Check my math

[coolpenguin410]

Unarmed vs Quaterstaff

Considering you can get any bonus on a set of handwraps as a quaterstaff, the only things to factor are STR mod, Power Attack and Damage Die.

X= STR mod

X + 11 (average dmg on 2d10) + 5 (PA) > 1.5X + 3.5 (average dmg on 1d6) + 10 (PA)
X + 16 > 1.5X + 13.5
X +3.5 > 1.5X
3.5 > .5X
7 > X

So, if the monk's strength bonus is greater than 7, they do more damage per swing with a q-staff. Now let's look at minimum damage:

X + 2 + 5 > 1.5X + 1 + 10
X + 7 > 1.5X + 11
X -4 > 1.5X
-4 > .5X
-8 > X

Q-staff monks always deal more damage than handwraps unless they have huge penalties to strength. Now max damage:

X + 20 + 5 > 1.5X + 6 + 10
X + 25 > 1.5X + 16
X +9 > 1.5X
9 > .5X
18 > X

Handwrap monks have the potential to do significatly more damage than q-staff monks when rolling max damage. A q-staff monk would need a strength score of 46 or more (for +18 strength mod) to do more than a handwrap monk rolling maximum damage.

Conclusion: A handwrap monk makes better DPS than a q-staff monk only in sheer volume of attacks. Handwrap monks attack faster than a quarterstaff and get more attacks with the TWF chain. However, a handwrap would need to consistenly roll above average in order to out damage a q-staff monk in a single swing. This discrepancy is only exaggerated by a higher strength score, WF power attack enhancements and higher damage dice (greensteel q-staff, Rahl's Might) favoring the quarterstaves. Greensteel quarterstaves also allow some more options not available to handwraps. (I.E. Min II)

DISCLAIMER: This is only a thought experiment. If my math is off somewhere, please let me know. I am not bashing either kind of monk (though I prefer q-staff myself). However, I am interested in other opinions.

[Quijonsith]

An interesting post. What I also see though is this only accounts for damage per hit. Unarmed GTWF is alot faster than q-staff. Something else to consider is that the more attacks per second you make, the more crits you will have. This is great when it comes to burst effects. There's also using weaking, etc, handwraps to quickly get an enemy to autocrit.

[Anklenibbler]

nm

was forgetting the increase in fist damage as we level

[t0r012]

maybe if you put a little more detail as to what number represents what?

such as what does any of this represent other than x(str bonus)?
X + 16 > 1.5X + 13.5
X +3.5 > 1.5X
3.5 > .5X
7 > X
-------
beyond that I think you are trying to make it way too complex.
2d10(base unarmed lvl 20) + 5(power attack) + str bonus
1d6 (base qstck dmg) +5 (power attack) + (str bonus * 2)
or for green steel 1d8 base? and rawl's is what 1d10?

[coolpenguin410]

maybe if you put a little more detail as to what number represents what?

such as what does any of this represent other than x(str bonus)?
X + 16 > 1.5X + 13.5
X +3.5 > 1.5X
3.5 > .5X
7 > X

I did that in my first equation:


Unarmed vs Quaterstaff
X + 11 (average dmg on 2d10) + 5 (PA) > 1.5X + 3.5 (average dmg on 1d6) + 10 (PA)
X + 16 > 1.5X + 13.5
X +3.5 > 1.5X
3.5 > .5X
7 > X


Note the parts in red. Everything beneath that is math and simplification.


beyond that I think you are trying to make it way too complex.
2d10(base unarmed lvl 20) + 5(power attack) + str bonus
1d6 (base qstck dmg) +5 (power attack) + (str bonus * 2)
or for green steel 1d8 base? and rawl's is what 1d10?

Power Attack is +10 for a two handed weapon. In your formula you leave out what the 2d10 and 1d6 actually represent, hence why I broke it down into average damage, minimum damage and maximum damage. I laid everything bare. Yes, green steel and Rahl's Might are 1d8 and 1d10 respectively.

I fail to see how it is complicated. I simply meant to show what the number mean with a simplistic comparison. If you want to complicate it, you could involve crits and burst weapons...but all I wanted to show was base damage per hit.

[bandyman1]

If you want to complicate it, you could involve crits and burst weapons...but all I wanted to show was base damage per hit.

That's a problem in your comparison though.

Because high levels are going to include burst effects, and the handwarps will be getting more of them, and ( because of the attack numbers ) benefit from them more.

You can't really do a base comparison like you've done above, and expect it to accurately cover DPS between the two in the endgame.

Because all of those effects will be in play.

[coolpenguin410]

You can't really do a base comparison like you've done above, and expect it to accurately cover DPS between the two in the endgame.

I don't. That's the point. It was just a number crunch.

I acknowledged that handwraps out DPS (aka Damage Per Second) q-staves by sheer volume of attacks. I just found it interesting that via damage per swing, q-staff does more on average.

[bandyman1]

* shakes head *

Lets go with max damage per swing.


Rahl's ( bleeding ) with force ritual and 30 Str.

10 + 5 enchantment + 10PA + 10 Str + 8 Bleed + 1 force = 46

+ 5 Handwraps of Bleeding with force ritual and 30 Str.

20 +5 enchantment +5 PA +10 Str +8 Bleed +1 Force = 46

Now add in ToD rings.

Case closed.

[coolpenguin410]

* shakes head *

Lets go with max damage per swing.


Rahl's ( bleeding ) with force ritual and 30 Str.

10 + 5 enchantment + 10PA + 10 Str + 8 Bleed + 1 force = 46

+ 5 Handwraps of Bleeding with force ritual and 30 Str.

20 +5 enchantment +5 PA +10 Str +8 Bleed +1 Force = 46

Now add in ToD rings.

Case closed.

Not sure what point you're trying to make. Your math is off, both numbers should be 49.

10 + 5 enchantment + 10PA + 15 Str + 8 Bleed + 1 force = 49

20 +5 enchantment +5 PA +10 Str +8 Bleed +1 Force = 49

If anything, you're just reinforcing my point that per swing, handwraps do better max, but q-staffs have better average. See:

5.5 + 5 enchantment + 10PA + 15 Str+ 8 Bleed + 1 force = 44.5

11 +5 enchantment +5 PA +10 Str +8 Bleed +1 Force = 40

This is important because handwraps have, what?, 1 in 100 chance of doing max damage while Rahl's Might is 1 in 10.

[bandyman1]

Not sure what point you're trying to make. Your math is off, both numbers should be 49.

10 + 5 enchantment + 10PA + 15 Str + 8 Bleed + 1 force = 49

20 +5 enchantment +5 PA +10 Str +8 Bleed +1 Force = 49

If anything, you're just reinforcing my point that per swing, handwraps do better max, but q-staffs have better average. See:

5.5 + 5 enchantment + 10PA + 15 Str+ 8 Bleed + 1 force = 44.5

11 +5 enchantment +5 PA +10 Str +8 Bleed +1 Force = 40

This is important because handwraps have, what?, 1 in 100 chance of doing max damage while Rahl's Might is 1 in 10.

Ahh. I see my bad.

Forgot the 1 and a 1/2 for a two-handed weapon.

But still, Q-staves don't do better average.

Like I said; Add ToD rings. We're talking end-game, remember???

Then figure that unarmed is faster as well.

Comparison isn't even close.

As for how I came up with 46, I blame trying to watch the superbowl while adding, lol.

[bandyman1]

This is important because handwraps have, what?, 1 in 100 chance of doing max damage while Rahl's Might is 1 in 10.

Not really.

Max damage a swing is 49 for the staff ( with the modifiers we're using ).

Average damage for the wraps ( with +3.5 for holyburst ring and +3.5 for shocking burst ring ) is 47.

You're barely out damaging an average handwrap attack with a max Qstaff one.

It won't be enough to make up the difference, even if the attack speeds were identical.

[oberon131313]

Glancing blow?

[bandyman1]

Glancing blow?

You don't get glancing blows on every swing.

In oder to count those, you'd have to accont for the fact that on a lot of your swings, the handwrap monk gets two hits.

[Anderei]

* shakes head *

Lets go with max damage per swing.


Why? Your missing the point. Damage per second is what counts, not per swing.

[coolpenguin410]

We're talking end-game, remember???

I don't recall writing that.


Like I said; Add ToD rings.

So add them. I'm not terribly familiar with ToD rings. Do they give some kind of bonus for handwraps that doesn't apply to quarterstaves as well?


Max damage a swing is 49 for the staff ( with the modifiers we're using ).

Average damage for the wraps ( with +3.5 for holyburst ring and +3.5 for shocking burst ring ) is 47.

That's biased math. If you're going to add the rings to the handwraps, you have to add them q-staff. With the additional +7 average damage from the rings, the average hit for a q-staff is now 51.5. Q-staff wins again.


Then figure that unarmed is faster as well.

I'm sorry, (I really am. I'm afraid I'm not getting my point across.) I already allotted for that. Handwraps do better DPS because of the high volume of attacks they do in a short period of time. HOWEVER, my point is that quarterstaves have better average damage per hit.

[coolpenguin410]

Why? Your missing the point. Damage per second is what counts, not per swing.

And you're also missing the point of this thread. Thanks for playing though. :p

[coolpenguin410]

Glancing blow?

Good for melee AoE and maintaining aggro on a group of mobs, but, again, not the point of my original post. For a kind of build that this would be important to, it would still be useful only situationally.

[bandyman1]

I don't recall writing that.

You're perfectly fine mentioning GS ( min IIs ) staves and Rhal's Might, but we're not talking about endgame??? :rolleyes:

OK. Yeah. Your QS monk is awesome against a handwrap monk using plain-Jane vanilla +5 wraps. That happens a ****ton in game, right???


So add them. I'm not terribly familiar with ToD rings. Do they give some kind of bonus for handwraps that doesn't apply to quarterstaves as well?

I did. Changed the results a bit, didn't it? And; Yes.


That's biased math. If you're going to add the rings to the handwraps, you have to add them q-staff. With the additional +7 average damage from the rings, the average hit for a q-staff is now 51.5. Q-staff wins again.

Except that the rings only work on unarmed. So, no; It doesn't.


I'm sorry, (I really am. I'm afraid I'm not getting my point across.) I already allotted for that. Handwraps do better DPS because of the high volume of attacks they do in a short period of time. HOWEVER, my point is that quarterstaves have better average damage per hit.

And I showed you that your point is simply wrong. Because no handwrap monk is sitting at level 20 with +5 wraps.

[Feylina]

"I'm sorry, (I really am. I'm afraid I'm not getting my point across.) I already allotted for that. Handwraps do better DPS because of the high volume of attacks they do in a short period of time. HOWEVER, my point is that quarterstaves have better average damage per hit."

I'm really tring to understand the point of this thread. if you are saying pure vanilla un raid geared gimp tooned q-staves hit harder and on average better than the handwraps. So what? how many mobs are you 1 hitting? Hell if you aren't taking attack speed and stances into account and looking at damage past 1 swing. you might as well just grab a greataxe. It would make as much sense as this thread.

[Delt]

And you're also missing the point of this thread. Thanks for playing though. :p

I'm not sure what the point of the thread is either...? Trying to pretend staves aren't the worst (handwraps>kamas>staves) for monks through specific and narrow mathematics? Is that it?

Oh, ToD burst rings are unarmed only.

[coolpenguin410]

You're perfectly fine mentioning GS ( min IIs ) staves and Rhal's Might, but we're not talking about endgame??? :rolleyes:

Point taken. I have a green steel Q-staff and Rahl's on my monk. However, I did not mention them in my original numbers. You brought up their statistics.


Except that the rings only work on unarmed. So, no; It doesn't.

I did not know that. I concede that point.

[coolpenguin410]

I'm not sure what the point of the thread is either...? Trying to pretend staves aren't the worst (handwraps>kamas>staves) for monks through specific and narrow mathematics? Is that it?

I never said that. It was just some interesting numbers I decided to share.

[bandyman1]

Point taken. I have a green steel Q-staff and Rahl's on my monk. However, I did not mention them in my original numbers. You brought up their statistics.

You mentioned them in your first post.

I thought it only fair to give your Qstaff monk the benefit of a high DPS weapon for the comparison, because that it what a Qstaff monk is going to be using at those levels. Just as a hand-to-hand monk is going to be using the rings.

It still doesn't make the cut though.

It's not better average damage, and it's not better max damage.

[coolpenguin410]

I'm really tring to understand the point of this thread. if you are saying pure vanilla un raid geared gimp tooned q-staves hit harder and on average better than the handwraps. So what? how many mobs are you 1 hitting? Hell if you aren't taking attack speed and stances into account and looking at damage past 1 swing. you might as well just grab a greataxe. It would make as much sense as this thread.

I'm sorry. Do you never just take some numbers and run them just to see what happens? I just found it interesting. I'm sorry you don't.

[coolpenguin410]

You mentioned them in your first post.

I thought it only fair to give your Qstaff monk the benefit of a high DPS weapon for the comparison, because that it what a Qstaff monk is going to be using at those levels.

It still doesn't make the cut though.

It's not better average damage, and it's not better max damage.

I mentioned them, yes, but the math was on a regular 1d6 q-staff. So with the ToD rings, handwraps win this argument. I can live with that.

[Anderei]

I never said that. It was just some interesting numbers I decided to share.

Why not take a Greatsword then? You're not proficient and not balanced either. Also aweful slow. But with 1 hit you'll do top most damage, if it hits. .... and the point is?

[coolpenguin410]

Why not take a Greatsword then? You're not proficient and not balanced either. Also aweful slow. But with 1 hit you'll do top most damage, if it hits. .... and the point is?

Greatswords are boring?

[victorey84]

There is one fundamental problem with your math, and you even used it to prove the opposite.

Every number on a 1 die roll has an equal chance to come up, whereas on a 2d10 the average is the most likely to come up. So, while the rahl's might has a 1/10 chance for max damage, that also goes for min damage. Meanwhile, the fists will do either of those only 1/100 of the time for each, but still 1/10 times exactly the average, 28% of all hits are within 1 point of the average, or 44% within 2 points, and so on.

I can understand trying look at "worst" and "best" case scenario, but whenever random is involved you also have to consider the probabilities involved. Since that can get complicated, the first meaningful number considered is the average, then the standard deviation (or similarly the variance) and perhaps higher moments, but that's often unnecessary.

If we didn't consider this, then picks might seem like the best weapons due to their high (crit) damage.

Past that, I believe that even without considering weapon effects, the extra hits from twf and thf lines are worth considering. Specially since off-hand unarmed hits get full STR bonus, which effectively makes it 2x bonus vs 1.5x for quarterstaves.

I'm not sure on thf, but based on the info in the ddowiki, with all feats and at lvl 20, on a full attack chain, 3 out of 4 attacks will roll a glancing blow at (normal damage + 10)*40%.

So, let's look at the average numbers again:
2(x Str Mod + 5 Enhancement + 11 die average + 5 PA)>(1.5x Str Mod + 5 Enhancement + 5.5 Rahl's die average + 10 PA) + (1.5x Str Mod + 5 Enhancement + 5.5 Rahl's die average + 10 PA + 10 TWF glancing bonus)*0.4*0.75 = (simplified) 3 + 1.3 (1.5x Str Mod + 5 Enhancement + 5.5 Rahl's die average + 10 PA)

Solving gets us: x>-247 i.e. lvl 20 fists are strictly better than Rahl's might without even considering weapon effects.

Actually, I'm a bit surprised at the strict result since my first calculation I forgot to add the 75% of hits thing and came out with x<93 or so, STR MOD, still astronomical, but at least with a turning point.

Additional weapon effects and attack speed would further push fists higher, specially considering that the thf-line of feats say they increase the chance of effects proc'ing on glancing blows, but don't seem to have any numbers suggesting it's less than 100%.

One last quick calculation I did but which I'm too tired to elaborate on at this point is considering how many mobs the staff needs to be hitting, given a Str mod of 10, to match the damage per attack of fists. Interestingly, it's roughly 2, i.e. main + 1 extra. Of course, speed and weapon effects could significantly change that.

P.S.: Ok, reread your conclusion, and I can see what you mean, and agree with it. I can understand why you might be surprised that one hit from a 1d6 weapon could deal more damage than a 2d10 fist given enough str, but that's to be expected due to 2x PA bonus and 1.5 str bonus vs 1x and 1x, specially since the difference between 1d6 and 2d10 average is 7.5, take 5 from the extra PA bonus, and you're left with 2.5 which is quickly made up by the 1.5x str bonus.

In fact, this is a significant reason why DR can pose a significant problem for monks without key handwraps. An average greatsword gets 2d6 + 1.5x str + 10 PA almost as much base die as lvl 20 fists but scaling up faster. Also, if a monk can't bypass DR he doesn't get ki to use strikes.

On the other hand, the extra weapon effects aren't affected by DR (though resistance can also sometimes be a problem), are landed twice per swing, much faster, and potentially with ToD rings can have twice as many effects as "normal" weapons. I don't know how that matches up with greensteel though.

[coolpenguin410]

...<snip>...

Great post victorey. Essentially, what you're saying is that while the q-staff die results will be equally spread over all available numbers, the handwraps' two dice will favor the average result. Meaning that the q-staff has the potential to out damage handwraps, but handwraps will consistently roll average while the q-staff is all over the place.

It's such a simple idea, I'm surprised I didn't realize it sooner. Basically, all my original post did was show the potential for the two weapons in certain situations.

Thanks for the discussion all. I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did. :D

P.S. My monk will still favor quarterstaves. :eek: :D

[bandyman1]

Great post victorey. Essentially, what you're saying is that while the q-staff die results will be equally spread over all available numbers, the handwraps' two dice will favor the average result. Meaning that the q-staff has the potential to out damage handwraps, but handwraps will consistently roll average while the q-staff is all over the place.

It's such a simple idea, I'm surprised I didn't realize it sooner. Basically, all my original post did was show the potential for the two weapons in certain situations.

Thanks for the discussion all. I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did. :D

P.S. My monk will still favor quarterstaves. :eek: :D

No man; It doesn't.

As I showed you earlier in the thread; An average handwarp attack by a monk at endgame is barely out-damaged by a max Qstaff attack by the same monk at endgame.

In order for you to say that the Qstaff has the potential to out damage the wraps, you'd have to figure max damage on every hit. And if you do that, then there's no reason not to figure it for the handwraps either.

And the Qstaff gains nowhere near as much damage from average to max as the handwraps do.

[coolpenguin410]

No man; It doesn't.

As I showed you earlier in the thread; An average handwarp attack by a monk at endgame is barely out-damaged by a max Qstaff attack by the same monk at endgame.

In order for you to say that the Qstaff has the potential to out damage the wraps, you'd have to figure max damage on every hit. And if you do that, then there's no reason not to figure it for the handwraps either.

And the Qstaff gains nowhere near as much damage from average to max as the handwraps do.

Dude, I appreciated your input in this, but you keep missing my points. I was always ever talking about a single swing. I hate to be rude, but seriously:

Potential (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/potential)

I always acknowledged handwraps were better DPS.

Done.

[Dylvish]

Im a little confused by this post. Its really comparing apples and oranges, or trying to compare a THF to a TWF on only one point.

If the monk had only handwraps, with no bonuses or stats on them, the staff user may average a couple of points higher 'per hit' , you are correct. But unfortunately, there is way too much that gets thrown in immediately on top to make that a nearly irrelevant observation. :(

Monks with GTWF swinging unarmed and in windstance IV get several attacks per second (dont remember the exact numbers, someone broke it all down the other day on a previous thread), as opposed to the Qstaff getting.. 2? maybe 3?

Then there is the odd mechanic extra they threw to monks... the TOD rings. They add even more to the monks per/hit when going unarmed.

If you were just throwing in the interesting fact that if the monk with the bat, and the one bare handed swung at something 1 time, the bat would do a little more, I get it, although I'll admit I'm not sure why the post on the epiphany :)


(As a note: I truly wish staves were a bit more balanced / viable for monks, as I have always enjoyed the concept and like the idea of players being able to be a Kama monk, or a Qstaff based monk, hell even a pair of kukri would be something fun for concept).

[Anderei]

And if DDO would have a weapon what 10000 times makes 1 damage, and 1 in 10000 times makes 10000 damage, the OP would prefer that, because of the "potential"... *rollseyes*

[coolpenguin410]

And if DDO would have a weapon what 10000 times makes 1 damage, and 1 in 10000 times makes 10000 damage, the OP would prefer that, because of the "potential"... *rollseyes*

Actually, a 1d1 weapon with a very high crit multiplier would probably be pretty interesting.

Nonetheless, you misunderstand...again...I prefer quarterstaff mostly for flavor, not its statistics. :rolleyes:

[Quijonsith]

Actually, a 1d1 weapon with a very high crit multiplier would probably be pretty interesting.


Interesting yes... until you encounter any kind of damage reduction.

The advantage a harder hitting slower weapon has over a less hard hitting fast weapon is against damage reduction. A great axe that gets half the number of hits with the same DPS as a faster weapon will always win against a mob with DR unless you are able to bypass that DR.

[bandyman1]

Dude, I appreciated your input in this, but you keep missing my points. I was always ever talking about a single swing. I hate to be rude, but seriously:

Potential (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/potential)

I always acknowledged handwraps were better DPS.

Done.

LMAO.

No one said a **** thing about DPS.

I'M TALKING ABOUT DAMAGE PER SWING TOO!

OK. A dagger has the potential to out damage a greatsword on a single swing.


Doesn't happen very often though, now does it???

Sure, if the monk rolls minimum damage on every die roll on every swing, you're going to be outdamaging him with your Qstaff every swing, assuming that you don't roll minimum damage yourself ( which you have a better chance of doing than he does, to boot. ).

Assuming he doesn't have wind IV, or TWFing feats, you may even out DPS him.

Happy?


On a serious note; No. It doesn't have the potential to out damage it. Because *** would you ever compare max damage on one weapon vs. min damage on another??? You have to compare both at min damage ( where the handwraps win ), average damage ( where the handwraps win ), or max damage ( where; You guessed it! The handwarps win ).

[coolpenguin410]

A dagger has the potential to out damage a greatsword on a single swing.

Only with a very low strength score and when the dagger rolls high and the greatsword rolls low. In other words, with the variables as I set them, no, a dagger does not have the potential to out damage a greatsword.

Which is disappointing. Thematically speaking, being spec'ed for daggers would be pretty cool, just not even close to viable. Especially considering you can forget the daggers and use shortswords without changing your build at all (or just add Otwf and use rapiers).

Now if the Devs were to create some sort of bonuses unique to daggers...