Way of the Asassin II Clarification Question

[MrCow]

Question..how do you derive the stats and saves? I can see how some can be derived, stat weapons, but the saves?

Extensive previous work (some of which is posted in threads from months and months ago) showed me that I would have a predicted save within a ~10% margin from what I would test if I just took the Hit Dice base saves and added the stat based saves.

So for example, we have the troglodyte arcane above. He has 16 Hit Dice (Calculated in several ways in DDO, such as WIS/Intimidation, Charm/Con Damage/Heal/Harm, Spell HD threshold immunity, for this I used Charm/Con Damage/Heal/Harm) and as an arcane you can reference a table for saves and find that arcanes have a base save fortitude save of 5 at 16 Hit Dice. I added on the 12 CON's +1 modifier and that got to 6. From how many times I have run through Coalescence Chamber I generally only fail my Finger of Death (DC 27) on any troglodyte shaman about 5% of the time (sorry, I don't have the nitty gritty testing data for these critters) so it seems like a reasonably good save DC.

Give me a moment and I may be able to link to some past posts I made that outlines my methodology.

Edit: Here ya go, my basic methods for finding this stuff can be found here. The ways I've found to get Hit Dice can be found here. The threads are a bit old so they may not be exactly what I currently do and I assure you there are several ways to certain answers. At this point I'm bowing out of the thread until more DDO data is requested.

[KristovK]

Extensive previous work (some of which is posted in threads from months and months ago) showed me that I would have a predicted save within a ~10% margin from what I would test if I just took the Hit Dice base saves and added the stat based saves.

So for example, we have the troglodyte arcane above. He has 16 Hit Dice (Calculated in several ways in DDO, such as WIS/Intimidation, Charm/Con Damage/Heal/Harm, Spell HD threshold immunity, for this I used Charm/Con Damage/Heal/Harm) and as an arcane you can reference a table for saves and find that arcanes have a base save fortitude save of 5 at 16 Hit Dice. I added on the 12 CON's +1 modifier and that got to 6. From how many times I have run through Coalescence Chamber I generally only fail my Finger of Death (DC 27) on any troglodyte shaman about 5% of the time (sorry, I don't have the nitty gritty testing data for these critters) so it seems like a reasonably good save DC.

Give me a moment and I may be able to link to some past posts I made that outlines my methodology.

Yeah, some of that info is straight from PnP as it should be, but I have to question the con, trog is base 14 con, elite array brings it up to 17, so that seems off to me, should be a min fort of 9 before anything else is brought into play, based soley on the character class levels, which should be augmented by the racial bonuses.

*edit*

BTW, again, love the work, including the thread you posted about the DCs using the wrong stats today, great work.

[MrCow]

but I have to question the con, trog is base 14 con, elite array brings it up to 17, so that seems off to me

Welcome to DDO. I'd hate to say it like this but I will: "Test it before you call it fact". Say hi to the Elite difficulty 8 CON Gold Concord Wizards (dwarves) in Prison of the Planes for me as well and tell them how they are malnourished like the casting Trogs. The quickfoot thieves in Search for the Rare Scrolls Elite are rather interesting too with their 100% fortification. Just about the only humanoid in DDO with fortification and its 1 HD to boot!

There are many MANY small deviations that you may not catch if you base everything based on pen and paper. In fact, whenever I seem to do that it bites me in the back side more often then not...

[KristovK]

Welcome to DDO. I'd hate to say it like this but I will: "Test it before you call it fact". Say hi to the Elite difficulty 8 CON Gold Concord Wizards (dwarves) in Prison of the Planes for me as well and tell them how they are malnourished like the casting Trogs. The quickfoot thieves in Search for the Rare Scrolls Elite are rather interesting too with their 100% fortification. Just about the only humanoid in DDO with fortification and its 1 HD to boot!

There are many MANY small deviations that you may not catch if you base everything based on pen and paper. In fact, whenever I seem to do that it bites me in the back side more often then not...

I'll take your word on it, seen too many things myself that make me look at the books and the screen and go 'wt...'.

[Eudimio]

Where does WotAII leave rogues in a power comparison with sorcerers? Wizards? Clerics? Barbarians?

It leaves them superior to all classes in melee damage against mobs vulnerable to sneak attack, just like they are now.

[gpk]

VERY COOL! Thanks, I didn't know that existed, wonderful work!

Question..how do you derive the stats and saves? I can see how some can be derived, stat weapons, but the saves?

Ya wonderful work, so 6 is awfully close to 4 huh, well within the margin of error.

Unless of course Mr. Cow is also lying/making stuff up

[Eudimio]

Ya wonderful work, so 6 is awfully close to 4 huh, well within the margin of error.

Unless of course Mr. Cow is also lying/making stuff up

Greater than 50% margin of error!!!! I guess that's why they call some people scientists and other people programmers.

Please scroll up where Angelus claimed a 0% margin of error using a wounding weapon.

[KristovK]

Ya wonderful work, so 6 is awfully close to 4 huh, well within the margin of error.

Unless of course Mr. Cow is also lying/making stuff up

Maybe you missed that I questioned his results on the con of the mob, it's well below what it should be, but he's found that to be the case with other mobs as well, check his Catalog, it's very informative and has some surprising results. I can see the logic behind the lowered con, from a CR standpoint, as casters have higher CRs than non-casters, so in order to keep it down the devs played with the stats to underpower the physical aspects of the mob, old trick, we did it all the time in NWN with custom mobs on persistant worlds and as DMs for PnP. Didn't think they were doing that in DDO but it would seem that they are, which means we can't take for granted that any given mob of a given CR will have stats of given values. 8 Con on a dwarf on elite in GH...not something I think any of us would ever have guessed.

As for Cow's results and how he reached them, I can't argue with his methodology, it's quite detailed and he's obviously spent a lot of time testing and retesting to make sure his results are as exact as he can make them. AD simply tossed off a number without any proof of any sort, even when asked for it he simply gave us the link to the mod6 patch. Cow gives us his methods and his results, big difference there, and I questioned that even so, or did you miss that? His results still make me wonder though, since I know my own wiz is having a harder time making FoD stick on the Trogs then his results with a DC27 vs my DC30, especially when coupled with the results others have expressed in this very thread. Really bad rolls or a potential bug in the DC check, not sure, but it bears looking into, have to take my Wiz into the Vale and actually keep track of exactly how often it sticks and fails, see if there's a pattern or not. Than again, I've had days when none of my spells stuck and days when mobs died from just seeing my wiz act like he was casting, statistical anomolies are rampant in games with random number generators.

[gpk]

Yes yes we know it was not just you, all this kids were doing it, an older kid made you do it.

I think if you've played this game a reasonable amount by now you should have noticed that this ain't pnp d&d and that mobs get lotsa adjustments regardless of their stats. The correlation ain't always there between con-hp-saves, str-ab-dmg etc.

But of course it's just easier to call people liars rather than taking the 5-10 minutes it would have taken for you to narrow the saves down to near their exact values...

I guess A_D just rolled a d20 and got lucky, came up with a value very close to what Mr. Cow listed.

[bandyman1]

Yes yes we know it was not just you, all this kids were doing it, an older kid made you do it.

I think if you've played this game a reasonable amount by now you should have noticed that this ain't pnp d&d and that mobs get lotsa adjustments regardless of their stats. The correlation ain't always there between con-hp-saves, str-ab-dmg etc.

But of course it's just easier to call people liars rather than taking the 5-10 minutes it would have taken for you to narrow the saves down to near their exact values...

I guess A_D just rolled a d20 and got lucky, came up with a value very close to what Mr. Cow listed.

And the fact of the matter is, it doesn't prove a **** thing.

Maybe the rolls were in his favor, maybe the rolls have been against me. The fact remains, that without actually seeing the rolls, he hasn't the foggiest notion. Nor does anyone else.

Mr. Cow gives numbers that support his experience. And I say that the number he gives doesn't support my experience. And I've not been the only one to say it. Doe's that make us liers? And quite frankly, I'm in the shroud a lot.

We have no idea what the number generator for DDO is doing at any given time. Therefore there's no way for us to " narrow it down ".

But then again, the rest of us weren't claiming that we knew what the numbers were to begin with.

If you feel that the death attack DC is to high; just freaking offer your opinion and be done with it. The Devs DO have the infromation avalible to make an informed decision. What you DON'T do, is make up infromation you don't have and present it as factual evidence to support your argument.

[Aspenor]

I will agree with Bandy above, my (extensive) experience does not match with MrCow's. I question the accuracy of his numbers. The difference here is that he actually attempts to back up his claims and not just assert his all-knowing genius by raw power and belittling people.

I will be testing this, when I get the time.

[KristovK]

And the fact of the matter is, it doesn't prove a **** thing.

Maybe the rolls were in his favor, maybe the rolls have been against me. The fact remains, that without actually seeing the rolls, he hasn't the foggiest notion. Nor does anyone else.

Mr. Cow gives numbers that support his experience. And I say that the number he gives doesn't support my experience. And I've not been the only one to say it. Doe's that make us liers? And quite frankly, I'm in the shroud a lot.

We have no idea what the number generator for DDO is doing at any given time. Therefore there's no way for us to " narrow it down ".

But then again, the rest of us weren't claiming that we knew what the numbers were to begin with.

If you feel that the death attack DC is to high; just freaking offer your opinion and be done with it. The Devs DO have the infromation avalible to make an informed decision. What you DON'T do, is make up infromation you don't have and present it as factual evidence to support your argument.

Thanks Bandy, I was trying to figure out how to say that without violating the forum rules and couldn't

Once again, the DC of Death Attack is in line with the DC of insta-kill spells which is in line with the PnP progression at levels 12-17, although the Assassin would be getting that DA at level 6 and have their DC pretty close to max at 16th and it wouldn't progress much until after 20th level when it picks up again, however spell DCs wouldn't progress much after 20th level, only get a slight increase from epic spell focus and every so often from stat increases for the casting stat, doesn't keep up with the Assassin, 1/2 levels 11+ and the Imp Death Attack feat which can be taken multiple times and stacks. Everyone who keeps using the 'Assassin's only get 10 levels' is wrong, PnP goes into Epic and DDO is going to go into Epic, so the DCs and feats of Epic need to be considered as well. Spell DCs tend to hit an upper limit by 30th level, only increased by stat increases(+2 every 10 levels provided you take stat feats at least 2x in those 10)...DA keeps increasing via levelling and via a stacking feat(DC+5 every 10 levels with a potential extra +6 if you take the 3 Imp DA/10 lvl). It's really quite in keeping with the actual PnP rules and it's quite in keeping with the actual DDO 'balance' we have.

[gpk]

What you DON'T do, is make up infromation you don't have and present it as factual evidence to support your argument.

Please clarify, who made up what here exactly. Are you still saying he pulled that number out of thin air?

It's funny, it seems some ppl prefer dead wrong yet "polite" posts to on the nose but "impolite" posts.

[Kulhwch]

Please don't nerf this new ability before it's even been released. Rogues SHOULD be able to insta-kill every now and then.

[EinarMal]

To me the intent of the ability in PnP, and what it should be in DDO is near certain death for 1 mob if you land it. So, I think the DC is fine as it is, most mobs should only save on a 20 in my opinion, so if they are not moving, and you get a sneak attack, and your to-hit roll lands, they should die 95% of the time.

I would much rather them adjust the cooldown timer if they think, AFTER PLAY TESTING BY PLAYERS, that the ability is overpowered.

I do not think that it will turn out to be, based on my experience using clickie based timed attacks. I think you will get far less attempts than people think.

I think what people are glossing over is that sneak attacks are WAY more powerful in PnP. Without inflated hit points one round of sneak attacks in PnP will pretty much kill almost anything. This is a way to give back this feeling of, if you attack and unsuspecting or helpless mob a Rogue should drop them almost instantly. In this game if you walk up to a mob (even if you don't have agro), after 1 swing you do. It is a much different dynamic for Rogues.

[Wulf_Ratbane]

I was wondering when MrCow would show up.

Admit it. You knew he was coming, didn't you gpk?

I've been laughing my ass off.

I suspected that's where A_D was getting his numbers, so I am surprised he was even off by 2.

[Angelus_dead]

Please don't nerf this new ability before it's even been released. Rogues SHOULD be able to insta-kill every now and then.

Hi! It's a long thread, so just let me summarize for you:

Even if the ability is nerfed such by changing the save DC to 10+hd/2+int instead of the currently-planned 10+hd+int, rogues will still be able to kill a level-appropriate spellcaster in a single hit with high reliability.

(Why look at spellcasters? Because monsters who cast spells have the biggest ability to harm your party quickly, so killing them rapidly is more valuable than killing most other things)

At this time it is basically agreed that in a level 16 base quest, set to elite, a spellcasting monster will have a fortitude of 9. Under the proposed nerf, a level 16 assasin rogue would have DC=10+8+6=24, meaning the monster will have a 70% chance of dying instantly. However, an elite quest of that level is supposedly balanced for a party of level 19-21. On normal, the caster would have an 85% chance of instant death.

Without the nerf, the ability as announced would have a DC=10+16+6=32, meaning both the normal and elite versions of the monster would have a 95% chance of death, as they require a natural 20 to survive. In fact, the rogue is free to remove his intelligence+6 item dropping the DC to 29, and he's still 95% successful.

Two good rules of thumb:
If the effectiveness of an ability is capped the same across the full range of difficulty settings, it's probably too strong.
If an ability is so strong there's no incentive to equip items that improve it's power, then it's probably too strong.

So, the choice comes down to this matter of opinion: In favorable conditions, does the ability need to have a 95% success rate to be worthwhile? Or is it acceptable for there to be more luck involved?

[MysticTheurge]

It's funny, it seems some ppl prefer "polite" posts to "impolite" posts.

Perhaps you can see why with the few small adjustments to the sentence above.



I mean, call me crazy, but I really prefer polite-and-right posts. Which plenty of people seem to be capable of managing.

[MrCow]

Mr. Cow gives numbers that support his experience. And I say that the number he gives doesn't support my experience. And I've not been the only one to say it. Doe's that make us liers? And quite frankly, I'm in the shroud a lot.

My fortitude numbers are for the troglodyte casters in The Vale and The Coalescence Chamber, not The Shroud. There is likely a large variation and a special extra save amount tacked on to the ones in The Shroud due to being a raid-specific enemy.

Sorry for the confusion on this part. I was referencing the Fiend-Blood Troglodyte Theurge and not the Sorcerer variant.

[Angelus_dead]

I suspected that's where A_D was getting his numbers, so I am surprised he was even off by 2.

No actually, I've never taken data from that there. I tried once to get Armor Classes off it, but found it very lacking (I did fill in a few that I'd happened to measure myself)

As for the difference of 2, I'm not entirely convinced the value of 6 is correct as opposed to 4. But I'm not eager to perform the hundreds of test samples it would require to narrow the margin of error to under +/-2. Either value is a markedly low fortitude, which was my point: any normal sorcerer will have his Finger of Death succeed 95% of the time.

(Unless it is blocked by SR, which is visually indicated and shouldn't confuse anyone)