The Mechanical Impact of -5/+10

[TwoSix]

Right, so I'm less confused:
Scoring an auto-hit effects the accuracy, and thus the damage difference, agreed?

Yes, the difference between the average damage is impacted when either the base attack or the -X attack is in the "only hit on a 20" or "only miss on a 1" range. But I think that's pretty well understood.

 

[Yunru]

Yes, the difference between the average damage is impacted when either the base attack or the -X attack is in the "only hit on a 20" or "only miss on a 1" range. But I think that's pretty well understood.

Right, that's what I was trying to say about having to do each -X/+2X separately. Because there isn't a single algebraic formula for it all (that I know of) due to that.

 

[TwoSix]

I think each on would have to be charted individually, as the crit/fumble system messes it up algebraically.

I see the confusion...when you said "crit/fumble system" in this post, you mean the "auto-hit/auto-miss system". Yes, that part does change the formula and the break points for different values of X for -X/+2X attacks.

 

[Morrus]

You have no idea how many times I think you are trolling. I think you are trolling right now but I don't say it.

Sure, go ahead. But if you really want to ignore the table I posted showing why it matters and instead make personal attacks, aren't you just confirming your troll?

Calling people names because you disagree with them is not appropriate. Both of you, do not respond to one another again in this thread.

 

[cmad1977]

Like with every GWM analysis before, I miss the real actual play advice that matters.

Never use GWM without Advantage, unless enemy AC is atrocious. Of course, good players make sure to gain advantage all the time, so this is not exactly a change of tactics. One easy tip: attack unseen.

One way to comprehensively break the feat is to be a Battlemaster Fighter using the Precision maneuver. The secret is that Precision is much more economical than most maneuvers. Most maneuvers need you to spend a die each time you stand to gain the benefit. Precision's benefit is avoiding a miss, and you only need to spend a die when you miss and want to turn it into a hit. What this means in practice is that your dice lasts much longer.

Add just a little spice (Bless, a magical weapon with a bonus, what have you) and you will find that your new feat can double your damage output, and often will.

It's when you see with your own eyes your player hit with three attacks at level eight or so* for something like 55 damage round after round at distances up to 120 feet, that you realize the developers never really played the game the way your players do, and that you need to do WotCs job for them and remove that feat (Crossbow Expert).

In light of this, I'm not sure what the point of analyzing the feat in isolation is. No driven player ever uses the feat in situations where you actually need to pay the unmitigated -5 to gain the +10.

*) Referencing my player's Ranger/Fighter build that gets to three attacks ahead of the fighter. Sorry, it was a while ago so I'm a bit hazy on the details. Damage is 1d6+5+10 times three for ~55 damage.

Which is nice and all, but the real sadness?

Without the feat, that damage would have been 30 lower, which is less than half. (The slightly increased miss chance means that's pessimistic in real play. And other classes can match the damage).

Still, the -5/+10 completely invalidate a lot of character concepts simply by virtue of existing. Put in simple terms: if you're a fighter in a feat-enabled game, you can forget about competitive DPR if you have other feats or concepts in mind than what can be used with GWM or CE.

And that's what's broken here.

Translation: ‘I’m incapable of managing a simple feat at my table! But it’s not my fault because I don’t take responsibility for my game!’

 

[Umbran]

Translation: ‘I’m incapable of managing a simple feat at my table! But it’s not my fault because I don’t take responsibility for my game!’

Dude, knock off the personal attacks. Address the logic of the post, not the person of the poster. If this is somehow difficult to manage or understand, please take it to e-mail or PM, and we can discuss. Thanks.

 

[TwoSix]

Translation: ‘I’m incapable of managing a simple feat at my table! But it’s not my fault because I don’t take responsibility for my game!’

How do you "manage" a feat that makes some archetypes/tropes stronger than others when that isn't the desired behavior? The goal is to make all types of weapon users do damage in a similar band to archers and great weapon fighters. I shouldn't do only 50-60% of the damage of an archer just because I decided to be a dagger thrower or a spear wielder or a two-weapon fighter.

 

[cmad1977]

How do you "manage" a feat that makes some archetypes/tropes stronger than others when that isn't the desired behavior? The goal is to make all types of weapon users do damage in a similar band to archers and great weapon fighters. I shouldn't do only 50-60% of the damage of an archer just because I decided to be a dagger thrower or a spear wielder or a two-weapon fighter.

I’m pretty sure the desired behavior of the feat is to make people who spend valuable and limited decision points in order to be better at a thing... better at that thing!

Ultimately this always boils down to
‘Oh no... one of the PCs is doing awesome things in one pillar of play! How do I prevent my PCs from being awesome!’

There is nothing to manage about the feat. The management needs to take place in people running of their games.

 

[TwoSix]

I’m pretty sure the desired behavior of the feat is to make people who spend valuable and limited decision points in order to be better at a thing... better at that thing!

Missed the argument. Why can't I do the same thing for my spear wielder or dual-weapon wielder?

 

[cmad1977]

Missed the argument. Why can't I do the same thing for my spear wielder or dual-weapon wielder?

I don’t know. Why can’t the greatswprd wielder hit an opponent at 60’? Or attack more often in a round?