Blaise

If it's already magical in nature, you could probably work a way in for it to stabilize those living on its back. I mean if they are going into outer space, there needs to be some magic to stabilize lifeforms on its back. Say a purple aurora borealis across all the sky signals the coming of judgment day, for believers to make a pilgrimage to their mecca. At this central city, they descend into the dragon, into a hospitable environment sheltered within. The earth is screwed, but it wouldn't be the first religion that believes their final salvation comes with the ending of the rest of the world.

@TrevorD I think it just stands on its hind legs so that half of its body is in space and it can float.

Hello! Thanks!

Hi @Shalvenay thank you for the welcome! It's a nice community and been very helpful to me!

For example, page 13 can be summarized by 0.65 * non-crit damage (1d12+6=12.5) + 0.05 * crit (2d12+6=19) and you get 9.075 or 9 average.

@Xirema What are you trying to do with pages 12/13? You pose the question "What's her expected damage on an average attack under these conditions?" I don't understand why all the tables are necessary to answer this. You only need her average damage on the die roll and add any modifiers. Most of the time for comparisons you wouldn't need a to-hit roll since it's normalized, but if you want to incorporate to-hit you just multiply the crit and non-crit averages by the chance to hit.

Weird your name shows up as MikeO in the chat box, but MikeQ for tagging

Thank you @MikeQ

So for now, I accept the one answer, but simultaneously I open a bounty to give to the other person 24 hours later?

that would be nice

ooohh

I can accept one answer and give a bounty to the other?

One answers my title better. The other one spends far more time and effort to answer my personal case better. The first one is better for future users, the second one I'd like to show appreciation for their time to help me personally.

Is it always better to accept an answer? I have two good answers for different reasons. If I accept one, I draw attention away from the other.

@KorvinStarmast Do you think 14 con on a sword & board EK is too low? Gotta spend my other ASI on feats and strength maxing.

@KorvinStarmast ah, the question in question: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139801/…

@KorvinStarmast hey korvin, I responded to your comment but forgot to tag. I'm not sure if editing in a tag will still tag you. Besides that, I'm not sure if my comments are too long. I want to be forthcoming with information so you and others don't have to guess, but I also don't want to bog the page with too much text or deviate the thread's purpose from its title for future readers. We can continue in the comments if you'd like, or move to a chat room, whichever you think is best.

@eimrek

You can also pay attention to how much improvement you gain with a larger basis set over a smaller one. Sometimes it's not all that much, and depending on your needs it could be convenient to save calculation time with a smaller basis set.

Well, depending on how far you are with your calculations, you may prefer to stay with 6-311++G so you can publish with the same basis set on all your molecules. In that case, I'd still go to a database and take a smaller basis set to see if it helps initial convergence. You can always upgrade the basis set afterward.

I would try a def2-SVP basis set first, then move up to def2-TZVP later. You might also try other functionals, like PBE or one of the Minnesota functionals, although I do not know enough to tell you which functional should work best for your type of system. Also, if the SCF oscillation continues with def2-SVP, I'd activate the damping function. I'm not sure what the exact command is for damping in Gaussian, but I see in your output that "damping=F," so there must be a way to make it true.

@eimrek what molecule are you dealing with? I did not see it in your question.

What kind of topics do we discuss here? Anything at all to do with calculation errors? :)

Whoops didnt mean to enter yet. Well nevermind, think i got it.