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

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?