Definition of a DPS Build

[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.

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:

1. All of those will deal more DPS than a barbarian and at least one of those will deal more DPS than a fighter.
2. 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

[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:

1. All of those will deal more DPS than a barbarian and at least one of those will deal more DPS than a fighter.
2. 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)