D&D 5E GWF vs. TWF Fighting styles

[Xeviat]

Or make volly only a twin shot?

 

[Kryx]

Or make volly only a twin shot?

That wouldn't really different from extra attack, would it?

You could also take the 3rd option from the level 3 Hunter which allows hitting a second target within 5 ft of the target.

 

[Xeviat]

I meant a twin shot on separate targets, not a single. So they'd get 4 ranged attacks, 2 and 2, spread out compared to a fighters 3. It's a trade off. And yes, it's similar to horde breaker, but it could stack with horse breaker

 

[Sezarious]

horse breaker

...... You're a monster!

 

[Xeviat]

...... You're a monster!

You know it. That's what those big great swords are for, right? Or Damascus Scimitars.

 

[Istbor]

...... You're a monster!

I think I just found a new villainous Orc Elite name.

 

[Salamandyr]

Would making the bonus attack from two weapon fighting not use your bonus action make enough of a difference? I know it would be a positive boon to the ranger, who thanks to Hunter's Mark switching already has too much demand for his bonus actions? Archery is already superior to TWF even before we factor in losing our bonus attack the first turn against a new opponent due to casting Hunter's Mark or switching opponents.

 

[Kryx]

Would making the bonus attack from two weapon fighting not use your bonus action make enough of a difference?

No, it wouldn't help Fighter, Barbarian, or Paladin really at all.

Ranger would be helped every so slightly with a higher Hunter's Mark damage. No where near enough to compete.

It would also heavily boost Hand Crossbow vs Heavy Crossbow/Longbow.

 

[Salamandyr]

Fair enough. And since I have no desire to make hand crossbows more desirable, I guess I'll leave well enough alone.

The ranger in my campaign's an archer anyway; so no real incentive to change it as it is.

 

[juggerulez]

What?

When you roll a 1 or a 2 you can reroll and must keep the second value. That means it's replaced, and therefore couldn't possibly influence the formula. Now, you can still roll a 1 or a 2 on the second roll, but that's already included in the die's average.
1d4 becomes (2.5 + 2.5 + 3 + 4)/4 = 3
1d6 becomes (3.5 + 3.5 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6)/6 = 4 1/6
1d8 becomes (4.5 + 4.5 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8)/8 = 5.25
1d10 becomes (5.5 + 5.5 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10)/10 = 6.3

The numbers I posted are the commonly accepted numbers posted everywhere. They have been validated by many people on many forums - they are correct.

First of all: I come with an olive branch, with the sole thirst of knowledge, so don't shoot me

Since this confrontation happened, I wanted to do a little research. Long story short: apparently we're both wrong.

A mathematician friend of mine, who uses maths on a daily basis and whose maths I can't even fathom the complexity of, told me that this is not the right way to do statistics, and since his kung-fu is way better than mine (that's assured) and apparently better than yours too (again, I'm just the messenger, don't shoot me ), I've asked him to elaborate his statement. Here we go:

If you reroll 1s and 2s on any die, let's say a d6. You pool together all the results and then divide them by their number, which means 1+2+3+4+5+6+1+2+3+4+5+6+3+4+5+6 divided by 6+6+4.

so apparently a GWF's d6 does 3.75 on average instead of 3.5... and instead of "my" 3.83 and "your" 4.17.

D4 is 1+2+3+4+1+2+3+4+3+4 divided by 4+4+2 which does 2.7
D6 is 3.75
D8 is 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+3+4+5+6+7+8 divided by 8+8+6 which does 4.77
D10 is 162/28 = 5.77
D12 is 231/34 = 6.79

Now a question arises: who's right?
I really can't believe that in a whole community of nerds (I'm one too so it's not used in a derogatory way ), there is not a single maths savvy dude who disproved "your" maths...so since he's a mathematician for vocation, and since he worked on artificial intelligences too, I'm quite confident that he's not wrong...so...

...can you feel my perplexion?


Let's assume for a brief moment that he's right and we're all wrong... am I the only one that now thinks that GWF is strongly overrated?