damage over the same weapon without Vex. (Ignoring criticals)
If we assume a short combat with only 6 attacks then Vex provides a 25% increase in damage on average.
If we include criticals then for 10 attacks Vex provides a 29% increase in damage, and for 6 attacks it provides a 26% increase in damage on average.
Yes this. My original calculation was only first round. But yes this. And the longer you go the greater the chance the first target will die and cause a reset and there isnt much point to calculate past round 3 or 4. Though I think your 29% total is a little off.
It is (0 + 14% +18%+19%+20%x5)/10 for 15.1% increase in damage across the entire time. NOT accounting for crits. Which will take me time and a calculator. Though I am very much not sure on this one.
You're forgetting that Vex lasts between turns, so hitting on attack 2 of round 1 grants advantage to attack 1 of round 2. This actually makes it simpler to calculate:
Attack | P(hit)
1 | 0.6
2 | 0.744
3 | 0.78
4+ | 0.79
This is across the entire combat assuming no other factors influencing your chance to hit. If we assume a character makes ~10 attacks in a standard combat and all damage is on a per-hit basis then Vex provides a 27% increase in damage over the same weapon without Vex. (Ignoring criticals)
If we assume a short combat with only 6 attacks then Vex provides a 25% increase in damage on average.
If we include criticals then for 10 attacks Vex provides a 29% increase in damage, and for 6 attacks it provides a 26% increase in damage on average.
Yes this. My original calculation was only first round. But yes this. And the longer you go the greater the chance the first target will die and cause a reset and there isnt much point to calculate past round 3 or 4. Though I think your 29% total is a little off.
It is (0 + 14% +18%+19%+20%x5)/10 for 15.1% increase in damage across the entire time. NOT accounting for crits. Which will take me time and a calculator. Though I am very much not sure on this one.
Ah see you're calculations are off because you are substracting the chance to hit rather than dividing.
0.744/0.6 = 1.24 = 24% higher chance to hit/damage.
When you subtract the chances to hit then you are considering the absolute amount of damage different and the damage per hit (DMG) doesn't cancel from the equation: 0.744*DMG - 0.6*DMG = 0.14*DMG difference in damage dealt.
Whereas if you divide them to get a % difference in damage then the damage per hit does cancel and you get a universal value for the improvement:
(0.744*DMG)/(0.6*DMG) = 1.24 = 24% increase in damage dealt
PS I just ran the math assuming it requires 3 hits to kill the target, in which case Vex provides a 20% increase in damage over the first 6 attacks. For 4 hits / kill Vex = 22% increase in dmg.
You're forgetting that Vex lasts between turns, so hitting on attack 2 of round 1 grants advantage to attack 1 of round 2. This actually makes it simpler to calculate:
Attack | P(hit)
1 | 0.6
2 | 0.744
3 | 0.78
4+ | 0.79
This is across the entire combat assuming no other factors influencing your chance to hit. If we assume a character makes ~10 attacks in a standard combat and all damage is on a per-hit basis then Vex provides a 27% increase in damage over the same weapon without Vex. (Ignoring criticals)
If we assume a short combat with only 6 attacks then Vex provides a 25% increase in damage on average.
If we include criticals then for 10 attacks Vex provides a 29% increase in damage, and for 6 attacks it provides a 26% increase in damage on average.
Yes this. My original calculation was only first round. But yes this. And the longer you go the greater the chance the first target will die and cause a reset and there isnt much point to calculate past round 3 or 4. Though I think your 29% total is a little off.
It is (0 + 14% +18%+19%+20%x5)/10 for 15.1% increase in damage across the entire time. NOT accounting for crits. Which will take me time and a calculator. Though I am very much not sure on this one.
Ah see you're calculations are off because you are substracting the chance to hit rather than dividing.
0.744/0.6 = 1.24 = 24% higher chance to hit/damage.
When you subtract the chances to hit then you are considering the absolute amount of damage different and the damage per hit (DMG) doesn't cancel from the equation: 0.744*DMG - 0.6*DMG = 0.14*DMG difference in damage dealt.
Whereas if you divide them to get a % difference in damage then the damage per hit does cancel and you get a universal value for the improvement:
(0.744*DMG)/(0.6*DMG) = 1.24 = 24% increase in damage dealt
Perfect thank you sir. Just minor clarification we would need to divide that among number of attacks though right for the average damage increase per attack. correct? I may just need to play with the numbers for a bit on a calculator when I have time. to double check the work. Because the first attack was still 0 and the second was 24 so it is 12 right? Do that for each, ya I need a calculator, can't do that in my head. dang it.
Edit: very easy weighted average question. Dean comes to work 50% of the time. Sam comes to work 100% of the time dean does but only 25% of the time when dean doesn't. What is the chance sam will come to work?
Trick question, they're both terrible and should both be fired. 😝
I'd change Topple so if hit the target loses its reaction, as unbalancing attack effect. We have to prevent of extra rolling dice per attack.
This could work.
Though personally I'd like masteries to be more active; if the idea behind masteries is to give martials more options comparable to spellcasting, then they really need to be more tactical choices, though I guess switching weapons for a different passive bonus is a kind of tactical choice?
To really encourage that weapon mastery might need to come with easier weapon switching early on (when each weapon only has one mastery) but later on you should be able to get multiple options on a single weapon, with that being the tactical choice.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It isnt irrelevant. That is the problem, assuming it is irrelevant is purely wrong.
Lets give an example
You miss and do 0 damage then you hit and do 12. What is the average damage you did? Hint. It isnt 12. 0's matter when calculating averages. They always have, they always will.
If you are taking hit chance into account for how much flex adds, you need to do the same for vex. That includes the 40% when it does nothing. Just like the 40% when flex does nothing because you missed.
Edit: we are going to account for when graze does nothing because of chance to hit, we are going to account for when flex does nothing because of chance to hit, we are going to account for when cleave does nothing because of chance to hit. NO! we can't account for when Vex does nothing because of chance to hit. Results say Vex OP please fix! Huh I wonder why?
It is irrelevant, because we are looking at what Vex does, when Vex adds 0, it adds 0. We are comparing the damage that Flex and Vex add, neither of these add a specific % of damage because there are other variables which alters that %. Going with Flex since it is simpler to explain with, if you have an Average damage on hit of 10, but this increases to 11 then your damage increase on a normal hit is 10%, but if you do an average damage on hit of 15 but this increases to 16, then your damage increase on a normal hit drops to 6.67%. So we do not have consistent percentages to work with. Thus we are only comparing the absolute damage of the two scenarios, since the amount of damage between a normal hit and a critical hit are not consistent for Vex.
Further too this, we actually adjust the equation of Flex to exclude the damage it isn't doing. So if your average damage is a more modest 9.5 with a longsword (1d8+2+3), we calculate how much damage this does on a hit as an average of 4.5+2+3 for that 9.5 average, we then calculate the additional damage of a critical as an additional 1d8, or 4.5. If we know we are dealing with a 60% chance to hit then to exclude the 40% where nothing it done, we can multiply it by 60% or 0.6. So we get 9.5*0.6, additionally we look at the 1 in 20 chance to critical as a 0.05, so we also get 4.5*0.05 or 9.5 * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 5.925. There is nothing with a * 0.4 in there because we already know it's 0 * 0.4, which is 0, we exclude this because it's irrelevant, Flex added nothing. Now we repeat the same equation with flex and 1d10. We get 10.5 * 0.6 + 5.5 * 0.05 = 6.575. Flex added 0.65 average damage, pretty simple, we already knew that since there is a 60% chance to hit and a 5% chance to crit.
Now if we apply the same thing to the example of starting with no vex, how much damage does vex add in two attacks, if you miss the first attack then it adds nothing to the second. Let's stick with the same numbers, 1d8+2+3 at 60% chance to hit.
You have a 50.4% (0.6 * 0.84) chance to hit both attacks with vex
you have a 9.6% (0.6 * 0.16) chance to hit only the first attack with vex
you have a 24% (0.4 * 0.6) chance to miss the first attack but hit the second with vex
you have a 16% (0.4 * 0.4) chance to miss both attacks with vex
So the next bit of information, what are the chances without flex
You have a 36% (0.6 * 0.6) chance to hit both attacks without vex
you have a 24% (0.6 * 0.4) chance to only hit with the first attack without vex
you have a 24% (0.4 * 0.6) chance to only hit with the second attack without vex
you have a 16% (0.4 * 0.4) chance to miss both attacks without vex
If we ignore criticals for now (because I'm getting fed up of breaking this down)
A normal attack does 9.5 damage. So the damage with Vex (for both attacks) can be calculated as (9.5 * 2) * 0.54 + 9.5 * 0.096 + 9.5 * 0.24 = 13.452. The damage without Vex can be calculated as (9.5 * 2) * 0.36 + 9.5 * 0.24 + 9.5 * 0.24 = 11.4. This gives a difference of 13.452 − 11.4 = 2.052. Now what happens if we remove (+ 9.5 * 0.24) from both equations?
And that is the crux of it, in two attacks, Vex adds nothing in the case of missing the first attack, if we were talking over three or even four attacks, then vex landing on the 2nd attack adds more but the scenario (and as I've stated previously), over two attacks, it adds nothing if the first attack is a miss, thus the increased damage is 0. You'd only care about this (9.5 * 0.24), if you were trying to figure out the increased damage as % but as I've already stated multiple times, trying to figure out the damage increase as a % is a bad idea and doesn't work, because it gets altered by vastly too many different variables. Critical hits which were excluded from this calculation is one factor, another is every part of the damage equation. What if you got a flametongue shortsword? What if you got an increase in Ability modifier, or what if you got the ability to critical on different numbers (I.E champion fighter). You won't get a consistent Vex increases damage by X%, you don't even get that for Flex, as shown above, which makes it even less usable as a comparison. What we can do, is just compare the absolute increase, not the relative increase to damage.
What we do know, is that Vex grows with your damage, Flex does not. If you have a 60% chance to hit at level 1 with a 5% chance to crit and a 60% chance to hit at level 20 with a 5% chance to crit, the amount of damage it adds is still 0.65 average DPR per attack. Vex however does not work like this, as you normally do more damage at level 20 than level 1, with higher ability modifiers, enchanted weapons, more features/spells/etc.
EDIT: Does X actually matter in the following equation? Given that:
A = 1
B = 2
C = ?
D = 4
X = ?
Does X actually matter if we are trying to find C in the following?
A + D + X = B + C + X
Or can we just drop X to get?
A + D = B + C
In the original equation, X is irrelevant because it is the same on both sides of the equation, you can simply drop it from both sides to find that C is 3.
This is correct, but that isn't what your numbers showed. Your numbers assumed you didn't have advantage on your first attack and you did on the second. But this is all around correct. If you have a 70% chance to hit without advantage, the second attack goes up to 84% and subsequent attacks approach 88% until the first target dies or gets out of reach and then it resets. Though, I admit that i may have misinterpreted what you were saying, if so my bad.
My base argument of course is, if people are going to accurately gauge it then they need to not treat it as "always on advantage after first attack". Because it is not.
My numbers were 'after a hit'. You always have advantage after a hit, because that's how the ability is defined.
I like the masteries though hope they can streamline topple so saving throw doesn’t slow down as much. I haven’t playtested topple so not sure how much it might slow but extra dice having to be rolled will slow some.
I don’t like the feat. I know that’s just how they are doing things but I really feel it should be a warrior group thing with maybe paladin and Ranger, or just Ranger since paladin is still pretty good, getting it at a later level (maybe level 5)
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Your numbers still seem confused and just wrong here but I think I see the argument you're trying to make.
So if we are to calculate how likely you are to hit with Vex over two attacks without advantage on the first, you'd calculate the two chances to miss together. So first off we have a straight 60%/40%. So not landing on the first attack is 40%, then the second attack is a 84%/16%. We have a 60% chance of hitting that 16% which is a 9.6% chance. So your chance to not get the advantaged attack of Vex, is 49.6%, conversely you have a 50.4% chance to land it. Further to that, you have a chance of landing a critical at 5.85% (9.75%×0.6)
So we just want to calculate how much damage Vex adds to that attack over not having Vex, well let's use the previous formula for a normal attack
(4.5+2+4) * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 6.525
Next we need to know how much damage we do with advantage, so we again go back to the previous formular
(4.5+2+4) * 0.84 + 4.5 * 0.0975 = 9.25875
So we add 9.25875 - 6.525 = 2.73375 damage from advantage. We have a 60% chance of having triggered this, so 2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025.
Flex is really boring in these equations, it's a 60% chance to hit, 5% chance to critical and increasing a 1d8 to a 1d10 adds an average of 1 damage. The damage Flex adds is 1 * 0.65 per attack, so over those same two attacks Flex adds 1.3 damage. Meaning using 60%, Vex wins.
What if you used 70%? Well Vex would gain 0.1 damage increasing it to 1.5 damage over two attacks but Vex?
normal: (4.5+2+4) * 0.7 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 7.575
advantage: (4.5+2+4) * 0.91 + 4.5 * 0.0975 = 9.99375
So advantage adds 2.41875 and you have a 70% chance of activating it from 1st hit. 2.41875 * 0.7 = 1.693125
Meanwhile the numbers for 50% would be Flex adding 1.1 damage over two hits and vex adding 1.419375
So yes, Flex gets a bit more from attack roll than Vex but Vex generally always does more. Where Vex takes off is when you have a +5 Mod with a +3 weapon. 60% chance to hit with all that?
normal: (4.5+2+5+3) * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 8.925
advantage: (4.5+2+5+3) * 0.84 + 4.5 * 0.0975 = 12.61875
(12.61875−8.925)×0.6 = 2.21625
Where Flex is still only adding 1.3 damage over those two hits, Vex on average is adding 2.21625. Which is a point, while Vex and Flex start off fairly similarly on damage, Vex improves where Flex is basically flat, only changing with chance to hit/crit.
But again, these are just scratching the surface, There can be other boosts too damage, like Hunter's Mark, Hex, Smite spells, etc. The advantage that follows Vex, does not need to be with the Vex weapon, which adds utility that Flex just simply lacks. So while Vex appearing to outperform Flex is small for just normal attacks, Vex also grants advantage for other utilities which can be spellcasting, or could be for triggering Sneak Attack, or could be used in other such ways.
So Vex, while situational, also has utility, Flex is just a relatively flat damage increase only.
There are also other reasons why Vex is OP'ed, like how Vex is usable on a number of ranged weapons, which means it is usable with the archery fighting style... yeah... don't forget about that one.
What about if topple only triggered when you pass the target’s AC by a certain amount, say 2? So, your AC is 18, I roll a 20, you are knocked prone.
I'd be wary of conditions that can trigger without saving throws, as that bypasses legendary resistance and similar defensive features.
They could make it once per turn, but maybe the save DC increases each time you hit the same target with the weapon, so the more you press the attack the more likely it becomes to fall over multiple rounds?
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
But that still kind of bogs it down. Once per turn, though isn’t terrible. I think it could go either way. With the saving throw being higher than a 15 in most cases, I think it would actually be harder to do by beating the AC by a certain amount and that’s part of the attack as well so it’s quicker. Brainstorm time for better ideas.
Dear god no. Again my numbers are correct yours are wrong.
60% chance to hit on first attack 40% chance to miss.
Second attack hit chance is affected by your first attack. 60% you hit on the first attack and thus have advantage on your attack on the second attack. Thus 60% of the time your second attack will have 84/16 odds and 40% of the time you will have missed your first attack thus you will NOT have advantage on your second attack making it 60/40 again just like you didnt on your first. This basic weighted averages. .6x.84= .504 (chance to hit with advantage × chance the first attack hit) .6×.4= .24 (chance to hit without advantage x chance you missed your first attack and thus do not have advantage on second attack). Add those 2 together for your 100% weighted average of .744. My numbers are correct. Chance to crit, 60% of the time, the first attack hit and you will have advantage resulting in chance to crit of 9.75%. 40% of the time you will not have advantage and thus your crit chance will be 5%. Thus (.6x.0975)+(.4×.05)=7.85% weighted chance to crit.
Flex is boring and easy to calculate it is the same as always.
The whole point of flex is to be boring and easy and reward specifically sword and shield playstyle so I am comparing it to other sword and shield options. Flex isnt an option on ranged. Push and slow and vex are. Compare those to each other.
Edit: very easy weighted average question. Dean comes to work 50% of the time. Sam comes to work 100% of the time dean does but only 25% of the time when dean doesn't. What is the chance sam will come to work?
Simple, once, because coming to work and being at work are two very different numbers that are easily confused, if Dean works 50% of the day and only goes in once, but Sam works 62.5% of the day, he still only has to come once. Of course the number could be anything else, but for this example, it'd be once.
So let's break down your mistakes, first let's start with this 5% one.
9.75 × 0.6 = 5.85, even if you are rounding, it'd be the wrong direction, it is more than 5%.
You seem to think I've not applied for the fact it only applies 60% of the time, however I have:
2.73375 * 0.6 = 1.64025
I don't need to apply the 60% directly to the calculation for damage of an advantaged attack, because I calculate it more simply which simplifies the entire process.
that is to say that these two are identical:
((4.5+2+5+3) * 0.84 + 4.5 * 0.0975 ) * 0.6 = 7.57125
(4.5+2+5+3) * 0.504 + 4.5 * 0.0585 = 7.57125
However if I wanted to recalculate this for a champion fighter that crits on a 19 it is simpler to just recalculate that 0.9 * 0.9 = 0.81 and leave the 60% chance it activated from the first hit separately than doing 0.9 * 0.9 * 0.6 = 0.486. Additionally it means I can more easily compare different chances to hit, so I just update 0.6 to 0.7 if I want to calculate based on a 70% chance to hit. The way you're going over the numbers is overly complicated for no benefit.
3rd, you don't need to care about the damage of a single attack, because in that case vex did nothing, this means vex added 0. 24% of 0 is still 0, thus we can safely discard this number, we only care about the 50.4% of the time you get the advantage and it hits, any other case, missing the first hit, or even missing both hits are irrelevant, in those cases Vex added nothing but as an average Vex still adds more damage overall then Flex from two attacks like this.
Obviously Flex is easier to work with and Vex will in practice lose damage because of situational effects but it also gains damage in ways that Flex simply can't and it gives utility that flex can not, for example if hostile targets are out of range, you haste the rogue and the rogue makes two short bow attacks, the first has a 60% chance to hit and then the next attack has a 84% chance to hit AND apply sneak attack, Flex has nothing like this. Obviously it's useless if the Rogue doesn't have access to it (we will need to see how other classes are adapted to weapon mastery, if at all but suspect Nick and Vex are mostly intended for Rogue and Ranger, they make no sense for Barbarian tho some for fighter), but it's just one of the examples of things that likely will be a consideration.
Yes sam has a 62.5% CHANCE of showing up to work. Everything else you put there is wrong and non-sense.
The times Vex doesn't add damage are relevant to the average damage it adds. Flex can "add" 0 damage as well if you roll a 1 on the d10. But we dont look at that we look at the average.
I DIDN'T say that the second attack had a 5.8% I said it has a 7.8% chance to crit. Because there is a 60% chance the second attack will be at advantage with a chance to crit of 9.75% and a 40% chance that the second attack WILL NOT have advantage and will only have a 5% chance to crit.
Apply weighted average. (.6×.0975)+(.4×.05)= 7.85% this is the chance the second attack will crit if you have vex and you hit on a 9 or better.
Next weighted averages question. Dean now shows up to work 60% of the time. Sam still shows up 100% of the time dean does, and still only shows up 25% of the time he doesn't. What is the chance that Sam will show up?
1. It's not nonsense.
it is you framing the question badly, you said A is at work 50% of the time, B is at work all that same time and 25% of the time. What is the chance that B turns up to work.
The question you MEANT to ask, was how long is B at work, but that is certainly NOT the question you actually asked.
2. We actually don't care about the times Vex is not in effect.
Pretty simple, when vex isn't applied, we already know the average DPR increase of these attacks is 0. You have a 1 in 10 chance of getting a 1 on Flex for a 1d10 damage die, you have a 1 in 10 chance of getting a 10 instead, this does affect the average but the situation where vex does nothing, it does 0, it's irrelevant to the average DPR increase.
3. Something is very off about your maths here...
What I think you're doing is, 0.0975 × 0.6 + 0.05 × 0.4 = 0.0785. However this is still wrong and nonsensical. Again, we can entirely dismiss the 40% here since Vex added no damage, it's a normal attack. Where Vex did add damage is in the 60% scenario where the first hit landed, thus 60% of the time, Vex has the ability to give a 0.975% chance to critical instead of a 5%, and a 84% chance to hit instead of a 60% chance to hit.
If we are going by that, then you are seeing a relatively increase of 95% chance to critical on the 2nd attack with advantage compares to not having advantage, we get that 60% of the time, so a 57% increase of chance to critical overall. We see an relative increase of 40% more chance to land the attack on the 2nd attack with advantage compared to not having advantage, since we get that 60% of the time, it's a 24% increase overall. I don't think these numbers are however that useful, since Vex can have so many variables to the damage that it does, it is not boring and simple like Flex where an increase of 10% chance to hit is 0.1 more average damage or that a 35% chance to hit is 0.35 more average damage.
It isnt irrelevant. That is the problem, assuming it is irrelevant is purely wrong.
Lets give an example
You miss and do 0 damage then you hit and do 12. What is the average damage you did? Hint. It isnt 12. 0's matter when calculating averages. They always have, they always will.
If you are taking hit chance into account for how much flex adds, you need to do the same for vex. That includes the 40% when it does nothing. Just like the 40% when flex does nothing because you missed.
Edit: we are going to account for when graze does nothing because of chance to hit, we are going to account for when flex does nothing because of chance to hit, we are going to account for when cleave does nothing because of chance to hit. NO! we can't account for when Vex does nothing because of chance to hit. Results say Vex OP please fix! Huh I wonder why?
You're forgetting that Vex lasts between turns, so hitting on attack 2 of round 1 grants advantage to attack 1 of round 2. This actually makes it simpler to calculate:
Attack | P(hit)
1 | 0.6
2 | 0.744
3 | 0.78
4+ | 0.79
This is across the entire combat assuming no other factors influencing your chance to hit. If we assume a character makes ~10 attacks in a standard combat and all damage is on a per-hit basis then Vex provides a 27% increase in damage over the same weapon without Vex. (Ignoring criticals)
If we assume a short combat with only 6 attacks then Vex provides a 25% increase in damage on average.
If we include criticals then for 10 attacks Vex provides a 29% increase in damage, and for 6 attacks it provides a 26% increase in damage on average.
For comparison, Flex provides ~10-12% increase in damage using a basic non-magical weapon.
Note that: Vex, Topple, Cleave and Nick improve with magic item acquisition, but Slow, Sap, Push and Graze do not. Indeed if we account for magic weapons Cleave and Nick are the only masteries that improve as your magic items get better, whereas all the others either remain the same or become less potent.
Yes this. My original calculation was only first round. But yes this. And the longer you go the greater the chance the first target will die and cause a reset and there isnt much point to calculate past round 3 or 4. Though I think your 29% total is a little off.
It is (0 + 14% +18%+19%+20%x5)/10 for 15.1% increase in damage across the entire time. NOT accounting for crits. Which will take me time and a calculator. Though I am very much not sure on this one.
Ah see you're calculations are off because you are substracting the chance to hit rather than dividing.
0.744/0.6 = 1.24 = 24% higher chance to hit/damage.
When you subtract the chances to hit then you are considering the absolute amount of damage different and the damage per hit (DMG) doesn't cancel from the equation:
0.744*DMG - 0.6*DMG = 0.14*DMG difference in damage dealt.
Whereas if you divide them to get a % difference in damage then the damage per hit does cancel and you get a universal value for the improvement:
(0.744*DMG)/(0.6*DMG) = 1.24 = 24% increase in damage dealt
PS I just ran the math assuming it requires 3 hits to kill the target, in which case Vex provides a 20% increase in damage over the first 6 attacks. For 4 hits / kill Vex = 22% increase in dmg.
Perfect thank you sir. Just minor clarification we would need to divide that among number of attacks though right for the average damage increase per attack. correct? I may just need to play with the numbers for a bit on a calculator when I have time. to double check the work. Because the first attack was still 0 and the second was 24 so it is 12 right? Do that for each, ya I need a calculator, can't do that in my head. dang it.
I'd change Topple so if hit the target loses its reaction, as unbalancing attack effect. We have to prevent of extra rolling dice per attack.
Trick question, they're both terrible and should both be fired. 😝
This could work.
Though personally I'd like masteries to be more active; if the idea behind masteries is to give martials more options comparable to spellcasting, then they really need to be more tactical choices, though I guess switching weapons for a different passive bonus is a kind of tactical choice?
To really encourage that weapon mastery might need to come with easier weapon switching early on (when each weapon only has one mastery) but later on you should be able to get multiple options on a single weapon, with that being the tactical choice.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It is irrelevant, because we are looking at what Vex does, when Vex adds 0, it adds 0. We are comparing the damage that Flex and Vex add, neither of these add a specific % of damage because there are other variables which alters that %. Going with Flex since it is simpler to explain with, if you have an Average damage on hit of 10, but this increases to 11 then your damage increase on a normal hit is 10%, but if you do an average damage on hit of 15 but this increases to 16, then your damage increase on a normal hit drops to 6.67%. So we do not have consistent percentages to work with. Thus we are only comparing the absolute damage of the two scenarios, since the amount of damage between a normal hit and a critical hit are not consistent for Vex.
Further too this, we actually adjust the equation of Flex to exclude the damage it isn't doing. So if your average damage is a more modest 9.5 with a longsword (1d8+2+3), we calculate how much damage this does on a hit as an average of 4.5+2+3 for that 9.5 average, we then calculate the additional damage of a critical as an additional 1d8, or 4.5. If we know we are dealing with a 60% chance to hit then to exclude the 40% where nothing it done, we can multiply it by 60% or 0.6. So we get 9.5*0.6, additionally we look at the 1 in 20 chance to critical as a 0.05, so we also get 4.5*0.05 or 9.5 * 0.6 + 4.5 * 0.05 = 5.925. There is nothing with a * 0.4 in there because we already know it's 0 * 0.4, which is 0, we exclude this because it's irrelevant, Flex added nothing. Now we repeat the same equation with flex and 1d10. We get 10.5 * 0.6 + 5.5 * 0.05 = 6.575. Flex added 0.65 average damage, pretty simple, we already knew that since there is a 60% chance to hit and a 5% chance to crit.
Now if we apply the same thing to the example of starting with no vex, how much damage does vex add in two attacks, if you miss the first attack then it adds nothing to the second. Let's stick with the same numbers, 1d8+2+3 at 60% chance to hit.
You have a 50.4% (0.6 * 0.84) chance to hit both attacks with vex
you have a 9.6% (0.6 * 0.16) chance to hit only the first attack with vex
you have a 24% (0.4 * 0.6) chance to miss the first attack but hit the second with vex
you have a 16% (0.4 * 0.4) chance to miss both attacks with vex
So the next bit of information, what are the chances without flex
You have a 36% (0.6 * 0.6) chance to hit both attacks without vex
you have a 24% (0.6 * 0.4) chance to only hit with the first attack without vex
you have a 24% (0.4 * 0.6) chance to only hit with the second attack without vex
you have a 16% (0.4 * 0.4) chance to miss both attacks without vex
If we ignore criticals for now (because I'm getting fed up of breaking this down)
A normal attack does 9.5 damage. So the damage with Vex (for both attacks) can be calculated as (9.5 * 2) * 0.54 + 9.5 * 0.096 + 9.5 * 0.24 = 13.452. The damage without Vex can be calculated as (9.5 * 2) * 0.36 + 9.5 * 0.24 + 9.5 * 0.24 = 11.4. This gives a difference of 13.452 − 11.4 = 2.052. Now what happens if we remove (+ 9.5 * 0.24) from both equations?
((9.5 * 2) * 0.54 + 9.5 * 0.096) - ((9.5 * 2) * 0.36 + 9.5 * 0.24) = 2.052
And that is the crux of it, in two attacks, Vex adds nothing in the case of missing the first attack, if we were talking over three or even four attacks, then vex landing on the 2nd attack adds more but the scenario (and as I've stated previously), over two attacks, it adds nothing if the first attack is a miss, thus the increased damage is 0. You'd only care about this (9.5 * 0.24), if you were trying to figure out the increased damage as % but as I've already stated multiple times, trying to figure out the damage increase as a % is a bad idea and doesn't work, because it gets altered by vastly too many different variables. Critical hits which were excluded from this calculation is one factor, another is every part of the damage equation. What if you got a flametongue shortsword? What if you got an increase in Ability modifier, or what if you got the ability to critical on different numbers (I.E champion fighter). You won't get a consistent Vex increases damage by X%, you don't even get that for Flex, as shown above, which makes it even less usable as a comparison. What we can do, is just compare the absolute increase, not the relative increase to damage.
What we do know, is that Vex grows with your damage, Flex does not. If you have a 60% chance to hit at level 1 with a 5% chance to crit and a 60% chance to hit at level 20 with a 5% chance to crit, the amount of damage it adds is still 0.65 average DPR per attack. Vex however does not work like this, as you normally do more damage at level 20 than level 1, with higher ability modifiers, enchanted weapons, more features/spells/etc.
EDIT: Does X actually matter in the following equation? Given that:
A = 1
B = 2
C = ?
D = 4
X = ?
Does X actually matter if we are trying to find C in the following?
A + D + X = B + C + X
Or can we just drop X to get?
A + D = B + C
In the original equation, X is irrelevant because it is the same on both sides of the equation, you can simply drop it from both sides to find that C is 3.