The Mechanical Impact of -5/+10

[Mistwell]

You're entirely right, by the way. The ultimate brokenness of these feats is the way they invalidate a lot of concepts.

If a gamer can't optimize the feats well enough to see how good they are (or refuse to acknowledge this) that isn't something that should let WotC off the hook. That is why every time a so-called analysis is published with results that seem to indicate they are reasonable I make it clear the analysis stops well before any effort to actually break them is applied.

I've seen you use the term "break" several times, but I am curious to know precisely what's happening to your games when you say something "breaks" them. I don't mean theoretically with averages, I mean I wish you'd recount for us what actually happens, step by step, and how the game breaks, and what happens in the broken game, and how all the players and DM react to that breaking.

 

[FrogReaver]

I've seen you use the term "break" several times, but I am curious to know precisely what's happening to your games when you say something "breaks" them. I don't mean theoretically with averages, I mean I wish you'd recount for us what actually happens, step by step, and how the game breaks, and what happens in the broken game, and how all the players and DM react to that breaking.

Why?

 

[Mistwell]

Why?

Why would it be helpful? Because there is an element of faith being asked for here. Faith that what's happening in his game is reasonably represetative of something larger than his game. We can't know that without details. We can't know if they're doing things like house ruling something which is resulting in a weird result (and they may not even know it's a house rule - it might be one of those "that's just how we've always done X" type things), or if his players are unusually adept or deficient at something that the average table does, or if the DM has tweaked the number or difficulty of encounters, or if the geography of their typical fights is unusually influencing certain play styles, or the setting, or the expectations of the players, or a whole host of things. Details would help a lot to fill in that information.

 

[Yunru]

Why?

Because it's pretty hard to imagine more damage breaking a story, which is what DnD is in the end.

 

[Mistwell]

Because it's pretty hard to imagine more damage breaking a story, which is what DnD is in the end.

Naw, that's not my motive for asking at least. Introduce a godlike being as a PC who can destroy foes with a wave of the hand and it would definitely at least significantly alter a story.

 

[FrogReaver]

I guess, but that's mostly semantics. Part of what makes GWM/SS so good is that it turns buffs into better buffs.

Yep more importantly GWM and anything that buffs accuracy is very strong and can be achieved while single classed allowing extra attacks and ASI’s to be granted “on time”. And using GWM doesn’t require any additional action economy resource.

There really isn’t any comparable use of 2 buffs that achieves what GWM accomplishes for damage when paired with an accuracy buff.

 

[FrogReaver]

Why would it be helpful? Because there is an element of faith being asked for here. Faith that what's happening in his game is reasonably represetative of something larger than his game. We can't know that without details. We can't know if they're doing things like house ruling something which is resulting in a weird result (and they may not even know it's a house rule - it might be one of those "that's just how we've always done X" type things), or if his players are unusually adept or deficient at something that the average table does, or if the DM has tweaked the number or difficulty of encounters, or if the geography of their typical fights is unusually influencing certain play styles, or the setting, or the expectations of the players, or a whole host of things. Details would help a lot to fill in that information.

In my experience when such information is requested it’s an attempt to find some piece of information to use to shut down a claim the requestor disagrees with.

So I’m asking why that information is important to you. What does knowing it change things for you? If there’s nothing unusual in his playstyle then is that going to make you think any differently?

 

[Yunru]

In my experience when such information is requested it’s an attempt to find some piece of information to use to shut down a claim the requestor disagrees with.

So I’m asking why that information is important to you. What does knowing it change things for you? If there’s nothing unusual in his playstyle then is that going to make you think any differently?

Because if there's nothing unusual in his playstyle it should be breaking more games than his.

 

[TwoSix]

Because if there's nothing unusual in his playstyle it should be breaking more games than his.

It doesn't break the game. It just overemphasizes playing two-handed weapon users and archers, at the expense of other weapon types. As I said earlier, having to choose between fidelity to concept and mechanical effectiveness isn't a great place for the game to be in.

It's easy to argue against CapnZapp when he's being hyperbolic, but that doesn't change the fact the game would be improved (as more concepts would be closer to being at the same level of effectiveness) if the rules around GWM/SS were different then they are now.

 

[5ekyu]

Btw I come at it from a different perspective - I am fine 100% fine that not every selection of fighting style has the same top damage or not that close enough to not matter.

Right now, the big dmg according to the white roommates are the 5/10 which are the big weapons and the bows etc - basically two handers.

That tends to rule out the shield users and the TWF users at the same time.

So you got your big whammy in the white room by choosing the offensive weapons but you dont get the defense of the shield or the benefits of light weapons - mixed in thrown or easily concealed mostly dex etc (tho that last bit does crossover ewith some bow builds but only for ranged.

If you go making one handed weapons open for the same optimized dmg, why would someone grab the big 2h weapons? Seems you will just be trading big top dogs for little top dogs.

But that's me.