Definition of a DPS Build

[Samadhi]

Background: I frequently see posters responding on players builds that "that isn't a real DPS build."

So how do we define a DPS build/character? If you believe some posters, the only way to be a REAL DPS build/character - the impression is often that unless you are a khopesh-using TWFing kensai/ranger - you are not REAL DPS. Of course, this means that only 2% of the melees on any server are DPS by this definition.

And certainly we can't leave equipment out of the discussion. Saw a flavor of the month build yesterday trying to vorpal a beholder... No cookie-cutter build is going to save your character from your own retardation or the fact that you only play once a month.

To me, I think the following is enough to qualify as a DPS build:
1) Str build w/ PA
2) TWF/THF
3) Reasonably high end equipment... (hardest to define)
I.E. the focus is on DPS

This is purely an imagined discourse but, the reason for posting, is that I want to hear others' thoughts on the matter. Yes, I know TWF is better than THF in current end game. But does that mean that THF is no longer considered a DPS build option? What percentage of the melee population should be considered DPS builds - top 30%? Or just the top 2%?

[Borror0]

To me, I think the following is enough to qualify as a DPS build:
1) Str build w/ PA
2) TWF/THF
3) Reasonably high end equipment... (hardest to define)
I.E. the focus is on DPS
Really? Those are odd prerequisites.

By that definition, my Str-based intimitank would be a DPS build when he switches to TWF even though he has Stalwart Defender! By that definition, Dex-based rogues are not DPS build either even though they got stunning DPS.

[Samadhi]

Really? Those are odd prerequisites.

By that definition, my Str-based intimitank would be a DPS build when he switches to TWF even though he has Stalwart Defender! By that definition, Dex-based rogues are not DPS build either even though they got stunning DPS.

Well that is why the question :D

A case can definitely be made for dex-based rogues; but with the whole situational argument combined with new raid bosses having fortification; as well as the success of many str-based rogue builds - does the dex rogue still make the cut?

For the stalwart defender, that actually hits pretty point on to the question I'm probably poorly explaining :P. Assuming he is well-equipped and has the TWF feats - what is really stopping him from being considered a DPS build? The fact that he (might not) have weapon focus bonuses since he has some defensive feats instead? How about the tempest ranger that couldn't fit power attack in but, in all other ways, is as typical of a DPS focused build as it is possible to be? Can a bard or cleric be a DPS build even though it will never be doing quite the damage of a ranger or kensai?

[Borror0]

[...]- what is really stopping him from being considered a DPS build?
The focus.

To me, there are only to prerequisites to being a DPS build:
1. Primarily focused on DPS
2. DPS within a certain margin (10ish%) of "best stable DPS build"

[Samadhi]

The focus.

To me, there are only to prerequisites to being a DPS build:
1. Primarily focused on DPS
2. DPS within a certain margin (10ish%) of "best stable DPS build"

Cool maybe I should reword the OP a little bit - but within 10% of "best stable" is the kind of non-specific, high abstraction analysis I'm hoping to get some thoughts on.

[Borror0]

within 10% of "best staple"
I wrote and meant stable.

Example of unstable DPS are sneak attacks, elemental damage and favored enemy damage. That is, damage you don't always get. Though, at current end game, I would consider favored enemy damage since nearly all we fight can be covered by FE. Likewise, critical hits could be included in unstable damage or partially unstable damage if we face too many elementals/undeads/constructs or monsters with high fortification.

[Samadhi]

I wrote and meant stable.

Example of unstable DPS are sneak attacks, elemental damage and favored enemy damage. That is, damage you don't always get. Though, at current end game, I would consider favored enemy damage since nearly all we fight can be covered by FE. Likewise, critical hits could be included in unstable damage if we face too many elementals/undeads/constructs.

Gotcha, corrected.

[lunaticcat]

I wrote and meant stable.

Example of unstable DPS are sneak attacks, elemental damage and favored enemy damage. That is, damage you don't always get. Though, at current end game, I would consider favored enemy damage since nearly all we fight can be covered by FE. Likewise, critical hits could be included in unstable damage or partially unstable damage if we face too many elementals/undeads/constructs or monsters with high fortification.

Another thought along this line, is what constitutues good dps? 100points a hit? 150? 50? And this would need to be broken down further I think, into sub catagories such as portals, mobs, red's, etc...

Do you take into effect the rage as stable or unstable?

[Alcides]

You also need to qualify the question as to whether or not casters (sorc / wizard) count as DPS.

As far as the definition of what a DPS class is, you're concerned with the following.
1. High Damage Per Attack.
2. Number Of Attacks in a "Round".
3. High Probability of Connecting with an Attack.

The reason TWF does more damage than THF is due to extra damage that does not come from Strength or Power Attack. When these secondary damage sources do not add extra scaling damage when using a 2H weapon, they favor a 1H weapon, because you can double dip the extra damage via the off-hand attack chain. Combine this with the fact that there are a multitude of ways to gain iterative attacks, it becomes clear that TWF outdoes THF.

These secondary damage sources can be summed up as, but not necessarily limited to the following.
Bard Song
Divine Favor
Divine Might
Divine Power
Favored Enemy Damage
Ram's Might
Sneak Attack Damage
Weapon Specialization
Weapon Damage Enhancements

[Mindspat]

You also need to qualify the question as to whether or not casters (sorc / wizard) count as DPS[?]

Casters should be considered "Nukers" as their damage is Burst rather then persistent and extremely situational.

[Mithran]

In my opinion, some arcanes do count as dps specialists, as most melees do, but your emphasis (Borror0 would say 'focus') as an arcane can instead be on crowd control or debuffs, in lieu of dps. Similarly, I have a 14 Ranger/2 Paladin who I consider primarily dps-based and 12 Ranger/3 Paladin/1 Monk who is primarily A/C.

[Borror0]

Casters should be considered "Nukers" as their damage is Burst rather then persistent and extremely situational.
Even more accurately, we could say "Casters should be considered Nukers since it is limited by resources and not time which means that they can dish out massive DPS over a short span on time or average DPS over a long period of time."
Another thought along this line, is what constitutues good dps? 100points a hit? 150? 50? And this would need to be broken down further I think, into sub catagories such as portals, mobs, red's, etc...
Damage per hit is mieaningless. It's DPS that matters.

Though, damage per hit has become a good measure of DPS due to low AC, it is not an accurate measure.

Do you take into effect the rage as stable or unstable?
Barbarian Rage? It's stable the moment you can maintain it through a dungeon.

At lower levels, it's unstable. At higher levels, it's stable.

[sirgog]

I'd call a build a DPS build if they prioritise abilities/feats/etc that deal melee damage over abilities that heal, control crowds, provide group/raid utility or provide self defense.


Example:

A rogue that spends three feats and several build points on improving trapsmithing is a utility build.

One that put those resources into DPS instead, sacrificing some trapsmithing utility (i.e.e they probably couldn't hit the Cabal Elite trap at level 16) is a DPS build.


Note that a geared utility build may out-DPS an ungeared DPS build. For instance, if the first rogue had 2 Mineral 2 khopeshes and the second 2 +1 Holy Silver shortswords, the first will probably have the better DPS, until the second one catches up on gear.

[Zuldar]

I would say any build capable of killing a mob before said mob kills them back. Obviously, some builds are better then others.

[ChaelaAnne]

By your standards, Venn actually wouldn't be considered a DPS build, as she is missing a couple of the things on your list. In that light, you've seen what she can do first hand. I consider her the top of my list as far as DPS goes, even though techincally Alex actually hits more of those standards.

[hydra_ex]

Damage per hit is mieaningless. It's DPS that matters.


Borror, I'd have to disagree with you to an extent there. Damage per hit is a great way of measuring up how much damage you're doing against others of similar build. If I'm a 90 damage per hit on average, I know that it means nothing. If I said, on the other hand, that I'm a THF who deals 90 damage or a regular hit, we'd have an accurate description of his DPS (a bit above average for a barbarian). If I said that he was TWF, I would know that thats incredible damage. DPS is probably the easiest term to use, but if you qualify your Damage per Hit with meaningful build details, then it becomes a useful figure.

[Twerpp]

If you can put so much damage on shroud orthons that you usually choose straight DPS for its consistency in killing rather than swinging vorpals I think thats a good indicator of DPS. If you can do 350-400+ in damage to Harry in an attack sequence thats pretty good. If you can do that on elite and didnt get a single crit thats really good. If you are using straight DPS on tough high HP mobs and outkilling someone with a GTWF and boosted rate of attack who is using dual WoP rapiers youve got really killer DPS. If you've got the right build in the right place at the right time with the right buffs against the right enemy you've got the best situational DPS in the game!So yeah I see where youre comin from with the question lol. Everyone who ever built a sick kill count racking toon that runs like a raped ape will swear its the best DPS.

[Borror0]

Borror, I'd have to disagree with you to an extent there. Damage per hit is a great way of measuring up how much damage you're doing against others of similar build.
It the current end game, yes it is. I even stated so: "damage per hit has become a good measure of DPS due to low AC"

However, it's not a good way to look at the DPS output. For example, I have a build that deals 30 damage per hit and then other deals 90 damage per hit. If the first one hits 90% of the time and the other hits 10% of the time, the first one wins even if the second one deals three times more damage per hit.

To-hit, targeted monster AC and damage per average hit are all necessary variables to know.

[Asketes]

what about a lvl 20 mod 8 dps based fighter (no-PrE) that has the 10% weapon alactrity + obvious greensteel/raid loot + twf + PA (of course) but in mod9.. how much does one think that will fall behind kensai?

Looking for an intuitive answer btw

[Aranticus]

OP to answer your question, we need to define 2 things:

a. DPS
b. acceptable range to defined DPS

take fighter (not going into MC builds first) for example, there are several things that contributes to DPS

1. strength
2. PrC
3. capstone
4. feats
5. enhancements

a max DPS fighter must have max str. more str = better. str can come from item, enhancements, base, tomes. to me the main one is base str.

next is PrC. you can choose between defender and kensai. of course kensai is the DPS PrC

capstone is +10% alacrity. MCs will not be able to access it but can be compensated by other abilities, ie 19ftr/1rog = SA, 19ftr/1bbn = rage. a 19ftr/1wiz will thus not be able to compensate the DPS loss

feats refer to the specialisation, weapon and fighting style feats. GTWF, 2xWS, khopesh with PA is the max DPS available

enhancement refer to the WS enhancements, kensai weapon enhancements, haste boost. of course, max them out

now we defined what is DPS for the fighter class, next is to see how much the DPS range in order to be defined DPS. i'd personally put it at 5-10%. anything less than that is not a DPS build. thats the range provided by the PA feat. i mean, how can you call yourself a DPS build when you dun have PA?

[twoton]

you also have to look at damage per second and not just look at per swing. Since this game has a active fighting system the number of attacks per second does come into play as well.

I mean you could have a guy that hits like a two ton truck but swings slow and then have a guy that does about half the amount but swings twice as fast.

there are 3 types of dpsing builds in the game

glass cannons: lower hp and low ac but have massive amount of dmg output. I.E. casters and rogues.

offensive blitz dps: high end hp and low ac. These builds are usually str based rangers. TWF khopesh using ftrs and barbs

Balanced dpsers: moderate hp and good ac. These builds are usually ranger monk splashes, Pallys and monks or s/b ftrs or pallys.

[SableShadow]

Background: I frequently see posters responding on players builds that "that isn't a real DPS build."

This has less to do with the actual build, and more to do with the the poster you see responding.

[Samadhi]

i'd personally put it at 5-10%. anything less than that is not a DPS build. thats the range provided by the PA feat. i mean, how can you call yourself a DPS build when you dun have PA?

Here's the issue I have with a range as small as 5-10% (not that I have a solution to this issue). Namely, that equipment makes much more of a difference with this narrow of a band. So to use your pure fighter example, that fighter could have chosen every option you enumerated for max damage - but is so poorly equipped that it drops far below the 10% range.

Meanwhile, a Str-based fully geared tempest ranger, that didn't have the extra feat available for Power Attack, is easily out DPS-ing the fighter and the majority of everyone else. I certainly understand and can agree with the idea of PA being essential to a true DPS build - but at the same time there are builds out there that are top 5% DPS on a server that don't have it.

Keep the ideas flowing. IMO your point B. is the main thing to tweak with.

[baddax]

I wrote and meant stable.

Example of unstable DPS are sneak attacks, elemental damage and favored enemy damage. That is, damage you don't always get. Though, at current end game, I would consider favored enemy damage since nearly all we fight can be covered by FE. Likewise, critical hits could be included in unstable damage or partially unstable damage if we face too many elementals/undeads/constructs or monsters with high fortification.


What about Burst DPS? haste boost, DM,DS etc? thats should be counted also.
For Example my pally can maintian his "burst DPS" for both parts 4 and 5 of the shroud. Or through 80% of the VOD end fight. I always make sure i save 10% of my burst DPS for the last part of the fight where its needed most.

[ddoer]

Background: I frequently see posters responding on players builds that "that isn't a real DPS build."


this is another way of saying, your DPS sxxks :D

or they are just saying, your AC is too high as a real DPS build.


I think, if you (or see another toon) consistently getting high kill counts in quests, it is a DPS build. So, DPS applies to both end-boss and other mobs.

[Samadhi]

this is another way of saying, your DPS sxxks :D

or they are just saying, your AC is too high as a real DPS build.


I think, if you (or see another toon) consistently getting high kill counts in quests, it is a DPS build. So, DPS applies to both end-boss and other mobs.

I would definitely disagree with this, as in current end game most mobs are not killed by DPS at all, at all.

[Aranticus]

Here's the issue I have with a range as small as 5-10% (not that I have a solution to this issue). Namely, that equipment makes much more of a difference with this narrow of a band. So to use your pure fighter example, that fighter could have chosen every option you enumerated for max damage - but is so poorly equipped that it drops far below the 10% range.

Meanwhile, a Str-based fully geared tempest ranger, that didn't have the extra feat available for Power Attack, is easily out DPS-ing the fighter and the majority of everyone else. I certainly understand and can agree with the idea of PA being essential to a true DPS build - but at the same time there are builds out there that are top 5% DPS on a server that don't have it.

Keep the ideas flowing. IMO your point B. is the main thing to tweak with.

that is the reason i set items aside. you could compare between 2 toons of the same uber gear set up or 2 toons without gear. this eliminates DPS from items thus only relying on the "build"

as to str based tempest, next mod FE is +14. lets see how a fighter compares, 3 enhancements = +1 dmg, 2 x weapon spec = +4, 2 x ws enh = +2, kensai = +8 str = +4, kensai weapon = +3. grand total = +14. they come out to be the same. the reason a str based tempest will out dps a str based ftr is due to tempest III stwf like ability. as of mod 8, fighters are sub par due to no PrC thus dps rangers can afford to go without PA and still out dps fighters, not next mod thou

this is also the reason i separate the different classes. a max DPS barb is very different from a max DPS fighter. the barb can ignore all AC enhancements whereas the fighter might have to maintain a decent AC due to lower hp pool

[Borror0]

What about Burst DPS? haste boost, DM,DS etc? thats should be counted also.
Burst and stable are not contradictory. Since we play in a known end game, we can estimate how much of DPS X or Y will represent in the grab scheme of things if we are really interested about that or if it matters enough.

By the way, Divine Sacrifice is not burst DPS and it is stable, too.

[EinarMal]

Why don't you just look at gfunk's thread or just calculate DPS? All that matters is where you fall on the chart.

Some people like to calculate it over 5 minutes so you can factor in things like haste boost etc. in a reasonable way. Personally I would probably do something like DPS over 10 minutes which covers time between shrines for pretty much every quest in the game.

Really not that hard to calculate, look up cforce's attack speed thread, and it's pretty much basic math.

[Visty]

its kinda easy if you look at the classes

dps: fighter, barb
support: rogue, ranger, monk, paladin, bard
casters: wizard, sorc, cleric, favsoul

[Xyfiel]

My Archer=DPS
Everyone else=in a different party, so don't matter:rolleyes:

[Borror0]

its kinda easy if you look at the classes

dps: fighter, barb
support: rogue, ranger, monk, paladin, bard
casters: wizard, sorc, cleric, favsoul
I think all rangers, all rogues and most post-Module 9 paladins will laugh at that chart.

Oh, and monk don't belong in the support category. That incorrectly suggest they are useful. :p

dps: fighter, barb
My dwarven defender wonders why his class is considered DPS.

[Mr_Ed7]

Great post...

So where is the definition anyway uber-builders?

First you may want to reiterate that DPS is Damange Per Swing...yes or no?

Second: The Definition may be : A role a character may play in a party where they are the one doing the most damage to enemy targets via some sort of weapon be it fists, swords, bows etc.

Typical DPS characters addtionally may have supstantially more hit points and armor class then other characters depending on the character's focus.

DPS classes typically include the melee or "Fighter" classes such as the Fighter proper, the Barbarian, the Ranger and the Paladin.

DPS classes also can include the Rogue and the Monk.


Something along those lines...

[EinarMal]

Great post...

So where is the definition anyway uber-builders?

First you may want to reiterate that DPS is Damange Per Swing...yes or no?

Second: The Definition may be : A role a character may play in a party where they are the one doing the most damage to enemy targets via some sort of weapon be it fists, swords, bows etc.

Typical DPS characters addtionally may have supstantially more hit points and armor class then other characters depending on the character's focus.

DPS classes typically include the melee or "Fighter" classes such as the Fighter proper, the Barbarian, the Ranger and the Paladin.

DPS classes also can include the Rogue and the Monk.

Something along those lines...

It is damage per SECOND typically not swing, and usually the best approach is to calculate it assuming equal gear and over a fixed time frame (like over 5 or 10 minutes) this allows you to factor in things with cooldown and limited use like haste boost, smites, etc...

You can drop the monk from the list ha-ha no Monk build will chart even close to top melee DPS builds.

[Yargore]

the reason a str based tempest will out dps a str based ftr is due to tempest III stwf like ability.

Wrong. A STR based tempest will not be able to out-DPS STR based kensai. Especially not if the ranger is pure.

You forgot to mention 10 x 20 sec 30% haste boost, 4 extra seeker, 1 extra crit range and higher tohit.

[Leyoni]

Background: I frequently see posters responding on players builds that "that isn't a real DPS build."

So how do we define a DPS build/character?

I have to preface by saying that I don't take this game too seriously -- I am not into accumulating the best possible gear or only making the best possible builds. I try to follow the forums and incorporate the great information found here. But, I never quite succeed in accumulating all the things that some of the posters seem to have.

Although Leyoni is my signature character, I find that it is easier and more fun for me to play melee types. I have several in various stages of development and some are better than others. I like to experiment with builds and do crazy things (like my warforged cleric 11/wizard 7/monk 2 project). However, mostly I'm a melee character kind of guy.

IMO DPS, aside from the technical meaning, really comes down to three things: 1) hitting on 2+, 2) confirming crits and 3) getting near maximum damage out of each hit.

This last item is where it gets a bit tricky. I don't have any max STR characters. So, I never really get maximum damage out of a hit. I also have finesse build characters (working on that AC angle) so I deliberately sacrifice damage for AC. Yet, I do reasonable damage per second*.

So, for the common player -- not the power guys running elite Shrouds/VoDs/Hounds -- I'd say that if you are a finesse based character whose AC keeps you in the fight longer that you are a DPS build if you are running 22+ STR with buffs/rages/etc and that if you are a STR based character whose AC doesn't let you stick around that long you are a DPS build if your STR with buffs/rages/etc is 30+.

Mind you, you still have to be hitting on 2+ and confirming your crits.

Now, when I figure out how to hit 80+ AC on a 30+ STR build....

*Edit: Reasonable IMO means that I'm able to solo a mob as quickly, or nearly so, as any other melee in the group. I use this because kill count sometimes just means you got in the lucky last blow. Soloing a monster means you don't have any help from anyone. If you can't do that any quicker than I can then our DPS must be pretty much the same. Of course, some people feel that they should not be getting hit while DPSing so my notion will be unfair to them since they can't solo mobs very efficiently due to low AC. I'll grant that they are probably hitting the limits of damage output but they require a very well run group in order to really shine.

[Aranticus]

Wrong. A STR based tempest will not be able to out-DPS STR based kensai. Especially not if the ranger is pure.

You forgot to mention 10 x 20 sec 30% haste boost, 4 extra seeker, 1 extra crit range and higher tohit.

and i also forgot to mention the loss of FE against non FE mobs etc. sometimes its smarter to look into the context of the discussion. if you look at the last sentence


this is also the reason i separate the different classes. a max DPS barb is very different from a max DPS fighter. the barb can ignore all AC enhancements whereas the fighter might have to maintain a decent AC due to lower hp pool[

there is no end to actually compare 2 classes together without setting constants which can marginalise the other abilities

[Aranticus]

Great post...

So where is the definition anyway uber-builders?

First you may want to reiterate that DPS is Damange Per Swing...yes or no?

setting that definition would make thf barbs the top damage dealers which is entirely untrue in current context

Second: The Definition may be : A role a character may play in a party where they are the one doing the most damage to enemy targets via some sort of weapon be it fists, swords, bows etc.

Typical DPS characters addtionally may have supstantially more hit points and armor class then other characters depending on the character's focus.

wrong. in ddo dps often comes with sacrifice to hp or ac. this is unlike the standard mmo where tanks have high hp, ac and huge melee attacks

DPS classes typically include the melee or "Fighter" classes such as the Fighter proper, the Barbarian, the Ranger and the Paladin.

DPS classes also can include the Rogue and the Monk.


Something along those lines...

this probably is a better idea but in general ddo dps is only concerned with melee and not ranged. for 1, a tempest ranger who alternates between MS and tempest has more dps then either of the fighting styles

[kodiak974]

that is the reason i set items aside. you could compare between 2 toons of the same uber gear set up or 2 toons without gear. this eliminates DPS from items thus only relying on the "build"

as to str based tempest, next mod FE is +14. lets see how a fighter compares, 3 enhancements = +1 dmg, 2 x weapon spec = +4, 2 x ws enh = +2, kensai = +8 str = +4, kensai weapon = +3. grand total = +14. they come out to be the same. the reason a str based tempest will out dps a str based ftr is due to tempest III stwf like ability. as of mod 8, fighters are sub par due to no PrC thus dps rangers can afford to go without PA and still out dps fighters, not next mod thou

this is also the reason i separate the different classes. a max DPS barb is very different from a max DPS fighter. the barb can ignore all AC enhancements whereas the fighter might have to maintain a decent AC due to lower hp pool


I dont agree that fighters need to have a decent AC as mine has over 500HP, and yes a barb might have 600hp raged but its not much different. And next mod they will be killing their self while attacking :)

[KingOfCheese]

I use a weird benchmark to think about DPS. I ask myself: if there were 8 clones of this character fighting the pit fiend on Part 4 of the Shroud on norm--how long would it take to get him down. If it is less than one round--uber dps. If it is between 1 and 1.5 rounds, solid DPS. If it is less then 2 rounds--ok DPS. If it is more than 2 rounds--I would not consider this a DPS character (it might become one with better gear, etc.; but it isn't one yet). When I am building a character to be a primary DPS build--I want it to fall into the category of less than one round. If it is a role player/DPS such as a DPS Warchanter or DPS Intim (an intim that can swap to twf or thf), I shoot for less than 2 rounds.

[Samadhi]

Why don't you just look at gfunk's thread or just calculate DPS? All that matters is where you fall on the chart.
<more stuff>
You can drop the monk from the list ha-ha no Monk build will chart even close to top melee DPS builds.

For you first point, this is exactly inline with the actual question. We can calculate top DPS - but what % of top DPS is considered still a DPS toon? If you are saying that you need to be within 2% of the top DPS build to be considered a DPS build; then as per my initial discussion, you are exactly what this post was targeted towards. It doesn't make sense, to my commonality, that 98% of the melees on a server are not considered DPS builds - esp. when they certainly are NOT AC builds.

If you drop the threshold to 10%, then it is entirely possible for a well built monk to make the grade. If you use the definition that a couple folks have mentioned (i.e. what is the build's focus), then we are looking at builds probably 30-40% below max DPS still making the line to be considered a DPS build. If we exclude equipment, then we will definitely see characters below 50% being considered DPS.

[EinarMal]

If you drop the threshold to 10%, then it is entirely possible for a well built monk to make the grade. If you use the definition that a couple folks have mentioned (i.e. what is the build's focus), then we are looking at builds probably 30-40% below max DPS still making the line to be considered a DPS build. If we exclude equipment, then we will definitely see characters below 50% being considered DPS.

No way a monk is within 10% of a tempest rogue or tempest kensai, I would be shocked if you could get better than 30-40% less.

I do not believe the feats or focus you take matter, the only think that matters is the results. Who cares if you focus on DPS but still only manage ~60% of max. That is just a bad build.

Now it some cases you can sacrifice 10-20% of max DPS to do other things like self healing, etc...

In my opinion if you want to claim being a top tier DPS build you need to be within 20% or so of a tempest kensai type build.

That means for example that no Bard build next Mod with mostly Bard levels can be a top tier DPS build, at best they are at about 60% of top tier builds. That doesn't mean they aren't useful for the other things they do but they are not top tier DPS builds.

[Aranticus]

I dont agree that fighters need to have a decent AC as mine has over 500HP, and yes a barb might have 600hp raged but its not much different. And next mod they will be killing their self while attacking :)

i like a little more survivability. my fighter can hit raid buffed 67 AC, has 460 standing hp. he can perform multiple roles rather than just DPS :)

[gfunk]

I dont think that "where you are are in a chart" constitutes whether you are a dps build or not. I consider any build that is TWF or THF which chooses a majority of offensive feats and enhancements relative to their defensive feats and enhancements to be a dps build (regardless of what class they are). ( excluding DPS casting here, though some people might wish to include it)

I think of this as relative to the class in question.. for example: a cleric could be a dps build if they focused more of their feats/enhancements on offense, even if they were near the bottom of overall dps rankings. I consider my warchanter to be a DPS build, even though they don't even do the same damage as a str based ranger vs non-favored. My fighter is a dps build, but If I took stalewart defender I would not consider them to be a DPS build even though they would do more DPS then my bard.

[Visty]

I think all rangers, all rogues and most post-Module 9 paladins will laugh at that chart.if ppl would acknowledge that they are support there would be alot less rant and wine on the forums



Oh, and monk don't belong in the support category. That incorrectly suggest they are useful. :p
true, but a whole category for just 1 class seems abit silly, thats why they are rated suport


My dwarven defender wonders why his class is considered DPS.

cause he is a fighter

[Drfirewater79]

I think we should also keep in mind shroud items

a dex based monk build using lightning kamas swings at a hit rate of 3 extra attacks per round with haste vs standard fighter with haste meaning they get 3 more chances at seeing lightning strike go off.

I have a TWF dps fighter (28 point build back in the day ) that dual weilds dwarven axe lightning III weapons and tempest rangers and monks dual weilding them have to hit at least twice as often cause of out numbering speed attacks

so its hard to say if a dex build can be a dps build as well .... damage per hit and damage per second are two different topics completely but they often get merged into the same world for some reason ...

I am by no means saying monks currently with the poor development of handwraps and the disadvantage of things like transmuting and shroud weapons on handwraps that currently make them far from DPS builds generally speaking.

however you cant take things like weaponry away from any character class

so my idea of a DPS build is

1) Character with high to hit potential
2) character with Great Weaponry (shroud or equal for moment)
3) character with abnormal crit potential (bloodstone or kensai with good crit weapon)
4) Character with abnormal attack speed (tempest ranger or wind monk)
5) character with high str (for bonus damage) [not always needed but nice for extra]
6) Character with all race and class damage amplification enhancements (dwarf axe)

[Borror0]

if ppl would acknowledge that they are support there would be alot less rant and wine on the forums
Incorrect.

There would be more rant because:

All of those will deal more DPS than a barbarian and at least one of those will deal more DPS than a fighter.
Rangers, rogues, monks and paladins have very, very poor support to offer to a group.


cause he is a fighter
That was supposed to make you understand that your system of categorization is too simplistic.

[Shade]

I consider DPS melee anyone who really focuses on DPS 100%. I don't care if their particularly chosen class/race/weapon isn't considered the best, as long as their build and gear is focused on it.
So:
1. Melee Class: Barb, Fighter, Ranger, Rogue, even Monk (tho they really have to try harder then most)
2. Max strength for all except Dex rogue, who max dex. Includes base + lvlup. If you onlys started 17 of 18 for a legit reason thats still dps. 16 or less = no.
3. dps feats minimum: Power Attack, TWF/THF feats, Icrit
3. Enhancements focused on dps, so rangers gets tempest, barb crit rage, etc.
4. Gear 100% focused on DPS, never anything given up for Ac/Saves/etc. Must have bloodstone or be trying to get it (or other form of acc. seeker), no head of good fortune. Monks shouldn't wear the stupid icy raiment, they should be using a DT outfit with +1 str if they have it. Any type of +AC items are out unless there is nothing else for that slot. In Shroud and most scenerios where you get mass healed, they should puprosely lower there AC as much as they can to ensure things like madstone and guards proc more often. If you ever ask for barkskin in shroud - your automatically kicked out of the DPS club.

Some exceptions apply.. Like dex Rogues in undead/construct quests.. Not dps.

These are some expectations I set for people when I say I want a "DPS melee" in my LFMs. I hihgly doubt they all met by those who sign up -but il'l generally take whoever anyways without regards to them, as there just ideals and not rules.

[Anthios888]

its kinda easy if you look at the classes

dps: fighter, barb
support: rogue, ranger, monk, paladin, bard
casters: wizard, sorc, cleric, favsoul

I think you missed the point. There are many, many builds in your 'support' and even 'casters' category that are building for DPS: they have greater two weapon fighting, they have enhancements, they're wearing sick weapons and prioritizing for bloodstone or lotd, tharne's goggles, whatever else, and making that generic fighter look like a lowbie.

[jmelanie7]

If you are using straight DPS on tough high HP mobs and outkilling someone with a GTWF and boosted rate of attack who is using dual WoP rapiers youve got really killer DPS.

In fact, it only means you get the last hit on a 1 con wounded mob, or that the GTWF using WoP rapiers (or even SS) has a VERY low to-hit. Killcount is biased, since it only shows the toon that got the last hit on the mob, and is FAR from being reliable for counting DPS.

[Anthios888]

That means for example that no Bard build next Mod with mostly Bard levels can be a top tier DPS build, at best they are at about 60% of top tier builds. That doesn't mean they aren't useful for the other things they do but they are not top tier DPS builds.

I feel that for some classes it is relative to others of the class. My bard is a perfect example. g2wf, power attack, dual min II khopeshes, litany of the dead, tharne's goggles, inspired attack III and inspired damage III, pure for the final damage boost, 32 strength. I could gimp myself out of existence trying to be the #1 top dps build standing alone by splashing fighter levels or ranger levels or whatever, but I would lose my edge in filling the bard role in the game. However, the relative net DPS increase a party gets for having that particular bard instead of a "non-DPS bard" or "haggle-focused bard" (a huge percentage of all bard icons) is far more than the difference between whatever nuance there may be between your kensai fighter and your dex rogue.

It's a group game. Striving for great DPS is a good goal, but simply setting the mark at % of X is losing out on the bigger picture.

[Anthios888]

I'd call a build a DPS build if they prioritise abilities/feats/etc that deal melee damage over abilities that heal, control crowds, provide group/raid utility or provide self defense.

Note that a geared utility build may out-DPS an ungeared DPS build.

Agree here

[EinarMal]

I feel that for some classes it is relative to others of the class. My bard is a perfect example. g2wf, power attack, dual min II khopeshes, litany of the dead, tharne's goggles, inspired attack III and inspired damage III, pure for the final damage boost, 32 strength. I could gimp myself out of existence trying to be the #1 top dps build standing alone by splashing fighter levels or ranger levels or whatever, but I would lose my edge in filling the bard role in the game. However, the relative net DPS increase a party gets for having that particular bard instead of a "non-DPS bard" or "haggle-focused bard" (a huge percentage of all bard icons) is far more than the difference between whatever nuance there may be between your kensai fighter and your dex rogue.

It's a group game. Striving for great DPS is a good goal, but simply setting the mark at % of X is losing out on the bigger picture.

Which is why I said that it doesn't mean that your Bard isn't very useful, but it will not next Mod be a top tier DPS build.

It depends on if you consider DPS focused to mean the best a particular class can do, in which case every class could be a DPS build.

The distinction I am making is the kind of claim you make, saying your a DPS focused Bard is accurate, saying that you have a top DPS build is not.

[cforce]

The problem lies in trying to discuss this in absolutes.

If you have never taken a feat or enhancement that aids saves, AC, DR, or hit points over one that aids to-hit or damage, you are a 'pure DPS build'.

If you have never taken a feat or enhancement that aids to-hit or damage over one that aids saves, AC, DR, or hit points, you are a 'pure defensive build'.

Otherwise, you are somewhere on the spectrum in between. And almost everyone is.

[kingfisher]

It's a group game. Striving for great DPS is a good goal, but simply setting the mark at % of X is losing out on the bigger picture.

bingo. this is a nice conversation and all, but there is no 100% correct answer here. all builds do damge to mobs and/or contribute to the damage others are doing to mobs. imo as close as you can get is:

dps build - a build that focuses on damage. This does not say whether the build is good or not, whether it is high enough dps to be called a successful dps build, or even if it is effective enough to be wanted in party - all of these thing are measurable on a toon-by-toon basis ONLY, because so much of their dps is gear based.

[Samadhi]

dps build - a build that focuses on damage. This does not say whether the build is good or not, whether it is high enough dps to be called a successful dps build, or even if it is effective enough to be wanted in party.

This seems to be the most popular answer so far, given those caveats.

[Mr_Ed7]

Still holding on the definition of DPS from some strong opinion minded individuals, perhaps Borro or Aranticus (sp) could provide...

Damage per second...ok we need more though.

Monk is neither support or DPS?
What about those monks that kill everything with like 70 kills in a dungeon? Is that DPS or no?

Monk in it own category...other?

Most seem to be melee, at least thats how I see them when filling groups.

[Aranticus]

Still holding on the definition of DPS from some strong opinion minded individuals, perhaps Borro or Aranticus (sp) could provide...

if this is so, u can give the definition too!

Damage per second...ok we need more though.

Monk is neither support or DPS?
What about those monks that kill everything with like 70 kills in a dungeon? Is that DPS or no?

my wiz topped kill counts in 2 tor runs in a row. is that DPS? no i did not nuke

Monk in it own category...other?

Most seem to be melee, at least thats how I see them when filling groups.

of coz they are melees :eek:

[SableShadow]

The problem lies in trying to discuss this in absolutes.

If you have never taken a feat or enhancement that aids saves, AC, DR, or hit points over one that aids to-hit or damage, you are a 'pure DPS build'.

If you have never taken a feat or enhancement that aids to-hit or damage over one that aids saves, AC, DR, or hit points, you are a 'pure defensive build'.

Otherwise, you are somewhere on the spectrum in between. And almost everyone is.

People cling to archtypes even when such clearly do not exist.

[Drfirewater79]

Incorrect.

There would be more rant because:

All of those will deal more DPS than a barbarian and at least one of those will deal more DPS than a fighter.
Rangers, rogues, monks and paladins have very, very poor support to offer to a group.


That was supposed to make you understand that your system of categorization is too simplistic.

Borrow i dont usually disagree with you so strongly but man are you off on that second point

if you build them right dps wise rangers and rouges are way better then fighters ... if they are built right a rouge who is built for dps will have str base and mix of con and int for skills and just bluff all the time so he can sneak attack constantly that is an extra 20-30 damage every swing that no fighter or barbarian can ever get

ranger who builds strength build with tempest can swing at the speed of a monk and dual weild as bonus feat so he can take dual kopesh/dwarven axe or any other green steel dual weild combo and rip through dps making them one of if not the single greatest dps class in the game today

Palidans and monks while not the highest DPS in the game depending on weapons can still be very usefull ... they are support fighters .... palidans ability to heal and monks speed make them perfect for almost every mission in the game

Palidans if built for str (which personally i wouldn;t do again) can have great saves and if they build to have enough smites they can even do quite a bit of damage while definatly not DPS they are one of the top single hit damage classing in DDO

monks are great for speed attack they attack at tempest speed whien they are wind monk and with the fix to dual weilding and handwrap speed of attacks will make handwraps (and the new ring which is very broken in my eyes but i guess i need to get one before i finalize my hate for them) will have monks speed wise being very good dps and top end ac just may not be that of a full str fighter but if they are halfling and have halfling guile and the goggles from VOD they add another 16-20 points of damage to each swing which is easily 2 or 3 times the speed of a fighter.

There is no build in DDO that is useless .... most monks can solo some at level missions using very resources and i am willing to bet rangers are the same way.

as far as current game and DPS as in per second I would agree that monks and palidans right now are the two lowest but really they are suppost to be support fighters anyway ... monks in PnP can out damage a fighter no problem just DDO has messed with monks so much that they fit in as lowest dps vs second highest to barbs where they should be.

...................

on a side note i agree with shade ..........and icy raiment is garbage if a monk is wearing it instead of DT armor they are not a good monk period ... i can hit 80 ac if buffed right and standing beside a palidan and i checked it vs my icy raiment and i loose 3 ac by having icy raiment on (Dt current = greater fire resistance Wis+1 (making me 28) and hieghtend awareness (+4 to ac) throw on some chaos bracers and my chattering ring and i out do IR every time its in my bank hoping one day it will be bound to account so i can use it on my next monk or ranger till they get DT)

[Borror0]

Borrow i dont usually disagree with you so strongly but man are you off on that second point
How so? Nothing you've said contradicts that point: Visty's categorization is too simplistic.

[Vivanto]

Borrow i dont usually disagree with you so strongly but man are you off on that second point - snip -

And what's that gotta do with Borror0's statement?

You only showed that they are good to dps, nothing with being a bad supporter.

[rimble]

This is purely an imagined discourse but, the reason for posting, is that I want to hear others' thoughts on the matter. Yes, I know TWF is better than THF in current end game. But does that mean that THF is no longer considered a DPS build option? What percentage of the melee population should be considered DPS builds - top 30%? Or just the top 2%?

I usually consider it relative to the build itself.

You can make a 'DPS Rogue' or an 'Assassinate Rogue'.

You can make a 'DPS Fighter' or a 'Tactics Fighter'.

You can make a 'DPS Sorcerer' or a 'CC/Buff Sorcerer'.

You can make a 'DPS Paladin' or 'Balanced Paladin'.

And so on.

It's more about defining your personal goals for the character, and not how they stand in relation to other characters.

Now when you start throwing 'Max DPS' and 'Uber DPS' and 'Monster/Exploiter/God' and other silly monikers in front, then you're throwing yourself into the overall DPS comparison.

Guess I pretty much agree with people that are along these lines:


dps build - a build that focuses on damage. This does not say whether the build is good or not, whether it is high enough dps to be called a successful dps build, or even if it is effective enough to be wanted in party - all of these thing are measurable on a toon-by-toon basis ONLY, because so much of their dps is gear based.

[Thrudh]

I use a weird benchmark to think about DPS. I ask myself: if there were 8 clones of this character fighting the pit fiend on Part 4 of the Shroud on norm--how long would it take to get him down. If it is less than one round--uber dps. If it is between 1 and 1.5 rounds, solid DPS. If it is less then 2 rounds--ok DPS. If it is more than 2 rounds--I would not consider this a DPS character (it might become one with better gear, etc.; but it isn't one yet).

That's an interesting way of looking at it...

The problem is, it's still hard to tell how good YOU are... I've been in 1 rounders and 3 rounders with the same character. Was he carried in the 1 rounder? or was he dragged down by others in the 3 rounder?

The only thing I go by is the FIRST number.. I'd love to see the ubers give us some numbers on DAMAGE PER SWING... My understanding is that seeing a red 70-80 per swing (first number) on the Pit Fiend with a great axe (and 220-240 on crits) equals good DPS...

Is that true or not?

What numbers should TWF be seeing to be considered good? Again, first number only... What's a good damage number for THF and TWF against the Pit Fiend?

[Aranticus]

I usually consider it relative to the build itself.

You can make a 'DPS Rogue' or an 'Assassinate Rogue'.

or you can make a DPS assassinate rog


Character Plan by DDO Character Planner Version 3.06
DDO Character Planner Home Page (http://www.rjcyberware.com/DDO)

Level 20 Lawful Good Halfling Male
(20 Rogue)
Hit Points: 242
Spell Points: 0
BAB: 15\15\20\25\25
Fortitude: 10
Reflex: 18
Will: 6

Starting Feat/Enhancement
Abilities Base Stats Modified Stats
(32 Point) (Level 1) (Level 20)
Strength 16 24
Dexterity 15 20
Constitution 13 16
Intelligence 14 16
Wisdom 8 8
Charisma 8 8

Tomes Used
+2 Tome of Dexterity used at level 1
+1 Tome of Constitution used at level 1
+2 Tome of Intelligence used at level 1
+3 Tome of Strength used at level 20
+3 Tome of Constitution used at level 20

Level 1 (Rogue)
Feat: (Selected) Toughness


Level 2 (Rogue)


Level 3 (Rogue)
Feat: (Selected) Two Weapon Fighting


Level 4 (Rogue)


Level 5 (Rogue)


Level 6 (Rogue)
Feat: (Selected) Power Attack


Level 7 (Rogue)


Level 8 (Rogue)


Level 9 (Rogue)
Feat: (Selected) Improved Two Weapon Fighting


Level 10 (Rogue)
Feat: (Rogue Bonus) Cripling Strike


Level 11 (Rogue)


Level 12 (Rogue)
Feat: (Selected) Oversized Two Weapon Fighting


Level 13 (Rogue)
Feat: (Rogue Bonus) Slippery Mind


Level 14 (Rogue)


Level 15 (Rogue)
Feat: (Selected) Greater Two Weapon Fighting


Level 16 (Rogue)


Level 17 (Rogue)


Level 18 (Rogue)
Feat: (Selected) Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Khopesh


Level 19 (Rogue)
Feat: (Rogue Bonus) Improved Evasion


Level 20 (Rogue)
Enhancement: Rogue Damage Boost I
Enhancement: Rogue Damage Boost II
Enhancement: Rogue Haste Boost I
Enhancement: Rogue Haste Boost II
Enhancement: Rogue Haste Boost III
Enhancement: Rogue Haste Boost IV
Enhancement: Halfling Dexterity I
Enhancement: Halfling Cunning I
Enhancement: Halfling Cunning II
Enhancement: Halfling Cunning III
Enhancement: Halfling Cunning IV
Enhancement: Halfling Guile I
Enhancement: Halfling Guile II
Enhancement: Halfling Guile III
Enhancement: Halfling Guile IV
Enhancement: Rogue Subtle Backstabber I
Enhancement: Racial Toughness I
Enhancement: Racial Toughness II
Enhancement: Rogue Faster Sneaking I
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy I
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy II
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy III
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy IV
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Training I
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Training II
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Training III
Enhancement: Rogue Sneak Attack Training IV
Enhancement: Rogue Assassin I
Enhancement: Rogue Assassin II
Enhancement: Rogue Assassin III
Enhancement: Rogue Hide I
Enhancement: Rogue Hide II
Enhancement: Rogue Move Silently I
Enhancement: Rogue Move Silently II
Enhancement: Rogue Dexterity I
Enhancement: Rogue Dexterity II





You can make a 'DPS Fighter' or a 'Tactics Fighter'.

or you can make a DPS tactics fighter


Character Plan by DDO Character Planner Version 3.06
DDO Character Planner Home Page (http://www.rjcyberware.com/DDO)

Level 20 Lawful Good Dwarf Male
(20 Fighter)
Hit Points: 362
Spell Points: 0
BAB: 20\20\25\30\30
Fortitude: 15
Reflex: 9
Will: 7

Starting Feat/Enhancement
Abilities Base Stats Modified Stats
(32 Point) (Level 1) (Level 20)
Strength 18 28
Dexterity 15 17
Constitution 13 18
Intelligence 13 14
Wisdom 8 8
Charisma 6 6

Tomes Used
+2 Tome of Dexterity used at level 1
+1 Tome of Constitution used at level 1
+1 Tome of Intelligence used at level 1
+3 Tome of Strength used at level 20
+3 Tome of Constitution used at level 20

Level 1 (Fighter)
Feat: (Selected) Toughness
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Weapon Focus: Slashing Weapons


Level 2 (Fighter)
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Combat Expertise


Level 3 (Fighter)
Feat: (Selected) Stunning Blow


Level 4 (Fighter)
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Weapon Specialization: Slashing Weapons


Level 5 (Fighter)


Level 6 (Fighter)
Feat: (Selected) Iron Will
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Power Attack


Level 7 (Fighter)


Level 8 (Fighter)
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Improved Critical: Slashing Weapons


Level 9 (Fighter)
Feat: (Selected) Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Khopesh


Level 10 (Fighter)
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Greater Weapon Focus: Slashing Weapons


Level 11 (Fighter)


Level 12 (Fighter)
Feat: (Selected) Greater Weapon Specialization: Slashing Weapons
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Two Weapon Fighting


Level 13 (Fighter)


Level 14 (Fighter)
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Improved Two Weapon Fighting


Level 15 (Fighter)


Level 16 (Fighter)
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Greater Two Weapon Fighting


Level 17 (Fighter)


Level 18 (Fighter)
Feat: (Selected) Improved Trip
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Superior Weapon Focus: Slashing Weapons


Level 19 (Fighter)


Level 20 (Fighter)
Feat: (Fighter Bonus) Quick Draw
Enhancement: Fighter Attack Boost I
Enhancement: Fighter Attack Boost II
Enhancement: Fighter Attack Boost III
Enhancement: Fighter Haste Boost I
Enhancement: Fighter Haste Boost II
Enhancement: Fighter Haste Boost III
Enhancement: Fighter Haste Boost IV
Enhancement: Fighter Weapon Alacrity
Enhancement: Dwarven Constitution I
Enhancement: Dwarven Constitution II
Enhancement: Dwarven Tactics I
Enhancement: Dwarven Tactics II
Enhancement: Dwarven Tactics III
Enhancement: Kensei Khopesh Mastery I
Enhancement: Kensei Khopesh Mastery II
Enhancement: Kensei Khopesh Mastery III
Enhancement: Fighter Critical Accuracy I
Enhancement: Fighter Critical Accuracy II
Enhancement: Fighter Critical Accuracy III
Enhancement: Fighter Kensei I
Enhancement: Fighter Kensei II
Enhancement: Fighter Kensei III
Enhancement: Fighter Strategy (Stunning Blow) I
Enhancement: Fighter Strategy (Stunning Blow) II
Enhancement: Fighter Strategy (Stunning Blow) III
Enhancement: Fighter Strategy (Stunning Blow) IV
Enhancement: Fighter Khopesh Specialization I
Enhancement: Fighter Khopesh Specialization II
Enhancement: Racial Toughness I
Enhancement: Racial Toughness II
Enhancement: Fighter Strength I
Enhancement: Fighter Strength II
Enhancement: Fighter Toughness I
Enhancement: Fighter Toughness II





You can make a 'DPS Sorcerer' or a 'CC/Buff Sorcerer'.

You can make a 'DPS Paladin' or 'Balanced Paladin'.

And so on.

It's more about defining your personal goals for the character, and not how they stand in relation to other characters.

Now when you start throwing 'Max DPS' and 'Uber DPS' and 'Monster/Exploiter/God' and other silly monikers in front, then you're throwing yourself into the overall DPS comparison.

Guess I pretty much agree with people that are along these lines:

it doesnt meant that if you decide to specialize on 1 area, it means that you have to drop the DPS portion. one can still maintain high DPS with another function. a good build is a build great at doing something. a great build is a build great in 1 function and is good in another

[rimble]

or you can make a DPS assassinate rog

Of course you can. My list wasn't meant to be an exhaustive list of possibilities.


it doesnt meant that if you decide to specialize on 1 area, it means that you have to drop the DPS portion. one can still maintain high DPS with another function. a good build is a build great at doing something. a great build is a build great in 1 function and is good in another

Again, though, it says where you're focusing your character. If you make a 'DPS/Assassinate' Rogue, as opposed to an 'Assassinate/DPS' Rogue, when conflicts arise and you need to make a build choice...one build will choose the DPS choice and the other the Assassinate choice...it's just a general description of where your priorities are at.

[Aranticus]

Again, though, it says where you're focusing your character. If you make a 'DPS/Assassinate' Rogue, as opposed to an 'Assassinate/DPS' Rogue, when conflicts arise and you need to make a build choice...one build will choose the DPS choice and the other the Assassinate choice...it's just a general description of where your priorities are at.

agree but for some classes its easier to dual role ie a dps wiz can be a cc wiz. main stat is int and a wiz has like 11 or 12 feats. similarly for a fighter, the abundance of feats allow one to be good in more than 1 area

[Drfirewater79]

How so? Nothing you've said contradicts that point: Visty's categorization is too simplistic.

I am just saying rangers dont need support its really monks who are the only ones who need it ... palis got there boost by getting cap stone that kicks ass

monks completely lack support while all the other classes you listed are totally fine the way they are ..... do awesome damage and are great in parties and not hated on at all most of the time

i have seen great shroud parties that where 60% ranger and people say "oh low dps party" and then we kick his ass early 2nd round.

as for wining the only people i feel have need to truly wine about how gimped there are DPS wise from PnP to DDO is the monk .. in PnP its easy to create a monk that does near same damage as a barb .. in DDO we cant even keep up with rangers and palidans.

that is all i am saying ..... as far as poor support for classes monks get the short end of the stick every time.

and that is why monks aren't ever gonna be seen as a DPS class ..... even at lvl 20 with 2d10 fists .....dont even get me started on greensteel.

[Borror0]

I am just saying rangers dont need support
I know. I said that.

No, actually, I pushed it even further. I said that rangers can't support.

its really monks who are the only ones who need it
Monks could be DPS, tanking or support. The class design is quite open.

Sadly, they are nothing but an unshaped class with no specific goal or anything to make them contribute much.

[cluedout]

this is really not complicated, a DPS build is a build that can deal an amount of damage per second, reguardless of what anyone says, as per definition of dps

now, my wizard can dps with spells, my 2 rangers can dps with swords, my upcoming WF wiz/rog/ftr can dps with both swords and spells, my cleric can dps with his spell penn scepter/devotion 8 shield. so all my builds are now dps builds.

so for your DPS take the amount of damage you do in 1 min and divide by 60 and that is your dps.

have a good and wonderful day.

[Yargore]

as for wining the only people i feel have need to truly wine about how gimped there are DPS wise from PnP to DDO is the monk .. in PnP its easy to create a monk that does near same damage as a barb .. in DDO we cant even keep up with rangers and palidans.

Not even barbs can keep up with rangers right now though.

[Shade]

Not even barbs can keep up with rangers right now though.
Perhaps in your magical fairy land.

In the real game, no other class can keep up with Barbarians.

You know - DDO.. The game where even the Devs themselves finally acknoledge that Barbarians are overpowered so they nerf them by removing critical rage from the game. (the most massive increase to DPS ever)

[BlackSteel]

Perhaps in your magical fairy land.

In the real game, no other class can keep up with Barbarians.

You know - DDO.. The game where even the Devs themselves finally acknoledge that Barbarians are overpowered so they nerf them by removing critical rage from the game. (the most massive increase to DPS ever)

meh, crit rage is being nerfed more for the abuse of on crit effects than for damage. If it was solely for damage then you wouldnt be getting a crit multiplier addition with FB

[Borror0]

If it was solely for damage then you wouldnt be getting a crit multiplier addition with FB
...especially since it leads to equal DPS on khopesh. You know, the highest DPS one handed weapon.

As for THF, Critical Rage II is far less DPS than FB III on the best two-handed weapon; falchion.

[78mackson]

...especially since it leads to equal DPS on khopesh. You know, the highest DPS one handed weapon.


50%+ fort on stuff that really matters doesnt help crits that much either... IMHO I think they could let the barbs keep the crit-range and just let em(em? .. eurm.. I also got one ofc) pay more AP for it..

[Borror0]

I think they could let the barbs keep the crit-range and just let em [...] pay more AP for it..
There were two identifiable problems with Critical Rage:

It was strongly biased toward high critical hit multiplier
It was improving barbarians' ability to kill outside from DPS (Puncturing, Banishing, etc.)

Frenzied Berserker do neither; it benefits equally to all weapons and does not improve barbarians' ability to kill outside of their DPS.

Simply increasing the AP cost would not have sufficed.

[bobbryan2]

I consider every melee who isn't actively trying to keep aggro a DPS build. You can differentiate between tanks and DPS... but anything else is a stretch.

There really aren't utility or support builds in my opinion. There's just good DPS builds and bad DPS builds.

[78mackson]

There were two identifiable problems with Critical Rage:

It was strongly biased toward high critical hit multiplier
It was improving barbarians' ability to kill outside from DPS (Puncturing, Banishing, etc.)

Frenzied Berserker do neither; it benefits equally to all weapons and does not improve barbarians' ability to kill outside of their DPS.

Simply increasing the AP cost would not have sufficed.

ye wop barbs were uber mod8 but not in next... and the new viscious thinghy is certainly not as great as con-drainers were in mod8..

what I mean is...
its sad to see the cool class with an axe symbol going way down the list in terms of DPS.. oh well.. atleast you know what u get when u take a barb.. or w8 you dont(u can still get the sword n board type and the thf-non twitcher)....

[Borror0]

its sad to see the cool class with an axe symbol going way down the list in terms of DPS..
Way down? If THF, its DPS went up quite a bit with Module 9.

If TWF, then Frenzied Berserker III is still an improvement over Critical Rage II but not enough to make up for what other classes got.

[78mackson]

Way down? If THF, its DPS went up quite a bit with Module 9.

If TWF, then Frenzied Berserker III is still an improvement over Critical Rage II but not enough to make up for what other classes got.

makes up(frenzied) vs rangers imho.. and seriously, THF?

to be close to par, u need to twitch:
* non-stop twitching is for ppl who needs ritalin. my wrists gets sore enough from not doing it.

* Lag issiues makes it close to impossible to twitch correctly.(and usually/ofc it lags where it really counts :P)

* THF:er is also lousy at stat dmging and vorpalise. makes stuff like mod6 really funny to run when your friend got the wops n banishers, smiters going for him... thank god for the wop nerf thou!

[Borror0]

makes up(frenzied) vs rangers
I am not sure I understand the point you are trying to make here.

makes up(frenzied) vs rangers imho.. and seriously, THF?
I didn't mean that THF was good. I meant that FB presents a big gain for THF characters.

While greataxe used to be the best weapon, in module 9 it will be the falchion and FB helps falchions more than CR did.

THF:er is also lousy at stat dmging and vorpalise. makes stuff like mod6 really funny to run when your friend got the wops n banishers, smiters going for him... thank god for the wop nerf thou!
While true, there is no indication that those will be of importance in module 9.

w/p got drastically weakened, banishers won't work and smiting will not be useful that much of the time. The only possible case where TWF >> THF is with Vorpal and if Turbine has not understood that letting Vorpal be good is not fun or good design, we're into deeper problem and I just found my first Module 9 rant topic. ;)

[Samadhi]

I consider every melee who isn't actively trying to keep aggro a DPS build. You can differentiate between tanks and DPS... but anything else is a stretch.

There really aren't utility or support builds in my opinion. There's just good DPS builds and bad DPS builds.

A very good point.