D&D next Playtest pack 10 29 12 deep analysis (part 2)

Hi, this is Rodrigo


In this post we’re going to take a look at classes in detail


Let’s start to speak about what I expect from the classes in general:


First, I would like classes to be balanced more in and out of combat. A not balanced system will lead to a disruption of the game, because somebody is “the king of the fight” and somebody else is “the only one speaking and acting  while not in combat”, boring  the rest of the players. Second and last I don’t expect a bunch of classes with many customization possibilities, but a lot of classes with different mechanics and a few possibilities to customize. For instance, what’s the deal of having a duelist warrior or a rogue? They’re pretty similar  leather finesse dmg dealers (warrior better in combat, rogue out of combat, sick) . Go for a good barbarian, or whatever else is different :D


Also, for the corrections I’m going to list, there will be the need for a categorization of maneuvers into offensive/defensive/mobility



Let’s speak about what I expect from the single classes (stating that I’m not a “insert random class here” player, I love playing all classes equally as long as they are equilibrated, no matter what’s the role)



Warrior: I would love warrior to be a supportive tank, dealing good amount of damage (but not excessive) while soaking up damage from opponents and gain their aggro (obliging them to attack him, limiting their movements etc). I really love it’s actual setup, best of all the shield stuffs and the possibility to do defensive maneuvers. What I absolutely don’t like is the fact that his main damage maneuver “deadly strike” is a better version of sneak attack (I’ll speak about an improvement in the sneak attack ability in the rogue section). Looking at average damage progression, I would like to point out that it’s not really appealing, as if you spend dices to do maneuvers your output damage sinks. Also, its mobility is a bit too high if he wears heavy armor.


Possible solutions:. A possible progression of the average  damage and expertise dice is provided in table 1 . Substitute deadly strike at lvl 1 with parry, and insert deadly strike at lvl 2. Also, insert  free expertise dices useable only for movement/defensive maneuvers at lvl1-5-10 (add  cap to maneuvers, parry and protect in particular,  if these dices results in numbers too high). As the mobility is something depending on armor, you should add dexterity requisite on warrior’s mobility maneuvers (a heavy armor warrior shouldn’t be mobile).


Maneuver suggestion:


Taunt (or similar name, provoke or whatever) => for each expertise die you spend roll it up. You can make charisma contests on up to that result number of creatures that can see you, and adding that result to each of your check. Every creature failing the charisma contest against you is obliged to attack you until the beginning of your next turn (aoe effect must include you).


Tactical lock (find a better name :D)=> as any creature tries to leave a square in your reach, you may spend an expertise die. You make a melee attack against that creature adding that result to the attack roll. If you hit, the creature falls prone and its movement ends immediately (it doesn’t leave the square and can’t move further). The creature can do any other available action.



Rogue: I totally disagree with the actual version of the rogue. I would love it as a single target cooperative damage dealer (like it was in 3.5) rewarding players that can use brain to gain a good position (and deal with the risk of being away from healer’s touch) with a STRONG burst of single target damage with a proper sneak attack skill (or a good burst if you just want to stay near mother priest). Its mobility has to aid him to reach the position he need. Also, that big pool of abilities is too much, disrupting the game. Rogue should not be the only one (or mostly) speaking and doing 100 different type of stuffs. The parry maneuver gives him damage mitigation he shouldn’t have (or not that big at all).


Possible solutions: A possible progression of the average  damage and expertise dice is provided in table 1. Revamp sneak attack (see below) and give it at lvl1 for all rogues. Insert a maneuver that helps the rogue getting advantage (as he has lower attack bonus then the warrior, also advantage should be the trigger for sneak attack) like Feint (see below). Increase it’s mobility a bit, giving it the possibility to move into the opponents taking low risks (like it was in 3.5, cd x on acrobat skill to move half speed without provoking opportunity attack). Decrease its damage mitigation removing parry. REMOVE THE 100 BONUS SKILLS, no class should be able to do 100 different skills (this is really important, balance classes both in and out of combat)


Maneuver suggestion:


Sneak attack => To use sneak attack you must have combat advantage. Whenever you hit with an attack you may spend any number of expertise dices. For each expertise dice you spend, roll twice that dice and add the result to the damage roll.


Feint => Before making a melee attack you may spend any number of expertise dices. Roll that dices, then you can start a bluff contest (against wisdom or sense motive) with the opponent you wish to attack, adding the result to your check. If you win the contest you gain combat advantage against that opponent until the end of your current turn.


Rule suggestion:


Flanking => same mechanic as 3.5 but with a little change. As long as two allies are at the two opposite sides of an opponent’s square (like it was in 3.5) one of them has combat advantage against that opponent each turn. The first attacking and flanking player decides if he gets the advantage, then if he doesn’t the second player may decide (when it is his turn and if he still can get the flanking position) and so on. No more then one player per turn can get this bonus on the same opponent.



Cleric: The cleric is the most correct class overall. Overall strong support, overall good mitigation (the armor, heals and such), overall 0 mobility and overall good stuff out of combat, and that’s exactly what I expect from it (it’s the class I played more). The damage is just somehow wrong. The cleric shouldn’t be the top single target dps, neither the top aoe dps (in this case he has only one aoe at 5th spell lvl, but it is the biggest in terms of numbers). It should only be corrected in terms of spell dmg, making the single target one less appealing (why should I heal and support while I can touch and oneshot somebody) and inserting some more good (but not best) aoe while nerfing the 5th lvl one.


Possible solutions: A possible progression of the average  spell damage is provided in table 1. Correcting the spell damage is pretty easy, just adjust the dices and the +x damage to fill up the average numbers you want to have. You can also insert many more spells dealing less average damage but with side effects, like slow/intoxicated/charmed etc, and some more situational spells for the “out of combat”.



Wizard: The wizard should be a good dps and support class, dealing top aoe damage and close to top single target damage. It’s not that far away from expectations, but with some totally wrong damage calculation. First of all, why should the top damage single target spell (at the moment), with an average damage of 50, be a WITHOUT HIT EFFECT? “Hey, I’m cool, I deal 50 damage as I just want it. You may deal 33 with 2 melee attack or 45 with a touch, but not 50 without all of that”. Ofc I’m speaking about magic missile, nerf that. Also, the aoe are random crap, with totally not appealing values and effects. I’d rather use a 4th lvl ice storm then a 5th lvl cloudkill or cone of cold, is that normal to you? It’s also too big (and unrealistic) that you can exclude some targets from your aoe damage as you wish, as aoe damage itself should be something that rewards you with big damage if you have the brain (and the space) to place it in a smart way (and you shouldn’t be allowed to do aoe everytime, otherwise bye bye single target spells). Last, its health is too big.


Possible solutions: A possible progression of the average  spell damage is provided in table 1. Correcting the spell damage is pretty easy, just adjust the dices and the +x damage to fill up the average numbers you want to have. You can also insert many more spells dealing less average damage but with side effects, like slow/intoxicated/charmed etc, and some more situational spells for the “out of combat”. Also, take out a d4 from magic missile, leaving it at 7,5 average dmg xlvl, then insert a single target spell for each spell lvl that deals more dmg but with a ranged attack. Absolutely remove spell tactician, as it’s too big (even if aoe numbers are way too low) and brainless “I cast the spell in the middle of the fight, boom everyone but not my mates”. Aoe should be situational, you need brain and space to place it correctly. Reduce health dice to d4, as it always was (a mage shall consider how to deal his big damage without taking aggro, if he brainlessly shot at things it’s reasonable he gets aggro and die istantly).


Suggestion: A possible wizard customization may be the “dominator”, I would play something dealing 0 damage but controlling opponents etc, consider this :D




TABLE 1





































































































































































































































WarriorDwarfHumansuggested progressionsuggested dice (see analysis part 2) Magesuggested progression*
111,0011,008,50(extra dice for mobiliy/defensive maneuvers)lvl 1-26,5s 8,5s 10s 3,5a 7a7,5s/10s** 10a
212,0012,0011,001d4lvl 3-420d 20s 10,5a 27s15s/20s** 15a
312,0012,0013,502d4lvl 5-630s 11a 14a 17,5a 21a22,5s/30s** 20a
415,5015,5015,502d6lvl 7-840s 17,5a 9 o 18a30s/40s** 25a
515,5015,5024,002d6 + extra attack (+another extra dice)lvl9-1050s 14a 16,5a 21a37,5s/50s** 30a
624,0024,0024,002d6 + extra attack Clericsuggested progression*
724,0024,0027,503d6 + extra attacklvl 1-28,5s 13,5s10s  5a
828,0028,0029,503d6 + extra attacklvl 3-422,5s 4,5x10s20s
928,0028,0029,503d6 + extra attacklvl 5-636s30s  15a
1035,5035,5032,503d8 + extra attack (+another extra dice)lvl 7-845s40s
RogueHalflingHuman (2)Elfsuggested progressionsuggested dice (see analysis part 2)lvl9-1028a50s  25a
110,0011,0011,0013,5 o 8,5+advantage1d4 a=aoe*also add some lower-dmg spell doing some effect like slowed/intoxicated etc
211,0012,0012,0013,5 o 8,5+advantage1d4 s=single target
311,0012,0012,0018,5 o 13,5+advantage2d4 d=divided
415,5015,5016,5023,5 o 16+advantage2d6 **the first "s" is the magic missile damage, the second is the average damage of another spell with a ranged attack
515,5015,5016,5030,5 o 23+advantage3d6Average dice result (for beginners)
615,5015,5016,5030,5 o 23+advantage3d6d42,50
715,5015,5016,5037,5 o 30,5+advantage4d6d63,50
817,5018,5018,5037,5 o 30,5+advantage4d6d84,50
917,5018,5018,5045,5 o 36,5+advantage4d8d105,50
1025,0026,0026,0053,5 o 42,5+advantage4d10d126,50




 

Hey there,

This isn't really a session feedback, so I'll be moving it to Playtest Packet Discussion.

Thanks!

Monica

Monica

Wizards of the Coast Online Community Coordinator

A friendly dragon.

Getting to Know Your Magic Online Client

Basic Dungeons & Dragons FREE

Have to agree with everything listed above the charts.  I'd have to do some more studying of the numbers before I agree with the chart(haven't looked at thoroughly yet).  Cone of Cold definately needs help.  It either needs more damange, an added effect such as slow, or both.  I always thought that it was odd too that the better damage spells were of a lower level.  Yeah, magic missile is all over the place and kind of broken.  Polymorph issues are more significant(in my eyes) right now...
The wizard should be a good dps and support class, dealing top aoe damage and close to top single target damage.




I strongly disagree with the part I highlighted. Thankfully, fighters deal much better single target damage, so I am happy with the game as is. In fact, fighter's might need a slight nerf to their damage. Rogues, however, need help. Monks I am mostly happy with. On the other hand, if you had said "close to top single target burst damage" I would agree... assuming that their numbers suffer a sharp drop off over the course of a 16-20 round day. 
I'm taking a good look at monks too, and what immediately comes at eye is that


flurry of blows is a nerfed sneak attack (1 ally near a monster is easy to get, not 2-3-4 attack rolls). Also (and that's funny) why should i punch foes while i can use a quarterstaff (dealing 1d8 instead of d6) AND GET DEADLY STRIKE MANEUVER (it's in monk's maneuver list) that, as we all know, it's the best dmg maneuver around.  


Going to make a study about that and post it, with some possible solutions  
The wizard should be a good dps and support class, dealing top aoe damage and close to top single target damage.




I strongly disagree with the part I highlighted. Thankfully, fighters deal much better single target damage, so I am happy with the game as is. In fact, fighter's might need a slight nerf to their damage. Rogues, however, need help. Monks I am mostly happy with. On the other hand, if you had said "close to top single target burst damage" I would agree... assuming that their numbers suffer a sharp drop off over the course of a 16-20 round day. 




That's what i meant, as a wizard has 2 spells x lvl. It's just broken 50 average dmg without a single roll, then 40 then 30 and so on, while aoe dmg both sucks and is brainless if you get the "exclude targets from your area spell" specialization (or whatever it is called)  

I'm taking a good look at monks too, and what immediately comes at eye is that


flurry of blows is a nerfed sneak attack (1 ally near a monster is easy to get, not 2-3-4 attack rolls). Also (and that's funny) why should i punch foes while i can use a quarterstaff (dealing 1d8 instead of d6) AND GET DEADLY STRIKE MANEUVER (it's in monk's maneuver list) that, as we all know, it's the best dmg maneuver around.  


Going to make a study about that and post it, with some possible solutions  



Flurry of Blows is not a nerfed sneak attack, it works nothing like sneak attack, it is mechanically different in many ways. No requirement except making an unarmed attack and multiple attacks instead of increased damage to a single attack being the biggest differences.

Now while it may be relatively easy for the rogue to work with a teammate and set-up his sneak attack if he ends up with no allies nearby sneak attack is very unlikely. The Monk on the other hand can use his ability anytime he makes an unarmed attack. This gives them more choices on who to attack.

As for why I would use Flurry instead of a quarterstaff with deadly strike? Most monk abilities that have a requirment require the monk to be unarmed. Stunning Strike is a good example, Deflect missle requires a hand free so it cannot be used with a staff, Deadly Strike can be used with an unarmed attack so if I had othe abilities I wanted access to I would probably stay unarmed. Also, while the damage using quarterstaff  and Deadly strike might be higher (the more attack rolls you make the higher the crit chance so FLurry has that going for it) it is a single attack. If you miss with your quarterstaff that is it, no more attacks. FLurry allows for multiple attacks, so if one misses the others might hit. I'd rather deal some damage than none. In addition, these extra attacks do not need to be made against the same target, some people even claim you can move in-between these attacks. This means Flurry allows you to hit multiple targets instead of one. It is completely possible for a flurry of blows to take down 4 targets, deadly strike can only take down one.

I won't argue flurry is better than deadly strike. For single target damage deadly strike is cleary superior right now, except for the higher crit chance, but you can also miss. I'd say if I hit with my first attack, and I knew I simple wanted to deal as much damage to this single target, I would use deadly strike before flurry. If I had multiple targets though, flurry is the way to go
I'm taking a good look at monks too, and what immediately comes at eye is that


flurry of blows is a nerfed sneak attack (1 ally near a monster is easy to get, not 2-3-4 attack rolls). Also (and that's funny) why should i punch foes while i can use a quarterstaff (dealing 1d8 instead of d6) AND GET DEADLY STRIKE MANEUVER (it's in monk's maneuver list) that, as we all know, it's the best dmg maneuver around.  


Going to make a study about that and post it, with some possible solutions  



Um, flurry of blows is actually a lot better than sneak attack mathematically speaking...
Cleave does quite the same part of the aoe that flurry does (you just don't move)


For what concerns the rest, flurry is not mathematically better, because it just splits the total dmg, so more average (not really, because missing the first hit is not like missing the flurry) and less hit/miss peaks. Also consider that if you use flurry your dices are gone, while if you miss deadly strike/sneak attack you don't expend them and use for something else (like parry for example). The crit on flurry is 6, you add no bonus to the roll, not a big deal.


So no, for the moment the monk is not that appealing (for what are my standards, i always speak about opinions)     

For what concerns the rest, flurry is not mathematically better, because it just splits the total dmg, so more average (not really, because missing the first hit is not like missing the flurry) and less hit/miss peaks. Also consider that if you use flurry your dices are gone, while if you miss deadly strike/sneak attack you don't expend them and use for something else (like parry for example). The crit on flurry is 6, you add no bonus to the roll, not a big deal.


So no, for the moment the monk is not that appealing (for what are my standards, i always speak about opinions)     




I am not talking about subjective opinions. I am talking about objective mathematical fact. And you are just flat out objectively wrong. Flurry is mathematically superior to Deadly Strike and Sneak Attack in terms of damage dealt. Your statistical probability of hitting is the same. But, with every extra attack you have one extra chance to score a critical hit. That means that at level 10, as a monk, you have a 18.549375% chance of scoring a critical hit per round. Moreover, you can score more than one critical in a single round. You could, potentially, score a critical hit with every single one of your attack rolls. Statistically speaking, at 10th level, with his 1d6 fist, a Dex stat of 20, and assuming an 80% chance of hitting his target, a monk will have a damage per round of 25 points. A rogue, with a 75% hit chance (because it has 1 lower point of attack bonus), a 1d8 katana, and a Dex stat of 20 will only have an average damage of 16-17. The monk will be a full 8 points of average damage ahead because of the way the math of multiple attack rolls with multiple chances of rolling a critical works. Moreover, flurry of blows allows you to split your damage between multiple foes. That lets you kill more targets a round.

You can subjectively dislike it. But it is mathematically superior. That is not my opinion, that is numerical fact...  

I want to know u'r math teacher, as in no world a 1 out of 20 can turn into  18% critical chance (that's the 4 out of 20 u speak about) . The critical ratio is always 1 out of 20, you just make more rolls and always have 1 out of 20 possibility on each roll, NOT CUMULATIVE. You are stating that in  the second roll probability is 2 out of 20, in the third 3 out of 20 and so on, and that's TOTALLY wrong.

 You lack some real math skill.


Also the potential damage is the same, same dices same stat same output. Critical hit may appear 25% on main attack (increasing damage) and 75% on a flurry MEANING U MAKE 6 DMG, NO BONUSES ARE ADDED, and not increasing output for no more then 2.5dmg (just a little jump on average dmg, an average a 6 rolled also does) . That said, you have to land in all the hits to deal ur full damage potential, and in 4 attacks, it's easy to understand that you never do. For which concern sneak attack and deadly strike, land 1 attack full dmg is CLEARLY superior (it is not only if the mob have very hard armor classes).

For the aoe, cleave is quite the same, you just don't move (and i already told u)  

You are speaking about a 20 on a dice, i don't know how much u played ded, but you shall know that it doesn't occur very much (and u're not even considering you don't just roll a d20 for attack rolls)

Before speaking of maths, learn maths  


Don't just criticize with empty motivation what i write, just because i said 4th edition is not d&d. If you want to provide maths, provide CORRECT maths.        

I want to know u'r math teacher, as in no world a 1 out of 20 can turn into  18% critical chance (that's the 4 out of 20 u speak about) . The critical ratio is always 1 out of 20, you just make more rolls and always have 1 out of 20 possibility on each roll, NOT CUMULATIVE. You are stating that in  the second roll probability is 2 out of 20, in the third 3 out of 20 and so on, and that's TOTALLY wrong.

 You lack some real math skill.



Yea, let's talk about "real math skill" and "our math teachers." When calculating the statistical probability that something will happen once out of a number of tries you perform the following function: 1-(P(A)*P(B)) where P(A) and P(B) are the statistical probabilities that a thing will not happen (expressed as a number between 0 and 1). So, if you have four attack rolls, and each attack roll has a 95% chance of not scoring a critical hit (0.95 statistical probability of not scoring a critical hit), you do the following: 1-(0.95*0.95*0.95*0.95). That means that with four attack rolls, and a 5% chance of scoring a critical hit on any single attack roll, there is a 0.18549375 probability that you will score a critical hit once. Expressed as a percentile that is 18.549375% of scoring a critical hit a round.  


Also the potential damage is the same, same dices same stat same output. Critical hit may appear 25% on main attack (increasing damage) and 75% on a flurry MEANING U MAKE 6 DMG, NO BONUSES ARE ADDED, and not increasing output for no more then 2.5dmg (just a little jump on average dmg, an average a 6 rolled also does) . That said, you have to land in all the hits to deal ur full damage potential, and in 4 attacks, it's easy to understand that you never do. For which concern sneak attack and deadly strike, land 1 attack full dmg is CLEARLY superior (it is not only if the mob have very hard armor classes).



No, the potential damage is not the same. A critical does not only maximise the dice rolled It also adds 2d6 + 1d6 for every odd level after 1st. At 10th level, for example, a critical hit maximises your base damage and adds +6d6 damage. As a result, the DPR of flurry of blows goes up significantly.

For the aoe, cleave is quite the same, you just don't move (and i already told u)  



The ability to move between attacks is huge. And, it is not quite the same. Flurry of blows is also better at ensuring that no damage gets wasted in overkill. It also allows for a higher chance of scoring a critical hit (as 2 dice of expertise in a cleave only grant you one chance to score a critical hit, while 2 dice of flurry of blows grant you two chances). Cleave, however, does allow you to add a stat bonus to your damage. In that one sense cleave is superior. 

You are speaking about a 20 on a dice, i don't know how much u played ded, but you shall know that it doesn't occur very much (and u're not even considering you don't just roll a d20 for attack rolls)



Mathematically, every time you roll a d20 you have a 5% chance of rolling a critical hit. After that, the statistical probability of rolling a critical hit given X number of rolls is just math. 

Before speaking of maths, learn maths



Speak for yourself! It is possible that I have made a mistake somewhere. If so, I hope someone points out where. But, from what I have seen, you have already made many mistakes in your logical process. I am not yet seeing any mistakes in mine. What you have said about flurry of blows is flat out untrue.  

Don't just criticize with empty motivation what i write, just because i said 4th edition is not d&d. If you want to provide maths, provide CORRECT maths.        



I don't have "empty motivation." I am pointing out that you are wrong. I don't want you spreading misinformation about flurry of blows. Likewise, if I have made a mistake, I hope someone points that out as well. That is the purpose of a forum. 


By the way, here is the damage calculation for a monk at level 10:


Assuming an 80% hit rate (which seems about par for the course for a fighter/monk with a 20 in their primary stat) at level 10:


Monks First Attack: 1d6+5 (average 8.5) (critical 11+6d6—average 32): Damage statistically dealt per attack—(8.5*0.75)+(32*0.05)+7.975


Each Flurry Attack:  1d10 (average 5.5) (critical 10 + 6d6—average 31): Damage statistically dealt per attack—(5.5*0.75)+(31*0.05)=5.675


Monks damage statistically dealt per round (with one first strike and three flurries): 7.975+(3*5.675)=25

Here is the damage calculation for a rogue at level 10:


Rogue with a Katana: 1d8+3d10+5 (average 26); critical 43+6d6 (average 64).


A rogue’s DPR per round: (0.7*26)+(0.05*64)=21.4 

So, I was off somewhere. For some reason I thought a rogue's DPR was 16-17. That is a mistake. Please note, however, that my overall statement was true. Flurry of Blows, with a smaller base damage die, still results in a higher DPR than a Sneak Attack. I can prove that the same is true for Flurry of Blows vs. Deadly Strike.  


 

Another point between Cleave and Flurry is that with Cleave you are required to drop the target. If the target is still alive you cannot cleave, while Flurry allows you to divide the attacks anytime you want to.

Also, the no modifier only applies to the additional attacks, which by level 10 are d10's. So a crit then on your primary attack is 6+ ability mod giving a probable 10 or 11 before adding the 6d6 (which is a new rule on How To Play pg 16, bottom corner in case you missed it.)

Finally, Cyber-Dave is correct about the probability. The more times you roll a die the more likely it is any particular number is going to show up.

So, this is what we have learned: Flurry of Blows is mathematically more powerful than Deadly Strike, and combines the utility of Deadly Strike and Cleave in a single maneuver. In other words, it is much better than both Deadly Strike and Sneak Attack. 

Of course, the fighter still ends up with a higher DPR (due to a number of factors). But the claim that Flurry of Blows is sub-par is flat out, mathematically, factually, objectively untrue.  

You lack a particular


you add no bonuses on a flurry of blows crit, it is six (or whatever dice it is). If you want to change the rules at your advantage here you go, but "and add no bonuses to the roll" is clear enough to understand that you don't (as the +2d6 etc , if you read, is called BONUS).


Still, if i roll 20 dices i don't have 100% of getting a crit, it is 1 out of 20 on each roll, that's pretty different.


I don't get why you prefer rolling 100 dices while you can roll once and get full dmg potential. Yeah you always deal some dmg, never heard about glancing blow? This flurry is a combination of deadly strike, cleave and glancing blow. Nothing new. It is just a matter of "numbers of maneuvers", if i want to do what flurry does i take that 3 and i have slightly better stuff : i roll 1dice instead of 4, cleaving stuffs and always deal some damage, i lose movements between cleave, just that.


If you prefer SITUATIONAL bonuses to static ones (because 90% of flurry of blows is situtational, you don't always split damage to 100 targets, you don't always need to do some dmg each turn and you die if you deal 0, while static is that you roll many dices and you never get your full potential damage) flurry of blows is what you really need.  


In the tables i made (see first post) i calculated average potential dmg without crit % etc, because it is so low you may exclude it.I'll also do this work for the monk, and it will go exactly like the rogue's one, low. 

Go try it on the field, like we do, and tell me how it is.


Post closed for me   

You lack a particular


you add no bonuses on a flurry of blows crit, it is six (or whatever dice it is). If you want to change the rules at your advantage here you go, but "and add no bonuses to the roll" is clear enough to understand that you don't (as the +2d6 etc , if you read, is called BONUS).



An ability modifier is classified as either a penalty or bonus, Sneak Attack classifies itself as bonus damage, Deadly Strike classifies itself as bonus damage, but criticals modify the damage die result and give you extra(not bonus) damage dice. I did not see the word bonus used for criticals anywhere, unlike everything else where it specifically says it is bonus damage. That is the big difference from what I read.
You lack a particular


you add no bonuses on a flurry of blows crit, it is six (or whatever dice it is). If you want to change the rules at your advantage here you go, but "and add no bonuses to the roll" is clear enough to understand that you don't (as the +2d6 etc , if you read, is called BONUS).



So, you have no idea how the rules of the game work.

Still, if i roll 20 dices i don't have 100% of getting a crit, it is 1 out of 20 on each roll, that's pretty different.



So, you have no idea how math works. And, by the way, if you roll 20 dice you have a 64% chance of rolling a critical.

I don't get why you prefer rolling 100 dices while you can roll once and get full dmg potential.



Because you can't. 


If you prefer SITUATIONAL bonuses to static ones (because 90% of flurry of blows is situtational, you don't always split damage to 100 targets, you don't always need to do some dmg each turn and you die if you deal 0, while static is that you roll many dices and you never get your full potential damage) flurry of blows is what you really need.



You have no idea how math or the game works... everything you just wrote is untrue. 

In the tables i made (see first post) i calculated average potential dmg without crit % etc, because it is so low you may exclude it.I'll also do this work for the monk, and it will go exactly like the rogue's one, low.



Except, it is not so low that you may exclude it.


Post closed for me   



That is probably for the best. 
You lack a particular


you add no bonuses on a flurry of blows crit, it is six (or whatever dice it is). If you want to change the rules at your advantage here you go, but "and add no bonuses to the roll" is clear enough to understand that you don't (as the +2d6 etc , if you read, is called BONUS).


Still, if i roll 20 dices i don't have 100% of getting a crit, it is 1 out of 20 on each roll, that's pretty different.


I don't get why you prefer rolling 100 dices while you can roll once and get full dmg potential. Yeah you always deal some dmg, never heard about glancing blow? This flurry is a combination of deadly strike, cleave and glancing blow. Nothing new. It is just a matter of "numbers of maneuvers", if i want to do what flurry does i take that 3 and i have slightly better stuff : i roll 1dice instead of 4, cleaving stuffs and always deal some damage, i lose movements between cleave, just that.


If you prefer SITUATIONAL bonuses to static ones (because 90% of flurry of blows is situtational, you don't always split damage to 100 targets, you don't always need to do some dmg each turn and you die if you deal 0, while static is that you roll many dices and you never get your full potential damage) flurry of blows is what you really need.  


In the tables i made (see first post) i calculated average potential dmg without crit % etc, because it is so low you may exclude it.I'll also do this work for the monk, and it will go exactly like the rogue's one, low. 

Go try it on the field, like we do, and tell me how it is.


Post closed for me   




You might have a point on the critical damage. I see it is possible to read the rules as written that way. However, I beleive that is not how the rules were intended to work. I know there are fancy forum terms for this (I beleive RAW is "rules as written" but I don't know the others), but I see it as this. An effect of rolling a critical hit, on any blow, is to roll additional damage. These supersedes any effect of an attack unless it states that criticals get no additional damage. I doubt we will ever see anything written this way.

Also, I love how you pointed out Flurry is very similiar to a combination of Cleave, Glancing Blow, and Deadly Strike. A nice, versatile manuever that can combine aspects of three manuvers. Yes, Deadly Strike is better at single target damage. Cleave also always you to hit multiple targets, and Glancing Blow is supposed to allow you to hit targets you miss (it is rarely applicable, but that is besides the point). Arguing an ability that allows you to increase single target damage, hit multiple targets, and/or hit a target you miss is worth less than it's component parts is... odd. Yes, it isn't as good at all these things, but it's versatility makes it pretty awesome in my book.

Also, situational is sneak attack or cleave, because they can only be used in certain situations. Flurry of Blows can be used in multiple situations, so it is versatile. I don't want to offend, but the two terms are kind of opposites.