D&D 5E GWF vs TWF: The Math

[the Jester]

Also nothing in there about getting to apply it to whichever attack hits after you determine the success of all of your attacks for the round. I know which way my DMs will interpret this. YMMV.

"One creature you hit" seems pretty clear, but every DM has his idiosyncrasies.

 

[sidonunspa]

Also nothing in there about getting to apply it to whichever attack hits after you determine the success of all of your attacks for the round. I know which way my DMs will interpret this. YMMV.

Of course, the first attack to hit would gain sneak attack... but that's the point...

using one weapon..... I get one chance to hit or miss, if I miss my sneak attack for the round is "wasted"

using 2 weapons, I get two chances to hit (or miss), if I miss with one attack and not with the other (order of these is not important) my sneak attack for the round is not wasted....

 

[Snapdragyn]

Of course, the first attack to hit would gain sneak attack... but that's the point...

using one weapon..... I get one chance to hit or miss, if I miss my sneak attack for the round is "wasted"

using 2 weapons, I get two chances to hit (or miss), if I miss with one attack and not with the other (order of these is not important) my sneak attack for the round is not wasted....

Again, I'm not disagreeing with that interpretation. I quite agree with that interpretation, in fact.

However, I know DMs who will interpret the relevent text differently.

 

[Stalker0]

Of course, the first attack to hit would gain sneak attack... but that's the point...

I think that is what he was questioning.

For example, if I can apply sneak attack after I see my attacks, I can apply it to the attack that gets a crit, so I get more valuable at it.

Or do I have to use SA as each attack is made?


In my math I had assumed you could make all attacks, if that is not true the math does change a little bit.

 

[heptat]

All situations are compared against a AC 16 character.

Note: DPR = Damage Per Round.

1st Level Fighter, with no fighting styles of note (they took that sweet +1 to AC!)

Str: +3, Prof +2.

TWF: 2 d6 weapons. DPR: 5.35
GWF: 1 2d6 weapon. DPR: 5.35

Can you please explain how you did these calcs? Thanks boss!

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Can you please explain how you did these calcs? Thanks boss!

Yeah, does this take into account that, without the TWF style, the off-hand attack does not get the ability bonus to damage? Since it's specifically the bonus attack, you can't simply roll two attacks and apply the ability modifier to one of the two if it hits -- you need to designate the bonus attack ahead of time.

 

[Remathilis]

Since a lot of people have asked the question, lets look at the math. Between GWF and TWF...is either one strictly superior?

All situations are compared against a AC 16 character.

Note: DPR = Damage Per Round.

1st Level Fighter, with no fighting styles of note (they took that sweet +1 to AC!)

Str: +3, Prof +2.

TWF: 2 d6 weapons. DPR: 5.35
GWF: 1 2d6 weapon. DPR: 5.35

Winner: Tied.
This one is a complete tie. Both style do the same damage, even if you modify the beginning strength. It depends on whether you want your damage in small chunks with better to hit, or a massive attack that misses more often. Considering the potential for damage overkill (and the fact that sometimes you just need to hit) I would give the slight edge to TWF, but its really a style preference.

1st Level Fighter, using the various fighting styles
Str: +3, Prof +2.

TWF: 2 d6 weapons. DPR: 7.2
GWF: 1 2d6 weapon. DPR: 6.5

Winner: TWF
The TWF fighting style provides more damage and a greater chance to hit. It is strictly the superior choice at the early levels.


8th level Fighter, no fighting styles
Str: +5, Prof +3. Crit on 19-20. 2 attacks as base.

TWF: 2 d6 weapons. DPR: 14.375
GWF: 1 2d6 weapon. DPR: 17

Winner: GWF
As the number of attacks increase, TWF's one bonus attack starts to make less of an impact.

8th level Fighter, with styles
Str: +5, Prof +3. Crit on 19-20. 2 attacks as base.

TWF: 2 d6 weapons. DPR: 17.63
GWF: 1 2d6 weapon. DPR: 18.99

Winner: GWF
The difference is a little less now, as the TWF fighting style ultimately does more good than the GWF one does. However its not enough to overcome GWF damage advantage.


A quick look at the cleric and rogue

Bonus damage that applies on both or either attacks always favors the style with more attacks. As such, the clerics divine strike (and buff spells that affects their attacks) and the rogue's sneak attack favor TWF straight up. Because these class do not get extra attacks like the fighter, GWF never gets a chance to come back in terms of damage.


In summary, optimal play for damage

Fighter (1-4): TWF with style
Fighter (5-20): GWF with style
Cleric (1-7): Either style...unless using certain buff spells.
Cleric (8-20): TWF
Rogue (1-20): TWF with sneak attack

How does it stack up against rapier and short sword? (1d8/1d6)

 

[Stalker0]

Yeah, does this take into account that, without the TWF style, the off-hand attack does not get the ability bonus to damage? Since it's specifically the bonus attack, you can't simply roll two attacks and apply the ability modifier to one of the two if it hits -- you need to designate the bonus attack ahead of time.

Yes this is taken into account. One attack is made with ability damage...and its DPR is adjusted by the to hit rate and crit rate. The off hand is the same but without ability damage, and the two are added together to get your total DPR.

 

[Stalker0]

How does it stack up against rapier and short sword? (1d8/1d6)

Technically you can't use TWF with a rapier...as it is not a light weapon.

 

[Branduil]

Technically you can't use TWF with a rapier...as it is not a light weapon.

I'd bet money that there will be a fighter or rogue subclass in the PHB that will allow it.