Hello Hibs,

i'm here to avoid the repeating of the same old sad story again and again. When i talk about realm abilities with people, as soon as i mention that Toughness is by far better than Physical Defence (at same level ofc), and that Tough should be taken before PD, they always begin to have problem at understanding the meaning of my words
Since the concepts behind this simple truth are easy understandable by anybody and not only by maths doctors (like i'm not), i came here on the forum to post a definitive guide.

These are the tables of the 2 ras.

Physical Defence
Level 1: 2%
Level 2: 5%
Level 3: 12%
Level 4: 19%
Level 5: 28%

Toughness
Level 1: 25
Level 2: 75
Level 3: 150
Level 4: 250
Level 5: 400

Before the real comparison, let's clarify what PD really does. It reduces by a certain percentage (depending on its level) the physical damages you gonna take. So, if your toon has a total of 1000 HP, you can also think about it as it could withstand a total amount of 1000 damages from melee (weapons, bows, crossbow, etc etc). So with PD1, it could therefore withstand 1000 HP plus a 2%, thus 1020 damages before dying (ok, 1019 before dying but let's simplify), since the 2% of 1000 is 20. That is a simple operation: 1000 + (1000/100*2).
The same toon having 1000 HP, if had PD5, could withstand 1280 melee (and exclusively melee) damages before dying.
So, in the abstract universe of this example (1000 HP toon), it's obvious that between PD5 and Tough5 (same cost of realm points, 35), Toughness is by far more effective, allowing you to sustain a total of 1400 damages of any kind vs. a total of 1280 damages, only of melee kind, granted by Physical defence.
And if the toon had 1500 HP? Then tough5 would allow it to sustain 1900 damages of any kind while PD5, 1920 damages of melee kind (against magical damage the hp pool would stay unaltered, 1500).
So, we can se that the more HP a toon has, the more effective PD is.

Now step back into the real world and talk about a conceivable exemple.

Among the classes that can take PD, archers are the ones that will probably would be more interested in it (and the ones with more HPs).
We have also said that the more HPs you have, the more PD is effective, so, for this example, i'll use the combination of class and race (on Hibernia) that will grant you more base HP: shar ranger. This way, once we have proved that Tough is better than PD for a shar ranger, we'll know that the same applies even more to all those toons having less HP.
A full capped level 50 shar ranger has a base of 1354 HP (with +10 const at start). Immagine that he has the necklace of body for self buffing (+205 hp), and, to consider the best possible situation, that he also uses base const potions (+72 hp), so once buffed, his total HP will be 1631.

Now, from this value of 1631, let's compare his total hp with Tough and PD.

Toughness vs Physical Defence
Level 1: 1656 HP vs 1663 HP
Level 2: 1706 HP vs 1712 HP
Level 3: 1781 HP vs 1826 HP
Level 4: 1881 HP vs 1940 HP
Level 5: 2031 HP vs 2087 HP

So, from this comparison, it seems that PD is just slightly better than tough, but when would this apply in reality? The answer is simple: NEVER

Which is the enemy that for killing you, delivers only melee damage? No one. Yes, we can immagine a paladin or a warrior with all reverse ablative on their armor and proccing ablative from their weapon. But, do this kind of enemy exist? Nope.

We'll then make a real comparison, calculating the bonus that PD grants you, only from the pool of hp that the shar ranger has effectively left when already has received (during a combat) some magical damage.

There will be three different examples, because there will be three different kind of enemies, according to the percentage of magical damage they'll deliver to our ranger: casters, assassins and solo templated tanks, and group templated tanks.

Toughness vs Physical Defence fighting a caster
Level 1: 1656 HP vs 1631 HP
Level 2: 1706 HP vs 1631 HP
Level 3: 1781 HP vs 1631 HP
Level 4: 1881 HP vs 1631 HP
Level 5: 2031 HP vs 1631 HP

Obviously, when fighting a pure caster, the hp bonus given by PD is 0. On this occasion, the points spent on PD are a total waste. The concept would be crystal clear even for a zombie

Now, let's value the next step, enemies that delivers a balaced mix of melee and magical damages. The best examples are the assassin classes, they can even deliver more magical than melee damage (think about viper III). Other examples could be skalds, minstrels, thanes, reavers and extreme solo tanks like Maeghra the paladin (all dot and reverse dot on his template). For this second step, let's base our calculation on an enemy delivering 50% magical and 50% melee damage. This means, that effectively, PD will we able to work only on 815 HP (1631/2), since the other half of the total hp will be lost thanks to magic.

Toughness vs Physical Defence fighting an assassin
Level 1: 1656 HP vs 1646 HP
Level 2: 1706 HP vs 1670 HP
Level 3: 1781 HP vs 1727 HP
Level 4: 1881 HP vs 1784 HP
Level 5: 2031 HP vs 1858 HP

Oops, it seems that even when fighting this kind of enemies Toughness is by far better than PD, and more you spec into it and more the gap increases.

Now, for the final step, let's consider the kind of enemy that will deliver as much melee damage as possible. These are group templated pure/light tanks (all dd procs and reprocs), friars, hunters and scouts (when not using a dmg add or damage shield ofc). For this last example, immagine also a normal proccing rate: only 2 low damage procs from alchemy and no bleeding or proccing from weapon styles (leviathan, blizzard blade, etc etc). Calculate therefore that to our total pool of 1631 hp, the bonus hp given by PD will be only calculated on a base of 1511 avaiale hit points (1631-120).

Toughness vs Physical Defence fighting a group pure/light tank
Level 1: 1656 HP vs 1661 HP
Level 2: 1706 HP vs 1706 HP
Level 3: 1781 HP vs 1812 HP
Level 4: 1881 HP vs 1918 HP
Level 5: 2031 HP vs 2054 HP

So, with this kind of enemies, if that is not a special day for them (normal proccing and no other effects), the two RAs give you almost the same benefits. PD it's just imperceptible better and only when compared at level 4, its advantage is a noticeably 2%. On the other levels the margin is smaller (even no margin at level 2).

At this point we have discovered that Toughness is always better by far than Physical Defence, except in the case you fight a group specced light/pure tank (which percentage of your incs does this kind of enemy cover? 10%?). Group specced tanks usually don't go solo and when you meet them, they might deliver you more than just 120 "not melee damages" (think about bleeding on positianals or that their alchemized pieces procs more or for more). Therefore is very rare for a ranger to meet the circumstances presented in the last example. Even when you play grouped, during a fg or smallman inc it's very rare that you don't get nuked, dotted, debuffed etc etc.

So, i'd say that if you are a shar ranger full buffed, Toughness is better than PD at least on 95% of the occasions.

Yes, don't forget we are always talking about the a shar ranger that put +10 const when rolling the character.

If you apply the same buffs on a lurikeen ranger (base of 1210hp), you will have, when full buffed, 1487 hp. Let's see how the keen ranger would have perfomed, according to ras, on the last table against pure/light tanks:

Toughness vs Physical Defence fighting a group pure/light tank with keen toon
Level 1: 1512 HP vs 1514 HP
Level 2: 1562 HP vs 1555 HP
Level 3: 1637 HP vs 1651 HP
Level 4: 1737 HP vs 1746 HP
Level 5: 1887 HP vs 1869 HP

Practically no difference. Sometimes it's imperceptible better Tough, sometimes PD. But keep in mind that we are always evaluating no more than the 5% of your possible incs (vs group specced tanks).

What are the final conclusions we can draw then?

- That if you are a shar ranger going around full buffed, Toughness is by far better than PD, except vs not proccing too much group specced pure/ligh tanks (5% of your total incs? ), where the difference is minimal anyway.
- That if you are a lurikeen ranger, Toughness is by far better than PD always.
- That if you are a caster, having roughly 1000 hp there is no need to think about what's better.
- And finally, that if you play a class that doesn't have PD among the selectable ras, don't worry, you can take Toughness that is gonna probably be much better


PS: Sorry for the long log post, i thought i would have never made it, but Zack game courage with his post
PPS: Now let's laugh thinking about the majority of the lurikeens rangers out there, with no Toughness at all and with best possible PD

You're not counting potions and other options for healing into your equation.

It would stand to reason that healing is more effective with higher PD than with higher HP.

Had a sheet with Toughness vs PD for my Hunter. I made one step more and made a HP-per-realmskillpoint table. Just for the ultra-number-nerds here So this 4 + that 3 is better then only 1 thing 5

Seethoven wrote:You're not counting potions and other options for healing into your equation.

It would stand to reason that healing is more effective with higher PD than with higher HP.

You are right about healing potions, not about ip, which is affected on the same percentage by Tough and PD.

Let's make an example with ip. I have a toon with 1600 hp. Toughness will allow me to have 2000 hp vs every kind of damage, while PD will allow me to have 2048 hp only vs melee damge (an impossible real situation, but work on this to simplify). Now i'm very good at using ip2 and to maximize it's efficiency i'll use it when i have only 1 hp left. Thanks to toughness i will reach 3000 hp vs all damages, thanks to PD, i'll have 3072 hp vs melee damages only.

But, like demonstrated above, an all melee damaging enemy/combat is an unreal situation. So, the results stay the same: far beyond better Toughness since the better situation that usually you can find (confronting pure tanks templated for soloing) will be losing only 20% of your total life vs magic and the rest vs melee. Still no match, even if you add in 70 hp more saved by PD thanks to a healing potions giving you 250 hp more

Frendir wrote::!: Had a sheet with Toughness vs PD for my Hunter. I made one step more and made a HP-per-realmskillpoint table. Just for the ultra-number-nerds here So this 4 + that 3 is better then only 1 thing 5

In fact, on my ranger i have Tough 4 and PD3
Since the realm points spent suffer of diminishing return as the level of the RAs goes up, so, once achived tough4, it's better to spend 10 more points on pd3 than 15 on tough5

Oh the humanity.

Too bad u spend so many times to write so many words with huge mistake on how percent works

Let me clarify. You say :

Badtzmaru wrote:So with PD1, it could therefore withstand 1000 HP plus a 2%, thus 1020 damages before dying

This is false. If you take "virtual" 1020 damage, then with PD they will be reduced by 2%, and u take only 1020x.98=999 damage.
Your mistake seems a very little one. But let's go on :

Badtzmaru wrote:The same toon having 1000 HP, if had PD5, could withstand 1280 melee (and exclusively melee) damages before dying.

28% damage reduction ? You say it's the same that having 1280 HPS ? Well, let'e try.
You have 1280 HPS and take 1300 damage -> you die
You have 1000 Hps and 28% damage reduction -> The 1300 damage are reduced to 1300*(1-0.28) = 936 damage. You are still alive. You can even take more, clearly.

PD is clearly better than Toughness if u talk about melee damage only, even with low HPs (like 1400).

If u take a closer (and accurate) look at this RA, u will realize than percentage are a little to high and what is more suprising is that PD3 and PD5 give are more cost effective than PD2 or PD4
Yeah, i believe that Mythic did the same mistake than you

If you want to correct your data, do not forget that :
1. HPs given by Toughness take benefits from resists
2. PD resists are applied after item resists (and armor bonus/malus)

So the effectiveness also depends on the resist you have against the damage you are taken.

Badtzmaru wrote:PPS: Now let's laugh thinking about the majority of the lurikeens rangers out there, with no Toughness at all and with best possible PD

I think they laugh louder than you

thanks hulkgris

edit.:

Badtzmaru wrote: [...]

You are right, the way i calculated the damage sustainable with PD is wrong The error is small at lower levels of PD, but becomes very big with PD5.

I will calculate (on the next days), the exact amount of virtual hp gained via PD, but remember that the priciple that the less hp you have, the less effective PD is always valid.

Just for curiosity i made again the comparison between Tough5 and PD5 when a shar ranger is fighting vs an assassin (50% melee and 50% other kind of damage): with tough5, he would have 2031 hp, with PD5 only 1947. This is because 815 hp are lost via "magical" damage while the other half, thanks to PD, becomes 1132 hp (1132*0,72=815). So 815+1132=1947.
And this difference is even bigger when we talk about toons with less hp (much more common). So, even if my calculations were wrong (my bad), my intuition was still correct

HulkGris wrote:PD is clearly better than Toughness if u talk about melee damage only, even with low HPs (like 1400).

Hem, that was my first sentence as well, but i hope you will admit that an enemy delivering only melee damage is really unlikely to be found.

HulkGris wrote:If u take a closer (and accurate) look at this RA, u will realize than percentage are a little to high and what is more suprising is that PD3 and PD5 give are more cost effective than PD2 or PD4
Yeah, i believe that Mythic did the same mistake than you

I'm in good company then

HulkGris wrote:If you want to correct your data, do not forget that :
1. HPs given by Toughness take benefits from resists
2. PD resists are applied after item resists (and armor bonus/malus)

That is automatically calculated because we are talking about final damage, the one that effectively reduces your hp pool, and that comes after the various bonus and malus.

HulkGris wrote:I think they laugh louder than you

Maybe, but definitely not when fighting an assassin

What is better if I am a caster ?

Another point is that ip heals for a percentage of your hp, another pro for tough.

Magicco wrote:thanks hulkgris

edit.:

Badtzmaru wrote: [...]

img

Nef Melody wrote:What is better if I am a caster ?

Another point is that ip heals for a percentage of your hp, another pro for tough.

Yes, for group play, talking only of "damage need to be done to die" is not enough.
Toughness could be a little better, but if my cleric need to heal 20% more HPs, then, i think i would choose PD.
A mage who is not healed is dead, even with Toughness 5. And since you are healed, the total HP taken into account for PD effect is huge.

What i mean is if i receive 2K hp of heal, then the PD effect is on a 3400 hp pool not only my 1400 base HPs.

And on top of that, if a DI is up, it will take longer to use all the heal pool if i have PD.

toughness is bullshit for grp rvr as a caster

Nef Melody wrote:toughness is bullshit for grp rvr as a caster

not in my grp when i'm afk again xD

Looks like you have fun to calculate your daoc . Guess thats why you use an SH gear too . Lets calc s/c debuff poison use and hope for a tracker .
Situation:
Infi/SB/NS (-118 s/c debuff poison) vs Char (Char - 2000hp (once with buffs, once without con buffs) and purge2+)
Calc for Debuff: (dunno if the values are correct, if not plz let me know, also other infos for calculating are welcome )
118 s/c debuff poison - vs buffed value *2 - 2*118=236 - 236 con debuffed - con to hp *3,6 - 236*3,6=849,6 - HP debuff: 849 hp
118 s/c debuff poison - 118 con debuffed - con to hp *3,6 - 118*3,6=424,8 - HP debuff: 424 hp
Here we go: (unbuffed)
Assa attacks (-118 s/c debuff poison) [Char: 2000-424=1576 HP: 1576/1576] [HP Bar: 100%]
Char use purge [Char: gainback of maxhp value: 1576/2000] [HP Bar: 78,8%]
Assa attacks (-118 s/c debuff poison) [Char: 1576-424=1152 HP: 1152/1576] [HP Bar: 73,1%]
848 HP drawed by debuff poison. Purge gives back the max hp, but not the drawed hp. No immunity timer on s/c debuff poison.
Here we go: (buffed)
Assa attacks (-118 s/c debuff poison) [Char: 2000-849=1576 HP: 1151/1151] [HP Bar: 100%]
Char use purge [Char: gainback of maxhp value: 1151/2000] [HP Bar: 57,6%]
Assa attacks (-118 s/c debuff poison) [Char: 1151-849=302 HP: 302/1151] [HP Bar: 26,2%]
1698 HP drawed
Atm i'm a bit to stoned but i guess only champ had this *2 debuff value, but.... blueberry cheese
In the unbuffed example you see that the visible effect of both debuffs is only that the HP is down to 73,1%. But these 73,1% are only 1152hp of the 2000hp we had on startup. 1152/2000 is 57,6%. Thx to Ombraccia , you ganked me that hard with this, that i started to calc the situation.

2000hp start
- pa dmg(+offhand) + vipertick + s/c debuff
(600+50+120=770dmg) [2000-770=1230 1230/2000 -> 61,5% ; 1230-424=806 (2000-424=1576) 806/1576 -> 51,1%
- cd dmg(+offhand) + new vipertick
(100+50+120=270dmg) [806-270=536 536/1576 -> 34%
QQ stunned, QQ hp low, QQ more -> ra dump -> purge -> stick + body resi song + dd shout + d/q debuff + instant mezz -> ...idea was to use ip2 but you used your purge that fast...
536/2000 -> 26,8%
- anytimer/whatever/unstyled + vipertick + s/c debuff
(50+120=170dmg) [536-170=366 366/2000 -> 18,3% ; 366-424=??? (2000-424=1576) ???/1576 -> 0%
really impressive how fast i died, since this moment i have ip on mousekey, but at all 50% of 1576 is only 788, 2 hits with new viper dot and its done.

plz calc this too, and share your results