IMA vs OC – Base damage comparison

[Lord_kNiels]

WARNING: Contains a lot of numbers. I have summed it up in the end should you not be interested in the details.

I have recently seen various monk builds on the forums trying to fit both Vorpal Strikes and Overwhelming Critical as the two epic feats. My own monk has taken Improved Martial Arts and Vorpal Strikes, so I have been wondering if Overwhelming Critical is worth the extra feat requirements over Improved Martial Arts. To decide for me which is better I have made a base damage comparison below.

Assumptions about the character for which I compare the two feats:
- Level 20 Monk
- Level 5 Epic
- Qualified for and having taken Vorpal Strikes
- Using level 5 GMoF as ED (although there will be some LD comparison included)
- Using Handwraps as weapon with +1[W] modifier (i.e. Epic handwraps)
- Has access to the monk past life
- Will hit on any roll on a d20 except for 1

IMA will add 1d6 to the monk’s base damage for each hit on rolls 2-20 which will also be multiplied on critical hits on rolls 19-20. The average roll of 1d6 is 3.5 and such the base damage increase for IMA with a x2 critical multiplier will be 3.87 and with a x3 critical multiplier (Mountain stance) it will be 4.24. Because this is a set value the gain is exactly the same on any monk, only influenced by the critical multiplier.
Should the monk be in LD with the additional critical multiplier the added damage per hit would be 4.61.

The benefit from OC on the other hand is dependent on both the amount of dice from the base damage as well as the damage bonus from Strength, Power Attack and the likes. Following the assumptions above the monk would have a base damage of 7d6+x.
(3.5[W] Monk, 1.5[W] Dance of Flowers, 0.5[W] Past life, 0.5[W] Reinforced fists, 1[W] Epic weapon)
In fire stance with Dancing with flames from the epic destiny another 0.75d6 should be added, and twisting improved power attack from LD adds yet another 0.5[W] but I will get back to these situations later.
With OC adding one critical multiplier on the two rolls, 19 and 20, it effectively adds two base damage rolls to the 19 cases of a hit on a d20. The table below shows the average damage per hit added based on the value of x, which is the damage bonus from everything but the base damage dice.

x	Added damage from OC
0	2.58
1	2.69
2	2.79
3	2.89
4	3.00
5	3.11
6	3.21
7	3.32
8	3.42
9	3.53
10	3.63
11	3.74
12	3.84
13	3.95
14	4.05
15	4.16
16	4.26
17	4.37
18	4.47
19	4.58
20	4.68
21	4.79
22	4.89
23	5.00
24	5.11
25	5.21
26	5.32
27	5.42
28	5.53
29	5.63
30	5.74
31	5.84
32	5.95
33	6.05
34	6.16
35	6.26
36	6.37
37	6.47
38	6.58
39	6.68
40	6.79
41	6.89
42	7.00
43	7.11
44	7.21
45	7.32
46	7.42
47	7.53
48	7.63
49	7.74
50	7.84
51	7.95
52	8.05
53	8.16
54	8.26
55	8.37
56	8.47
57	8.58
58	8.68
59	8.79
60	8.89
61	9.00
62	9.11
63	9.21
64	9.31
65	9.42
66	9.53
67	9.63
68	9.74
69	9.84
70	9.95
71	10.05
72	10.16
73	10.26
74	10.37
75	10.47
76	10.58
77	10.68
78	10.79
79	10.89
80	11.00
81	11.11
82	11.21
83	11.32
84	11.42
85	11.53
86	11.63
87	11.74
88	11.84
89	11.95
90	12.05
91	12.16
92	12.26
93	12.37
94	12.47
95	12.58
96	12.68
97	12.79
98	12.89
99	13.00
100	13.11

So it would appear that with a base damage of 7d6+13 or higher OC would be better than IMA with a x3 critical multiplier (including OC).
And with a base damage of 7d6+16 or higher OC would be better than IMA with a x4 critical multiplier (from Mountain stance).
Should the monk be in LD with a x5 critical multiplier the base damage would need to be at least 7d6+20 to justify OC over IMA.

Basically on 0% fortification monsters OC is clearly the better choice as it is not hard for a monk to reach even 7d6+20 base damage in epic levels.

On a 50% fortification monster (80% being a common elite and epic fortification value for raid bosses and assuming decent fortification bypass this is a good reference for a well played monk) the benefit of OC would be halved, whereas the benefit of IMA would be reduced from 3.87 to 3.68 for a x2 critical multiplier, from 4.24 to 3.87 on a x3 critical multiplier and from 4.61 to 4.05 on a x4 critical multiplier should the monk be in LD.
So on a monster with this kind of fortification one would need a base damage of 7d6+46 to justify OC over IMA on a critical multiplier of x2 (note that with OC this would be x3), which is a huge leap from the benefit on 0% fortification monsters.

In fire stance with Dancing with Flames another 2.63(*) should be added to the value of x to justify for the +0.75[W] and with improved Power Attack from LD 1.75(*) should be added to the value of x to justify for the +0.5[W] making those abilities favor OC over IMA.

So far it seems that if the monsters have no fortification (or very little that is bypassed) OC is way ahead of IMA, while a healthy amount of fortification brings IMA ahead of OC. But there is one more thing to take into consideration: OC has two feats that are required to qualify for it: Cleave and Great Cleave.
I will base this last part of my post on popular feat choices for monks. I will now assume that the monk has taken the following feats as part of their build, as they are commonly agreed upon as either must-haves or good choices for monks.
Toughness
Power Attack
Stunning Fist
Two-weapon fighting x3
Improved critical: Bludgeoning
Past life: Monk
Improved Sunder
Dodge or Cleave (Dark or light monk)

Now, as Cleave can be used to qualify for Shintao, light monks have an advantage when it comes to fit in OC in their build. The obvious choice when considering DPS would be to take Great Cleave instead of Improved Sunder.
For a dark monk however choices are harder. Obviously one feat to drop would also be improved sunder, however crippling the monks ability to sneak attack on high fortification monsters. For the second feat to drop I will consider three choices: PL: Monk, IC:B and GTWF.

Dropping Past life: Monk would mean that a monk with IMA rather than OC would do an additional 0.5[W] every hit making the gain from picking IMA over OC 5.80 damage per hit on average with a x2 critical multiplier, 6.36 with a x3 critical multiplier or 6.91 with a x4 critical multiplier in LD. This requires a base damage of +31 on 0% fortification mobs to have OC outperform IMA on a critical multiplier of x2 (x3 with OC) and +36 and +41 for the other two situations respectively.

Skipping Improved Critical: Bludgeon to qualify for OC would effectively mean halving the benefit of OC. In this case the maths would be the same as for a 50% fortification monster against 0% fortification monsters, requiring the monk to have a base damage of at least 7d6+46 on a x2 critical multiplier (x3 with OC) making Past life: Monk a better tradeoff anyways. This won’t be any different for higher critical multipliers.

The last case would be dropping Greater Two-weapon fighting. This scenario seems completely unreal to me but I include it anyways because it could be an option to some. Firstly this option does not sacrifice any base damage aside from not taking IMA, however there will be fewer hits. Going from 80% to 60% offhand chance gives a drop in DPS of 11.2% (not counting double strike chance). This does not only include base damage, but also weapon effects. So the case in which OC would be better than GTWF is where OC would add 12.5% damage to base damage including weapon effects. But since OC cannot increase damage by more than 8.70% of the base damage this is not going to happen and this is without weapon effects. With these the increase would be even less, so there is no situation in which OC is a better choice than GTWF.

To sum it up…
OC is a feat that can add a lot of damage to 0% fortification monsters. However once the fortification of the monster gets significant (using 50% as example above) the base damage added from IMA gets ahead unless the monk is able to reach a base damage of 7d6+46 (again from the above example).

A disadvantage of OC however are the feats required to take it. On a light monk it is not significant as one of the feats is already a requirement for Shintao and I’d say that OC is the better feat to take on a light monk. On a dark monk however, due to the feat requirement for Ninja Spy, you would have to give up another DPS granting feat to make room for OC. Having analyzed three common feats on a monk Past life: Monk seems like the most reasonable to trade off for Great Cleave. Against monsters with 0% fortification a monk with base damage of 6.5[W]+31 or greater would benefit more from Great Cleave and OC than from PL:M and IMA. However once the monsters gain some fortification IMA quickly gets ahead if OC again (and there have been added a lot of content with monsters with 100% fortification lately).

It also depends on your stance. Being in one of the critical multiplier enhancing earth stances favors IMA over OC, while fire stance with Dancing with Flames from GMoF favors OC over IMA.
Lastly when wanting to run a monk in LD rather than GMoF there should be no excuse not to go with OC as the feats Cleave and Great Cleave also give a significant advantage here.

	GMoF	LD
Light	Either	OC
Dark	IMA	Either

I hope this has been of help should you also have wondered in which situations IMA or OC is the better feat.

[TasMagar]

Thanks for all that info .


My main is a Shintao and have IMA but was thinking to swap for OC . My base dmg is 7[d6]+24 and since I am human I easily got cleave and great cleave . I was thinking to walk around with Legendary Dreadnaught and since the +1 crits that LD offers is great , OC would implement quite well . Add the +1 crits that Gramaster of mountain adds . Sums up to x5 crits which is really really impresive for a monk .

To talk a bit about EDs, keep in mind that LD epic moment is sustainable while GMoF is just a moment , very powerfull yes but not sustainable . That's why I prefer LD sometimes .

Also, if I twist "A dance of Flowers" , which I haven't yet , that would sum up to 9[d6] with 0.5[w] from LD . So I suggest to Shintaos out there to try this out .

[Artos_Fabril]

There's another case you don't address:
For Dark Monk, taking Precision over PA
+increased damage against medium or high-fort Mobs
-decreased damage against 0-fort mobs.

Personally, playing a H-Elf (rogue dil) Dark Monk, I find Precision superior to Power Attack on any mob that matters.

[DarkForte]

Lastly when wanting to run a monk in LD rather than GMoF there should be no excuse not to go with OC as the feats Cleave and Great Cleave also give a significant advantage here.

Why? Momentum swing/lay waste aren't affected by hws last time I checked.

[Munkenmo]

Why? Momentum swing/lay waste aren't affected by hws last time I checked.

still true now.

here's a list of feats that are better than great cleave for supplementary monk dps.

improved sunder (landing stuns, sneak attacks, quivering palm, touch of death, shintao abilities)
stunning blow (secondary stun)

what the op fails to properly address, is that the only monk build that could honestly consider overwhelming critical is a human light monk, but even then, under most circumstances it's a sub optimal build choice, giving up IMA, and one of improved sunder or stunning blow.

[Jaid314]

There's another case you don't address:
For Dark Monk, taking Precision over PA
+increased damage against medium or high-fort Mobs
-decreased damage against 0-fort mobs.

Personally, playing a H-Elf (rogue dil) Dark Monk, I find Precision superior to Power Attack on any mob that matters.

actually, precision may not be as much of a DPS loss as you think, and may not be a loss at all.

it does somewhat depend: a half-orc or warforged gets more out of power attack, after all.

however, because precision is a 5% increase to the amount of hits (ie if you hit 65% of the time, it goes up to 70%) so far as we know, it's relatively easy to calculate how much damage precision adds even to mobs with no fortification at all (grazing hits muddle the picture though).

it does depend on your to-hit, but against 0% fortification mobs if you were previously hitting 16 times out of 20, precision is worth about +1 damage per hit for every 16 points per hit (break-even for non-horc/toaster is close to 80) . if you were hitting 18 times out of 20, precision adds +1 damage per hit for every 18 points of damage per hit (break-even on non-horc/toaster is about 90). (so far as i can tell, the trend continues such that basically, whatever your current to-hit number on a d20 is without using precision, precision is worth +1 damage for every multiple of that number you deal on average per hit). this gets a little worse for monks than for most people i think, since a comparatively large amount of your damage still works on a grazing hit (base damage, but no strength etc, is applied to grazing hits)

not to mention it should help especially with landing important strikes more; missing with your stunning fist doesn't just mean you dealt less damage, it means you wasted your stunning fist.

and of course, if the power attack penalty is enough to push you down to a lower to-hit number, precision looks even better.

what this means to your specific monk is a bit up in the air, of course. i don't know what your average damage per hit is. but i do know that the more damage you deal per hit, the better precision gets.

[Lord_kNiels]

There's another case you don't address:
For Dark Monk, taking Precision over PA
+increased damage against medium or high-fort Mobs
-decreased damage against 0-fort mobs.

Personally, playing a H-Elf (rogue dil) Dark Monk, I find Precision superior to Power Attack on any mob that matters.

True. I did not consider Precision an option, and I should have. However with the recent addition of multiple 100% fort monsters a 25% fortification bypass would along with imp sunder and piercing clarity only result in 45% fort bypassed, leaving 55% fortification. This will still favor IMA over OC. No doubt you get a lot of sneak attack, but that is not affected by the IMA/OC feat choice.
As for 50ish% fortification raid bosses with precision, a drop in base damage of 5.53 (on a x2 critical multiplier) from power attack and a drop in 3.87 from not taking IMA requires a base damage of 7d6+64 to justify OC.

So I agree on a dark monk you may get something from precision, but this thread is about if picking IMA or OC is the better choice for an epic feat alongside Vorpal Strikes.

Why? Momentum swing/lay waste aren't affected by hws last time I checked.

However charging up for Masters Blitz, which when sustained is SWEET, with only sunder and trip takes AGES. And taking cleave for Shintao anyways, youre almost halfways there.

still true now.

here's a list of feats that are better than great cleave for supplementary monk dps.

improved sunder (landing stuns, sneak attacks, quivering palm, touch of death, shintao abilities)
stunning blow (secondary stun)

what the op fails to properly address, is that the only monk build that could honestly consider overwhelming critical is a human light monk, but even then, under most circumstances it's a sub optimal build choice, giving up IMA, and one of improved sunder or stunning blow.

I disagree that it is only viable on a human light monk, however it certainly does fit better in this kind of build. Take a build with very high strength and in Ultimate Sun Stance with Dancing with Flames and Improved Power Attack twisted (and possibly Horc for Power Attack enhancements.) This would have a base damage of 1.25[W]+8 (13.68 damage per hit on a x2 critical multiplier, 14.98 with OC, having OC amplify the base damage by 1.3 damage per hit on top of what OC already increases the remaining base damage) higher than a Human light monk in Ultimate Wind Stance, not twisting Improved Power Attack. With this base damage increase OC is certainly a better choice than IMA on 0% fort monsters.

[Munkenmo]

Take a build with very high strength and in Ultimate Sun Stance with Dancing with Flames and Improved Power Attack twisted (and possibly Horc for Power Attack enhancements.) This would have a base damage of 1.25[W]+8 (13.68 damage per hit on a x2 critical multiplier, 14.98 with OC, having OC amplify the base damage by 1.3 damage per hit on top of what OC already increases the remaining base damage) higher than a Human light monk in Ultimate Wind Stance, not twisting Improved Power Attack. With this base damage increase OC is certainly a better choice than IMA on 0% fort monsters.

sorry i can't take anything seriously if it's based on ultimate fire stance. To use it as an argument, you're justifying spending 9ap for a +2 str over disciplet of fire, there are virtually 0 builds, where that 9ap is worth it, there's also virtually 0 situations where fire stance is better dps than air stance.

10% double strike vs +2 damage per swing
if gmof
13% double strike vs +5damage and .75[w] per swing.

regarding masters blitz, stunning blow on a monk works just as well as great cleave, and on top of that, fotw, or gmof are both better dps choices.

The problems with your argument thus far, is that you've narrowed down the equation too much.

The higher your base damage is, the further ahead windstance pulls from the pack.

[Lord_kNiels]

sorry i can't take anything seriously if it's based on ultimate fire stance. To use it as an argument, you're justifying spending 9ap for a +2 str over disciplet of fire, there are virtually 0 builds, where that 9ap is worth it, there's also virtually 0 situations where fire stance is better dps than air stance.

10% double strike vs +2 damage per swing
if gmof
13% double strike vs +5damage and .75[w] per swing.

regarding masters blitz, stunning blow on a monk works just as well as great cleave, and on top of that, fotw, or gmof are both better dps choices.

The problems with your argument thus far, is that you've narrowed down the equation too much.

The higher your base damage is, the further ahead windstance pulls from the pack.

Ultimate Sun stance is not as bad as you make it sound. 0.75d6+5 is between 7.63 and 8.43 additional damage per hit depending on fortification. If your average damage is 70 (as an example) an 8 damage increase would be 11.4% more dps, whereas 13% doublestrike only gives 7.2% dps increase, as doublestrike only applies to main hand attack and not the 80% offhand procs.
You would need an average damage per attack of 111 to make Ultimate Wind Stance pull ahead under the conditions you set. (Assuming of course that the monk in Sun stance is hasted).

As for narrowing it down I based it around my own monk, however that is why I added the discussion of the different stances and character variations to guide one to a more fitting answer to their own monk.

[Munkenmo]

Ultimate Sun stance is not as bad as you make it sound. .

yes it is.


The 9ap you spent only net you 1damage per swing, and 2 extra key per crit, over lesser sun stance (free at level 1)

You're adding the effects of gmof ontop of ultimate sun stance. You get all the gmof boosts when in any fire stance, including the free lesser sun stance you get at level 1.

double strike also effects procs, and special attacks/ abilities, you're completely focusing on crits/ physical, and ignoring overall dps including procs.

take a minute and consider a monk will per swing likely have:
sneak attack
ki strike
holy burst
wrap procs
vorpal fists

add in ED twists like:
tunnel vision
sense weakness

and the threshold for where wind pulls ahead is significantly lowered.

having a 13% chance to land an extra stunning fist, touch of death, quivering palm, improved sunder is icing on the cake.

[Artos_Fabril]

True. I did not consider Precision an option, and I should have. However with the recent addition of multiple 100% fort monsters a 25% fortification bypass would along with imp sunder and piercing clarity only result in 45% fort bypassed, leaving 55% fortification. This will still favor IMA over OC. No doubt you get a lot of sneak attack, but that is not affected by the IMA/OC feat choice.

Choosing OC requires PA, so you lose an additional feat to take OC over IMA+precision. And you can't run PA and Precision at the same time.

I was trying to point out that, for a dark monk, Precision and Dodge might replace both PA and Cleave in the feat list (dealing more damage against mobs that matter), meaning you are short several pre-req feats for OC.

Or to put it another way. Taking OC on a dark monk doesn't just cost you the damage from IMA, it also costs you the damage you lose by not taking precision which for a rogue dilettante ninja-spy, is .25*<6d6+n>+.25*.1*<7d6+x> or 5.25+.25n+(.025*3(24.5+x)).

So against a 50% for mob, for a dark monk with a +46 damage mod (the minimum for OC to beat IMA), Precision adds 10.5375 damage per swing (without any +SA gear).

[Lord_kNiels]

Choosing OC requires PA, so you lose an additional feat to take OC over IMA+precision. And you can't run PA and Precision at the same time.

I was trying to point out that, for a dark monk, Precision and Dodge might replace both PA and Cleave in the feat list (dealing more damage against mobs that matter), meaning you are short several pre-req feats for OC.

Or to put it another way. Taking OC on a dark monk doesn't just cost you the damage from IMA, it also costs you the damage you lose by not taking precision which for a rogue dilettante ninja-spy, is .25*<6d6+n>+.25*.1*<7d6+x> or 5.25+.25n+(.025*3(24.5+x)).

So against a 50% for mob, for a dark monk with a +46 damage mod (the minimum for OC to beat IMA), Precision adds 10.5375 damage per swing (without any +SA gear).

I agree. I was kind of trying to make the point that OC is not worth it on a dark monk, because you will end up compromising too much and I'm sorry if it did not come out clear enough.

[Lord_kNiels]

yes it is.


The 9ap you spent only net you 1damage per swing, and 2 extra key per crit, over lesser sun stance (free at level 1)

You're adding the effects of gmof ontop of ultimate sun stance. You get all the gmof boosts when in any fire stance, including the free lesser sun stance you get at level 1.

double strike also effects procs, and special attacks/ abilities, you're completely focusing on crits/ physical, and ignoring overall dps including procs.

take a minute and consider a monk will per swing likely have:
sneak attack
ki strike
holy burst
wrap procs
vorpal fists

add in ED twists like:
tunnel vision
sense weakness

and the threshold for where wind pulls ahead is significantly lowered.

having a 13% chance to land an extra stunning fist, touch of death, quivering palm, improved sunder is icing on the cake.

I was not talking about physical damage only. Physical damage is what the sun stance adds, yes. But the 111 average damage per hit is including weapon properties. While it is possible to pass this with sneak attack damage and good handwraps and spamming Ki-strikes this does not outrule sun stance, especially for a light monk. Maintaining Ki-strikes in Sun stance is even easier due to the huge amount of Ki generation.
So, no, Ultimate sun stance is still not as bad as you make it sound.

I think you focus a lot on your own monk in what you post there and yes, for a dark monk, as you stated in your first response and which I agree with IMA and Wind stance are clearly the better choices. However the point of this post was to adress multiple build options and in which cases either IMA or OC is clearly the better choice and in which cases one might be situationally better than the other.

As for us getting out on a side track, arguing about stances, well of course 9 AP for +1 damage is too much spent and I'd pick Wind stance any day as well as you, but that does not render sun stance utterly useless. Especially Light monks that are not Half Elves may have interest in this due to the lack of Sneak Attack and whether they should go with another build or get the most of what they already have is not for me to decide, so I chose to provide information that favors these builds as well.