D&D 5E 5th Edition has broken Bounded Accuracy

[Zardnaar]

True. Knocking someone prone to set up the GWM is a great use of a Shield Bash. Sharpshooter comes on line earlier than GWM due to the +2 from Archery Style.

Well I think the shield master feat is better than GWF in a vacuum as GWM miss a lot by comparison assuming the shield master whatever can stack expertise or advantage (ideally both) on their athletics roll.

Spells like blindness, faerie fire and hold person become even better than they already are as well.

 

[KarinsDad]

Even with a +3 weapon you should only be averaging 15 points of damage a hit.

Your hit roll should be +6 proficiency +5 stat +3 weapon =+14 (without GWM) -5 =+9 (with GWM)

Average damage without GWM: 15 per hit. 45 damage with three hits.

Average damage with GWM: 25 her hit. 50 points with two hits. 75 with three hits.

Two hits with GWM exceeds the damage you do with three hits without it. Three hits with GWM blows non-GWM hits out of the water.

If you're a fighter with four attacks.

No GWM: 4 hits: 60 average damage.
GWM: 100 average damage.

You need to hit all four times to beat two GWM hits. Three GWM hits out of four does more damage than four hits without by about 25%.

Just to be fair, one should be looking at DPR. You cannot just disregard the -5 to hit like you did in your math and just add in the +10 damage.

Note: By "No GWM", I mean not using the -5/+10 feature. The extra damage and bonus attack for doing a critical doesn't change the percentage difference.

No GWM: 85% chance to hit (AC 18): 12.75 * 4 = 51 vs.
GWM: 60% chance to hit: 15 * 4 = 60 (increase of 17%)

No GWM: 75% chance to hit (AC 20): 11.25 * 4 = 45 vs.
GWM: 50% chance to hit: 12.5 * 4 = 50 (increase of 11%)

No GWM: 65% chance to hit (AC 22): 9.75 * 4 = 39 vs.
GWM: 40% chance to hit: 10 * 4 = 40 (increase of 2.5%)

And once one gets to AC 23, the DPR advantage goes to No GWM.

So, it really depends on what you are fighting. Most worthwhile fights at 20th level are against foes with decent AC or with the ability to get decent ACs. For example, an ancient Dragon that can throw up a Haste spell (or better yet, a Blur spell) or some such. Granted, PCs are buffing and/or debuffing too. Which is why all ancient dragons should have their own NPC henchmen spell casters.

 

[Celtavian]

Just to be fair, one should be looking at DPR. You cannot just disregard the -5 to hit like you did in your math and just add in the +10 damage.

Note: By "No GWM", I mean not using the -5/+10 feature. The extra damage and bonus attack for doing a critical doesn't change the percentage difference.

No GWM: 85% chance to hit (AC 18): 12.75 * 4 = 51 vs.
GWM: 60% chance to hit: 15 * 4 = 60 (increase of 17%)

No GWM: 75% chance to hit (AC 20): 11.25 * 4 = 45 vs.
GWM: 50% chance to hit: 12.5 * 4 = 50 (increase of 11%)

No GWM: 65% chance to hit (AC 22): 9.75 * 4 = 39 vs.
GWM: 40% chance to hit: 10 * 4 = 40 (increase of 2.5%)

And once one gets to AC 23, the DPR advantage goes to No GWM.

So, it really depends on what you are fighting. Most worthwhile fights at 20th level are against foes with decent AC or with the ability to get decent ACs. For example, an ancient Dragon that can throw up a Haste spell (or better yet, a Blur spell) or some such. Granted, PCs are buffing and/or debuffing too. Which is why all ancient dragons should have their own NPC henchmen spell casters.

We already hashed this out in another thread taking into account varying ACs. I was merely pointing out that Prism doing 20 damage a hit without GWM is not adding up with the information he has given us. He seems to be underestimating the difference in damage between using the two feats and not using them.

Most worthwhile fights at 20th level usually have a party buffing the Sharpshooter/GWM to boost his chance to hit as well as individual nova abilities like BM dice or paladin vows that greatly increase chance to hit allowing serious nova damage. Starting this discussion again means you missed the extensive discussion we already had. GWM/Sharpshooter are must have feats for those that use the weapons they effect. They do a great deal more damage than classes that don't have those feats. They are the only feats I've found in the game that create a balance problem other than perhaps Grapple Master with an expertise class. I don't have experience with Grapple Master yet.

Not to mention you of all people should be aware of the damage difference for martials using these feats and casters. That discrepancy is even wider for them. I tolerate it because of the versatility of the caster classes.

 

[KarinsDad]

We already hashed this out in another thread taking into account varying ACs. I was merely pointing out that Prism doing 20 damage a hit without GWM is not adding up with the information he has given us. He seems to be underestimating the difference in damage between using the two feats and not using them.

Most worthwhile fights at 20th level usually have a party buffing the Sharpshooter/GWM to boost his chance to hit as well as individual nova abilities like BM dice or paladin vows that greatly increase chance to hit allowing serious nova damage. Starting this discussion again means you missed the extensive discussion we already had. GWM/Sharpshooter are must have feats for those that use the weapons they effect. They do a great deal more damage than classes that don't have those feats. They are the only feats I've found in the game that create a balance problem other than perhaps Grapple Master with an expertise class. I don't have experience with Grapple Master yet.

Not to mention you of all people should be aware of the damage difference for martials using these feats and casters. That discrepancy is even wider for them. I tolerate it because of the versatility of the caster classes.

No doubt. I was merely pointing out that it is not a 25% difference like you stated unless the chance to hit in the GMW case is really high (like 75% or AC 15 post buffs/debuffs). Granted, this could occur with buffs and such, but on the other hand, most high level encounters worth their salt have higher AC foes and/or counters for such buffs. To make challenging high level encounters, a DM has to be creative. The PCs just have too many options and synergies otherwise. Just adding in more foes merely slows down the game. It allows the GMW case to do more damage percentage-wise, but at the cost of having a grind. To avoid this, the DM has to counter PC capabilities with NPC capabilities. Otherwise, 20th level PCs won't even be challenged with 99+% of the monsters in the Monster Manual.

You appear to be overestimating the damage increase percentage of -5/+10 by a small amount and assuming that buffs and such would allow for such a possibility. They might, but not if the DM is proactive about challenging the players.

 

[Celtavian]

No doubt. I was merely pointing out that it is not a 25% difference like you stated unless the chance to hit in the GMW case is really high (like 75% or AC 15 post buffs/debuffs). Granted, this could occur with buffs and such, but on the other hand, most high level encounters worth their salt have higher AC foes and/or counters for such buffs. To make challenging high level encounters, a DM has to be creative. The PCs just have too many options and synergies otherwise. Just adding in more foes merely slows down the game. It allows the GMW case to do more damage percentage-wise, but at the cost of having a grind. To avoid this, the DM has to counter PC capabilities with NPC capabilities. Otherwise, 20th level PCs won't even be challenged with 99+% of the monsters in the Monster Manual.

You appear to be overestimating the damage increase percentage of -5/+10 by a small amount and assuming that buffs and such would allow for such a possibility. They might, but not if the DM is proactive about challenging the players.

I'm not overestimating the damage increase. As I've stated we hashed this out in another thread. Once you start taking into account buffs, battlemaster dice, vows, bless, foresight, familiars providing adv., spells providing advantage, prone, and numerous other party capabilities that boost hit chance, the damage divide is immense. From the damage I recorded during the course of a campaign, I believe it is 70 to 100% more damage over the course of a fight than a character not using either of those feats. They do more damage in nearly every fight. Major fights they nova using special abilities. In mook fights a single bless spell allows them to use GWMf on every hit vastly outpacing other classes for damage. This is recorded over the course of about 6 levels after level 10 because I wanted to see the real game effect of the feats. You have a seven person party. You should record damage and see the percentage difference. You must have a Sharpshooter and GWM user in your party.

Theory-crafting only goes so far. Hard data is much better. The hard data showed that the GWM fighter when set up to succeed with bless and fly (to eliminate mobility issues with a melee martial) out-damaged everyone in the group by 70% to 100% over the course of a fight. Sometimes the paladin closed the gap with smite criticals. Occasionally a caster would have a good hit here and there with a spell critical. Overall, the GWM fighter was damage king by a wide margin.

Who does this hurt the most? Mostly martials not using the feats, though I don't worry about it as a much with defensive martials using Shield Master. It hurts lower level casters that lack spell versatility and especially rogues. Rogues are hurt the most by the feats given their damage balance is based on single large hits using Sneak Attack damage.

Sure. The DM can always make something harder for any class with something imbalanced. At least neither of those feats are as bad as Come and Get Me or 3E Power Attack at high level. Unless you're going to make every fight so hard that you can't use GWM, the GWM will have a vast damage advantage over non-GWM fighters. I think the Sharpshooter damage advantage will be greater than GWM. I'll start recording damage once he hits level 10 like before. It doesn't seem as big a problem at lower level save on a few nova occasions.

I'll post the data this time to add information for those still in doubt.

The data I collected before was in the following party:
1. Shield Master Paladin: Probably skewed the numbers in favor of the GWM fighter because he was using one of the lower damage paladin options, though he was a Vengeance Paladin.

2. Battlemaster Fighter: Probably the best fighter for consistent nova damage with GWM.

3. Life Cleric: Not much of a damage dealer.

4. Lore Bard: Also not much of a damage dealer, but great at helping the GWM fighter do his damage.

5. Evoker Wizard: Supposed to be a damage dealer, but could not match the GWM fighter save with AoE damage. I was getting better at dealing damage. If the DM allows the Evoker to use his Maximize evocation damage capabilities on cantrips for max cantrip damage all the time, the gap closes somewhat at level 14 plus. That usually allows the Evoker to use one maximized regular spell, then max his cantrip for the rest of the day for an average of 45 point fire bolt hit.

Not the best comparison, since no TWF damage dealer. Still clearly showed the damage advantage a GWM fighter has over other classes.

I think the next comparison with Sharpshooter will be better because I have an Eldritch Blast specialist warlock in the group (not a Sorlock. Warlock Fighter) and an Open Hand Monk. That should give me some good real game damage number comparisons.

 

[DaveDash]

I'm not overestimating the damage increase. As I've stated we hashed this out in another thread. Once you start taking into account buffs, battlemaster dice, vows, bless, foresight, familiars providing adv., spells providing advantage, prone, and numerous other party capabilities that boost hit chance, the damage divide is immense. From the damage I recorded during the course of a campaign, I believe it is 70 to 100% more damage over the course of a fight than a character not using either of those feats. They do more damage in nearly every fight. Major fights they nova using special abilities. In mook fights a single bless spell allows them to use GWMf on every hit vastly outpacing other classes for damage. This is recorded over the course of about 6 levels after level 10 because I wanted to see the real game effect of the feats. You have a seven person party. You should record damage and see the percentage difference. You must have a Sharpshooter and GWM user in your party.

Theory-crafting only goes so far. Hard data is much better. The hard data showed that the GWM fighter when set up to succeed with bless and fly (to eliminate mobility issues with a melee martial) out-damaged everyone in the group by 70% to 100% over the course of a fight. Sometimes the paladin closed the gap with smite criticals. Occasionally a caster would have a good hit here and there with a spell critical. Overall, the GWM fighter was damage king by a wide margin.

Who does this hurt the most? Mostly martials not using the feats, though I don't worry about it as a much with defensive martials using Shield Master. It hurts lower level casters that lack spell versatility and especially rogues. Rogues are hurt the most by the feats given their damage balance is based on single large hits using Sneak Attack damage.

Sure. The DM can always make something harder for any class with something imbalanced. At least neither of those feats are as bad as Come and Get Me or 3E Power Attack at high level. Unless you're going to make every fight so hard that you can't use GWM, the GWM will have a vast damage advantage over non-GWM fighters. I think the Sharpshooter damage advantage will be greater than GWM. I'll start recording damage once he hits level 10 like before. It doesn't seem as big a problem at lower level save on a few nova occasions.

I'll post the data this time to add information for those still in doubt.

The data I collected before was in the following party:
1. Shield Master Paladin: Probably skewed the numbers in favor of the GWM fighter because he was using one of the lower damage paladin options, though he was a Vengeance Paladin.

2. Battlemaster Fighter: Probably the best fighter for consistent nova damage with GWM.

3. Life Cleric: Not much of a damage dealer.

4. Lore Bard: Also not much of a damage dealer, but great at helping the GWM fighter do his damage.

5. Evoker Wizard: Supposed to be a damage dealer, but could not match the GWM fighter save with AoE damage. I was getting better at dealing damage. If the DM allows the Evoker to use his Maximize evocation damage capabilities on cantrips for max cantrip damage all the time, the gap closes somewhat at level 14 plus. That usually allows the Evoker to use one maximized regular spell, then max his cantrip for the rest of the day for an average of 45 point fire bolt hit.

Not the best comparison, since no TWF damage dealer. Still clearly showed the damage advantage a GWM fighter has over other classes.

I think the next comparison with Sharpshooter will be better because I have an Eldritch Blast specialist warlock in the group (not a Sorlock. Warlock Fighter) and an Open Hand Monk. That should give me some good real game damage number comparisons.

Pretty consistent with my experiences with SS as well.

The more buffs you have, the wider the margin, due to your base damage being much higher to begin with. KarinsDads numbers are basically the worst case scenario, not the only case scenario.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I'm not overestimating the damage increase. As I've stated we hashed this out in another thread. Once you start taking into account buffs, battlemaster dice, vows, bless, foresight, familiars providing adv., spells providing advantage, prone, and numerous other party capabilities that boost hit chance, the damage divide is immense. From the damage I recorded during the course of a campaign, I believe it is 70 to 100% more damage over the course of a fight than a character not using either of those feats. They do more damage in nearly every fight. Major fights they nova using special abilities. In mook fights a single bless spell allows them to use GWMf on every hit vastly outpacing other classes for damage. This is recorded over the course of about 6 levels after level 10 because I wanted to see the real game effect of the feats. You have a seven person party. You should record damage and see the percentage difference. You must have a Sharpshooter and GWM user in your party.

Theory-crafting only goes so far. Hard data is much better. The hard data showed that the GWM fighter when set up to succeed with bless and fly (to eliminate mobility issues with a melee martial) out-damaged everyone in the group by 70% to 100% over the course of a fight. Sometimes the paladin closed the gap with smite criticals. Occasionally a caster would have a good hit here and there with a spell critical. Overall, the GWM fighter was damage king by a wide margin.

Who does this hurt the most? Mostly martials not using the feats, though I don't worry about it as a much with defensive martials using Shield Master. It hurts lower level casters that lack spell versatility and especially rogues. Rogues are hurt the most by the feats given their damage balance is based on single large hits using Sneak Attack damage.

Sure. The DM can always make something harder for any class with something imbalanced. At least neither of those feats are as bad as Come and Get Me or 3E Power Attack at high level. Unless you're going to make every fight so hard that you can't use GWM, the GWM will have a vast damage advantage over non-GWM fighters. I think the Sharpshooter damage advantage will be greater than GWM. I'll start recording damage once he hits level 10 like before. It doesn't seem as big a problem at lower level save on a few nova occasions.

I'll post the data this time to add information for those still in doubt.

The data I collected before was in the following party:
1. Shield Master Paladin: Probably skewed the numbers in favor of the GWM fighter because he was using one of the lower damage paladin options, though he was a Vengeance Paladin.

2. Battlemaster Fighter: Probably the best fighter for consistent nova damage with GWM.

3. Life Cleric: Not much of a damage dealer.

4. Lore Bard: Also not much of a damage dealer, but great at helping the GWM fighter do his damage.

5. Evoker Wizard: Supposed to be a damage dealer, but could not match the GWM fighter save with AoE damage. I was getting better at dealing damage. If the DM allows the Evoker to use his Maximize evocation damage capabilities on cantrips for max cantrip damage all the time, the gap closes somewhat at level 14 plus. That usually allows the Evoker to use one maximized regular spell, then max his cantrip for the rest of the day for an average of 45 point fire bolt hit.

Not the best comparison, since no TWF damage dealer. Still clearly showed the damage advantage a GWM fighter has over other classes.

I think the next comparison with Sharpshooter will be better because I have an Eldritch Blast specialist warlock in the group (not a Sorlock. Warlock Fighter) and an Open Hand Monk. That should give me some good real game damage number comparisons.

If the -5/+10 feats increase damage by that margin, that simply confirms they are very broken, and best not allowed. Anything that so blatantly brings back the awful "striker" role is to be avoided at all costs. Nothing kills a game quicker ime.

 

[Celtavian]

If the -5/+10 feats increase damage by that margin, that simply confirms they are very broken, and best not allowed. Anything that so blatantly brings back the awful "striker" role is to be avoided at all costs. Nothing kills a game quicker ime.

Well, I think it is a problem for the other martials like the duelist and two-weapon martial and the monk and rogue (though I'm torn about the rogue because the class has a lot of nifty abilities a party can leverage to do some crazy stuff).

I tend to look at the game and PCs in terms of "What role can they fill and how well can they fill it? How effective can they be in the widest range of possible combat and non-combat encounters?" I feel the game is balanced if someone can do something very well that no one else can do that provides a significant advantage for the group. Clerics are generally the best healers. Bards are the best party buffers. Druids are a little bit wizard, a little bit healer, and can be built in different ways to provide a party with an advantage. Wizards are the most versatile spellcasters and can do some amazing things at high level in every pillar. Warlocks have some crazy combinations that make them powerful like being able to fight within darkness and the best attack cantrip in the game. Not sure about Sorcerers yet, but I do see some powerful possibilities.

Martials mostly hit stuff for damage. Each martial type can do a little something else like the barbarian taking damage extremely well or the paladin's many nifty defensive abilities. At the end of it all, they hit stuff for damage. The rogue is a little different because he can scout really, really well. He can kill enemies while scouting really, really well. You could send a rogue into a room with greater invisibility filled with two or three giants, he could kill them by himself without taking much, if any, damage if they have no means to see invisible creatures. A rogue in the right terrain with a ranged weapon can kill things without them finding him. They did a really good job of making rogues into stealthy killers in 5E. I'm not sure how to value that at the moment. Maybe most parties are impatient and the rogue wont' have time to do what he does. If a party is patient, he can soften up an area by himself with minimal risk. Rogues are great at mitigating damage by moving in and around combat.

With my arcane trickster and time, I removed sentries down an entire passageway when entering a dungeon clearing the way for the party and preventing us from wasting time rolling out combats with a the party. I also snuck around a dungeon killing things in rooms by myself to speed up dungeon exploration. How valuable an ability is it to be able to gain surprise on an opponent and soften them up before the party faces them? Hard to rate as it will vary by party. I found it to be a very valuable ability. This is why I don't necessarily agree that expertise is as valuable to a Lore Bard as it is to a Rogue. Sure, a lore bard can scout. But a lore bard doesn't do the damage a rogue can and thus isn't as good at sentry/monster removal while scouting. A party won't see that unless they are willing to let the rogue have enough time to do sentry removal. None of the other martials can do what a rogue can do as well as the rogue can do it. It may warrant them having more straight up fight combat damage from a feat like Sharpshooter and GWM.

 

[Quartz]

This isn't what I was really expecting from 5th edition so I've started think of ways to fix it.

Here's a starter for you: just as advantage does not stack, so temporary magic also does not stack.

 

[Dausuul]

Edit: This post originally claimed Crossbow Expert had been nerfed to effectively disallow dual hand crossbows... but after re-reading the Sage Advice column in question, I realized that Crossbow Expert was powered-up rather than nerfed. You can no longer dual-wield hand crossbows, but you can use the same hand crossbow for the bonus action attack, so you still get the full range of attacks and you only need one hand crossbow, which means if you have a magic crossbow you can use it for every attack.

Dang.