Ranking classes melee capability

[lans]

I want to get a comparision going to how different classes perform at melee.

In order to reduce how much optimization matters the scoring is going to be on if it can defeat a melee monster of cr =cl and unused nonclass resources.
 
So for this system a barbarian 3 with 0pb, a club and no feats or race chosen would have the best rankings if it can defeat an ogre.


I'm going to break the categories into equipment, feats, race, point buy and
alternate

Scoring for equipment is to take the decimal of WBLused and add it to
the score, with over .8 being rated as 1.25, and under a quarter as 0.

Feats - the same with using over 2/3 of your feats being rated as 1.25

Point buy- 15 points 0, 22 points .25, 25 points .5, 28 points .75, 32 points 1.25

Race No race 0 points, standard race .5 strong race .75, anthropomorphic baleen whale or other high powered race 1.25

Alternate grab bag of things .25 for a flaw .6 for 2, .75 for selling soul for feats, .15 for traits, .1 for each skill needed.

I'm thinking that maybe a penalty for out of class 1/day novas. Letting caster buffs that last over 2 hours be up.

I would like to avoid builds based heavily around charging
as I we all should know charging is ridiculous in 3.5

I would also like to avoid heavily optimized crit fishing infinite
attack style of builds, but I am hoping my point system disincentives that

[Nifft]

In order to reduce how much optimization matters (...)

What an unusual requirement.

[lans]

In order to reduce how much optimization matters (...)

What an unusual requirement.

Well, I want to rank the classes themselves not how much you can optimize them, and most classes are going to need feats and equipment to win encounters so them using as little as possible seems ideal for this.  Technically they should still be optimzed just to the point system as opposed to raw numbers.


Here is 2 i did so far


http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=962732
barb hp 78 ac 22, 20 on charge +12/7 2d6+7/10 5 rnds of frenzy
Ac
Barbarian lv 7 wealth hp 78 AC 23 2 19 on charge +2d6+10 12/7
rop +1 amulet of nat armor +1 weapon +1 armor +2
strength and constitution +2
Round 1 Barbarian frenzies, and charges 14/9 37.4 damage to giant on charge Giant does 28.98 to barb.
Round 2 B deals 31.79 G deals 24.25
Round 3 B Deals 31.79 G Deals another 24.25 B 1.52 G 1.02
R 4 Barbarian kills giant usually.


Hide


Warrior 77 hp ac23 16/11 2d6+12

giant hp 102 ac 20 16/11 2d8+10 19 15
25.35 vs 22 30.18 vs 20 17.06 if goes first

R 1 Warrior charges giant deals 22.33 Giant attacks back for 27.77
R 2 W FA for 31.62 G Does another 23.15
R3 W 31.62 G 23.15 Warrior at 2.93
R4 W 31.62 G 23.15 Giant should be at -1.5 warrior will be at -26.08 if the giant lives

[Solo]

Well, I want to rank the classes themselves not how much you can optimize them, and most classes are going to need feats and equipment to win encounters so them using as little as possible seems ideal for this.

You're not going to produce much usable data.

[altpersona]

wizard 1 defeats the ogre, right? (Sleep)

[lans]

wizard 1 defeats the ogre, right? (Sleep)

I am measuring melee capability, so sleep wouldn't be used. Now a wizard 3 with alterself, and other buffs is game.

Well, I want to rank the classes themselves not how much you can optimize them, and most classes are going to need feats and equipment to win encounters so them using as little as possible seems ideal for this.

You're not going to produce much usable data.

Care to give more on that?

[Nifft]

wizard 1 defeats the ogre, right? (Sleep)

I am measuring melee capability, so sleep wouldn't be used. Now a wizard 3 with alterself, and other buffs is game.

Sleep is a debuff.

Sleep + coup-de-grace via scythe => Wizard won melee.

This is an extreme example of how a save-or-lose spell can remove danger to the point that a Wizard is comfortable standing next to a (snoring) ogre.

The facts are that non-melee characters (i.e. the Wizard) can cast spells from far away from melee which change the threat of the melee participants significantly, to the degree that even a mere fighter can beat an ogre (if the ogre is asleep because of a Wizard).

[ketaro]

Why would you want to nerf a melee combatant when, as given above, a 1st level wizard with Sleep destroys something that would be a challenge to anything melee focused and many levels higher than the wizard?

[lans]

wizard 1 defeats the ogre, right? (Sleep)

I am measuring melee capability, so sleep wouldn't be used. Now a wizard 3 with alterself, and other buffs is game.

Sleep is a debuff.

Sleep + coup-de-grace via scythe => Wizard won melee.

This is an extreme example of how a save-or-lose spell can remove danger to the point that a Wizard is comfortable standing next to a (snoring) ogre.

Not what this thread is for, thats not a wizard wining melee, ratherthat is a wizard winning then going into melee.

Why would you want to nerf a melee combatant when, as given above, a 1st level wizard with Sleep destroys something that would be a challenge to anything melee focused and many levels higher than the wizard?

Is this directed towards me?

[IlPazzo]

That scoring system is overly complex buddy, you're on your own.
Anyway, if you want to do this kind of benchmark you could try checking optimization by the numbers (google it), to get a better idea of what the typical encounter for a given level might be.
After all, there is not much point in facing a melee monster in melee.

[Nifft]

wizard 1 defeats the ogre, right? (Sleep)

I am measuring melee capability, so sleep wouldn't be used. Now a wizard 3 with alterself, and other buffs is game.

Sleep is a debuff.

Sleep + coup-de-grace via scythe => Wizard won melee.

This is an extreme example of how a save-or-lose spell can remove danger to the point that a Wizard is comfortable standing next to a (snoring) ogre.

Not what this thread is for, thats not a wizard wining melee, ratherthat is a wizard winning then going into melee.

Winning before going to war is an entirely valid war strategy.

That said, the problem you've got is that there's no clear distinction between melee and non-melee.

Is it "winning melee" if a Duskblade channels ray of enfeeblement through his sword to debuff an ogre?

Is it "winning melee" if a Duskblade casts ray of enfeeblement from 30 ft. away and then stabs the debuffed ogre?

What's the difference between an ogre stunned by a Monk's Stunning Fist vs. an ogre stunned by Power Word: Stun?

[lans]

That scoring system is overly complex buddy, you're on your own.
Anyway, if you want to do this kind of benchmark you could try checking optimization by the numbers (google it), to get a better idea of what the typical encounter for a given level might be.
After all, there is not much point in facing a melee monster in melee.

I have problems with the optimization by numbers in that it measures BAB not attack bonus and doesn't say how much damage the average full attack would deal from the monsters. Picking a representative brute type monster seems better.

Would you suggest ways to make the system less complex? I am thinking maybe just using factors that a character has less control over, such as flaws, PB and WBL?

Winning before going to war is an entirely valid war strategy.

That said, the problem you've got is that there's no clear distinction between melee and non-melee.

Is it "winning melee" if a Duskblade channels ray of enfeeblement through his sword to debuff an ogre?

Is it "winning melee" if a Duskblade casts ray of enfeeblement from 30 ft. away and then stabs the debuffed ogre?

What's the difference between an ogre stunned by a Monk's Stunning Fist vs. an ogre stunned by Power Word: Stun?

  If I said I'm measuring the ability to go in and slobernogger it out with the monster, and spending a standard action to cast a spell, while it may be the best option is not what is being attempted here? That if a player says he wants to play a character that beats the crap out of things can be directed towards the right class.

[Solo]

Care to give more on that?

The further removed this experiment is from actual play conditions, the less relevancy it has.

[lans]

Care to give more on that?

The further removed this experiment is from actual play conditions, the less relevancy it has.

I think its only about as far removed from actual play conditions as heavily optimized characters. Possibly even less as this simulates minimalist builds that work.

[Endarire]

Melee classes have much in common.  They're primarily melee.  They exchanged the ability to be a Druid (unless they are a Druid) for the ability to hit stuff with PBS damage.

Hood demonstrates that in 3.5, class doesn't much matter so long as you have the right build.  Even a Wizard can learn Battle Jump and go Hood.  It's just a matter of details.

[lans]

That is why I want to figure out how much of a build is the class, as opposed to optimization of feats and magic items, and just having a high pointbuy.


@ Solo I think what I am attempting to do would make builds that would be inclusive of the highly optimized ones, as long as the melee character can go toe o toe with a monster of equal CR. If your play experience is that they don't then this wouldn't be representative of that

[altpersona]

That is why I want to figure out how much of a build is the class, as opposed to optimization of feats and magic items, and just having a high pointbuy.

point buy is the least thing, time and gold make up for it.

class is a collection of Features, many features exist over a range of classes. some classes like fighter are basically wholly contained in other classes, making their existence questionable or degrading them to a 'dip'.

feats and magic items tend to be blankets that cover many areas.

optimization is the art of goal seeking, it applies to every ruled concept and pretty universally determines success.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Trying to measure Gear Independence is a good idea.

We know about MacGyver, Crafting, Magic Marts ;
singleton items that make a specific class work ;
the dreamscarred build series i.p. proof item stack ;
Carnivore's super detailed builds ; SorO's MIC
semi-wishlist is less well known, as is the difference
between the DMG wbl chart and treasure lay out.

So that covers Gear ...