caius julius caesar – Steel Phoenix Studios

onion-souls:

rapacityinblue:

wearebarbarian:

onion-souls:

Under D&D rules, a dagger does 1d4 base damage. The average human has a Strength score of 10, adding no bonuses. Several of them, due to the military background of many, likely had strength or dexterity scores of 11-14. But only two or three, and quite a few would be frail with old age, sinking to 8-9 strength. All in all, we can only add a total of +1 damage per round from Brutus.

An estimate of sixty men were involved in Caesar’s actual murder. Not the wider conspiracy, but the stabbing.

Julius Caesar was a general, which is generally depicted as a 10th level fighter. Considering his above baseline constitution and dex, weakened by his probable history of malaria, epilepsy, and/or strokes (-1 dex modifier), and lack of armor at the time of the event, he would likely have something along the lines of AC 9 and 60 HP. The senators would likely hit him roughly 55% the time.

So the Roman senate had a damage-per-round of 66, more than enough to kill Caesar in one round even without factoring in surprise round advantage.

Now THESE are the kind of statistics I wanna see!

So as a ~~giant nerd with the 5e player’s handbook in her purse~~ DM, I’m going to quibble with your math just a tiny bit. Just getting Caesar to 0 wouldn’t do it – he’d have to fail his death saves or be reduced to -60hp to autodie.

First of all, I think given the facts, we can safely disregard any surprise round damage or advantage. Caesar had ample warning of the attack prior to its execution, both from rumors of the plot and portentous omens. This, combined with historical writings that state Caesar attempted to flee, would indicate that there was no surprise round and Caesar was active in the initiative order from the first event.

Accepting your numbers, 33 of the 60 conspirators involved should have succeeded in their attack rolls. This includes Climber, who successfully restrained Caesar, and Brutus, who did an additional 1 point of damage. 3 of the 33 attacks, statistically, were critical hits. If we assume that everyone was using a dagger, no one besides Brutus had damage modifiers, and no one besides Climber used their attack for anything other than a grapple, then the final damage total of the Roman Senate is 71 points of damage. (28 regular attacks at 2 points each [56] + 3 critical attacks at 4 points each [12] + Climber’s grapple [0] + Brutus’s attack at 2+1 [3])

Here’s where it gets hairy. According to historical record and autopsy, only 24 of the 60 attacks landed. (23 stab wounds, plus Climber’s grapple.) This indicates that:

Caesar had a much higher dex mod and correspondingly higher AC/initiative

Some of the conspirators used their actions to increase the DC of Climber’s grapple, rather than attack.

A combination of the above.

Further complicating matters are the following facts:

Caesar attempted to flee, but was blinded by the blood in his eyes, and fell prone.

He not leave melee range, so none of the 60 conspirators received attacks of opportunity against him.

Any attacks after this point had advantage.

The official autopsy and historical record states that the second strike to the chest was a lethal wound, however, the actual cause of death was ruled to be loss of blood from multiple stab wounds.

This single wound was struck late in battle after Caesar was already bleeding out.

Caesar definitely spoke after Casca and Brutus’s attacks, indicating that he was not yet unconscious and these were not the fatal blow.

Either two attacks landed after Caesar was unconscious, each registering as an automatic critical and therefore two failed death saving throws OR

The final attack to land did enough damage to instantly reduce Caesar from 1HP to a number equal to or below his starting HP, resulting in instantaneous death.

With all these facts in consideration, I think we can surmise the following.

Caesar, despite being feebled by age and illness, had a higher dex modifier than the original post credits him with. This aided him in AC, but due to illness, his HP was significantly lower than the average level 10 fighter. Additionally, he must have rolled very poorly on initiative, or else many more conspirators would have hit him while he was prone.

Caesar entered the senate chamber. Climber, who led the initiative round, approached Caesar and grappled him. Immediately after, Casca and Brutus attacked Caesar, both landing non-fatal wounds. Caesar used his first round reaction to grapple Casca in return, grabbing his arm. Casca called for aid, and some other 57 conspirators rushed to help. Given the final numbers, it’s likely that some used their action to dash or add to the DC of the grapple. Most of them acted before Caesar, attacking while he was grappled but not prone. Because of his high AC, many of these strikes missed.

On his turn, Caesar attempted to break the grapple. Caesar rolled a 1, prompting him to become prone. From this point on, attacks against him had advantage. When he was near death, a rogue, (assuming level 10) landed a critical hit with sneak attack. The presence of rogues is supported by Caesar’s words to Casca earlier: “Casca, you villain,” if we assume “villain” is meant, literally, as criminal, and not a metaphor for “stabhappy person”.

What’s awesome is we can use the rogue’s attack as a control for our estimation of Caesar’s HP.

Using the quick build rules in the PHB a human rogue at that level could have a dex as high as 20. For the sake of argument we’ll nerf him down to 15. That gives him a total dex+prof modifier of +6 with a dagger. So for final damage we’re looking at 1d4+5d6+6. That averages out to 23 including the modifier. Maybe around 30 if he rolls extremely well. And, if he struck after Caesar was unconscious, he’d crit automatically. So we’re looking at an average of 40 and a max of 75 points of damage. That gets us right to the sweet spot of the OP’s estimated 60 HP, with a good roll.

So there you have it. The average damage round of the Roman senate is around 70ish points of damage, but against a grappled and prone foe with the aid of one asshole rogue, it’s more in the 120 range.

Really good, and more in depth, analysis.

For clarification on one minor point, “Casca, you villain, what are you doing” is “Scelerate Casca quid agis?” In the original Latin of Suetonius’ account; sceleratus is more much in line with the modern use of villainy- a vile, wicked, debased person- than fur, furcifer, latro, raptor, or any other term a Latin would use for a rogue.