D&D 5E Current take on GWM/SS

[Coredump]

It's not my fault you never bothered to record any real data. Sorry I didn't save it to post on the board for you. Get some real play experience with these feats in a group and record the numbers. Then get back to me.

I've already done this dance with others like you. You've been proven wrong by more than me. You've ignored all the math and data proving you wrong. How many of these threads do we have to do proving your analysis wrong before you admit it? All I know at this point is it won't me continuing the debate with you. I know how it works. I've recorded the numbers. I've seen it in use. I've explained why your white room math doesn't work. I've explained why you focus on the very base fact that a single attack with GWF does 80% more than one without. That single fact alone should be enough for a guy that really knows math to know that the easier it is to hit, the more damage you will add with the feat. The fact it does less damage the more you do is fairly irrelevant. You're always going to use this feat under optimal conditions. So it will always add damage. That's the part that is extremely difficult to model because it is highly situational. Until you take the time to model the use of the feats being used only under optimal conditions, never when it isn't optimal, I can't even take you seriously. Because that is how it was used in the campaign I was in. ALWAYS under optimal conditions and turned off, when not optimal.

The fighter in question just turned it off and did regular hits when not optimal losing no damage, gaining no damage. When optimal he unleashed it, boosting his damage by about 80%.

And we're done. Go back to one of the numerous thread that exist showing you how wrong you are.

Did I miss anything concrete in here...?? because it seems like you spent a long paragraph saying "I'm right, I'm right...you are wrong... I know you are wrong because I am right... everyone says you are wrong...I prove you are wrong...I am right."

A single attack with GWM does *NOT* do 80% more damage.... your 'proof' for that was based on hitting 100% of all attacks. And you said you claimed 100% because you remembered them hitting 5 out of 6 times. (A new definition for 100%, but okay), and you said they hit 5 out of 6 when they needed to roll an 8 to hit.

So yes, if the SS/GWM player needs an 8 to hit, and still hits *every time*.... he may get that 80% boost you were claiming.

 

[Coredump]

Coredump: "That's bad math. My math while using the feat all the time, never not using it, shows it's only 12%. That's if use it all the time with both of the characters using the same stuff. You know. All the time regardless of AC."

So, honest question. Do you just not bother to look at the math, or do you just not understand it?

I *never* made that claim. and I *never* calulated anything based on 'using it all the time...regardless of AC'

I used a very specific AC... the AC that *you* picked, using the characters that *you* described. You claimed that a fighter against an adult white dragon would do "80% more damage" So I used all the parameters that you gave, and found out that.... you were just plain way off; mostly because your 'estimates' were not even close.

Could it happen? Sure. Did it happen in your game? I guess, okay. But pretty much anything *can* happen.

Celtavian: "Only focus on the difference in a single round of hits. The rest is too variable to calculate. The feat is only used under optimal conditions."

Yes, and you gave us those optimal conditions, so those are the conditions I used. And even using your optimal condistions.... it comes out to be a 25% boost. If you got something different... your guy got really lucky.

Been proven on multiple threads you appear to be ignoring. I can't continue a discussion with a guy that ignores what has already been clearly proven.

Bwahahahaha!! What have you 'proven'? The info you gave us to 'prove' it was false. 67% does not equal 83% does not equal 100%.... yet that was the basis of your 'proof'
If you have some other thread where you didn't just make up numbers, I would gladly look at that thread. I am not ignoring anything..... produce something that actually proves your point and we shall see.

 

[peukinho]

I believe the easiest method to balance those two feats would be to increase Monster ACs across the board.

Lets pick 3 generic heroes:

All three Level 11, so we are in tier 3, all main-stats are 18 and all three use +1 weapons. Just for this example I'm using only a few relevant feats, simple math and I will ignore critical hits. All numbers are rounded up.

Fighter Lv 11, Str 18, GWF and GWM
3 attacks per round 2w6+5, +9 to attack or 2w6+15 +4 to attack
Lets pretend thats 13 damage with +9 or 23 damage with +4 per attack

Fighter Lv 11, Dex 18, Archery and SS
3 attacks per round w8+5 (10 damage), +11 or w8+15 (20 damage), + 6

Paladin Lv 11, Str 18, Dueling + Divine Favor
2 attacks per round 2w8+7 (16 damage), +9 or 2w8+7+w4 (19 damage), + 9

Now lets take a look the expected numbers (damage per round, no special attacks, just the 2 feats and the Lv. 1 spell)

[TABLE="width: 500"][TR][TD]vs. AC[/TD][TD]Paladin[/TD][TD]Paladin + DF[/TD][TD]Archer[/TD][TD]Archer + SS[/TD][TD]Melee[/TD][TD]Melee + GWM[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]10[/TD][TD]32[/TD][TD]38[/TD][TD]30[/TD][TD]51[/TD][TD]40[/TD][TD]59,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]11[/TD][TD]30,4[/TD][TD]36,1[/TD][TD]30[/TD][TD]48[/TD][TD]38[/TD][TD]56[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]12[/TD][TD]28,8[/TD][TD]34,2[/TD][TD]30[/TD][TD]45[/TD][TD]36[/TD][TD]52,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]13[/TD][TD]27,2[/TD][TD]32,3[/TD][TD]28,5[/TD][TD]42[/TD][TD]34[/TD][TD]49[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]14[/TD][TD]25,6[/TD][TD]30,4[/TD][TD]27[/TD][TD]39[/TD][TD]32[/TD][TD]45,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]15[/TD][TD]24[/TD][TD]28,5[/TD][TD]25,5[/TD][TD]36[/TD][TD]30[/TD][TD]42[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]16[/TD][TD]22,4[/TD][TD]26,6[/TD][TD]24[/TD][TD]33[/TD][TD]28[/TD][TD]38,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]17[/TD][TD]20,8[/TD][TD]24,7[/TD][TD]22,5[/TD][TD]30[/TD][TD]26[/TD][TD]35[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]18[/TD][TD]19,2[/TD][TD]22,8[/TD][TD]21[/TD][TD]27[/TD][TD]24[/TD][TD]31,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]19[/TD][TD]17,6[/TD][TD]20,9[/TD][TD]19,5[/TD][TD]24[/TD][TD]22[/TD][TD]28[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]20[/TD][TD]16[/TD][TD]19[/TD][TD]18[/TD][TD]21[/TD][TD]20[/TD][TD]24,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]21[/TD][TD]14,4[/TD][TD]17,1[/TD][TD]16,5[/TD][TD]18[/TD][TD]18[/TD][TD]21[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]22[/TD][TD]12,8[/TD][TD]15,2[/TD][TD]15[/TD][TD]15[/TD][TD]16[/TD][TD]17,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]23[/TD][TD]11,2[/TD][TD]13,3[/TD][TD]13,5[/TD][TD]12[/TD][TD]14[/TD][TD]14[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]24[/TD][TD]9,6[/TD][TD]11,4[/TD][TD]12[/TD][TD]9[/TD][TD]12[/TD][TD]10,5[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]25[/TD][TD]8[/TD][TD]9,5[/TD][TD]10,5[/TD][TD]6[/TD][TD]10[/TD][TD]7[/TD][/TR][TR][TD]26[/TD][TD]6,4[/TD][TD]7,6[/TD][TD]9[/TD][TD]3[/TD][TD]8[/TD][TD]3,5[/TD][/TR][/TABLE]So if I didn't miss anything big, that should prove that monster ACs around 21 to 23 work pretty well, even in tier 3 with those feats.

(if anyone sees a mathematical error please let me know)

 

[DaveDash]

I think it's hilarious that CoreDump provides the math for his argument and those arguing the other way cherry pick anecdotes to attempt to build a foundation for their arguments. Rock on CoreDump!

His maths means nothing. It's a very specific scenario which is probably the least unfavourable to prove anything about these feats.

I have hundreds of dice rolls that prove that SS at the very least equates to roughly a 2:1 damage output. I find it more hilarious people are taking very specific white room maths over real play data.

It's really easy to test. You can even do it by yourself. Make some characters, make various encounters, use monsters from the MM and see what happens yourself.

 

[Ashkelon]

You missed some important factors.

1. Until high levels, most enemies only have an AC of 14-16 (with the occasional outlier).
2. Even at high levels, AC typically range from 16-18. An AC of 19+ is rare, and ACs of 22 or higher are typically reserved for CR 20+ enemies.
3. Using random treasure tables, most PCs will have a +2 weapon by level 15, and a +3 weapon by level 20. This means your typical level 20 PC will have +14 to hit, and hit an AC 20 on a 6+ and an AC 22 on an 8+.
4. Also, at higher levels, buffs become more readily available. Bless, Faerie Fire, knocking enemies prone, stunning enemies, paralyzing enemies, and restraining enemies all significantly increase accuracy.

These factors combine to make SS and GWM significantly better than they appear on paper (which is already well above and beyond most feats and even a +2 to an ability score).

 

[DaveDash]

Hey, data is good.

Unfortunately there isn't enough info yet. If you could supply it I would appreciate it. I realize you will not have all of this, or at least not in detail. But the more you can supply the better. Thanks.

What level were they?
What was their Dex?
Any other feats?
Did they always attack the same creatures?
What was the AC of the creatures they did attack?



Not familiar with Roll20. I assume that is 4 attacks? Their attack rolls were 27,23,30,30? Do we know which ones were hits? The 70 damage is just the total damage from the attacks that did hit?

Thanks

They were fighting creatures with an AC range of 13-18. Attack bonus of +14.5 with bless, so +9.5 using the -5/+10, which means he was hitting on rolls of 3.5-7.5 effectively. Even against the AC18 creatures it's still worth his time using -5/+10 since his hit chance is over 50%, and on four attacks the +10 makes up over 50% of his average damage (otherwise 8.5).

I have lots more data like this but I think its time for the nay Sayers to generate their own data.

The reason these feats are so good is because in real game scenarios your often fighting a mix of ACs and usually have buffs like Bless up. With ways of gaining advantage (shield bashing foes for the crossbow expert to walk up and nail) for example brings out damage levels that the game isn't designed to handle.

 

[peukinho]

You missed some important factors.

1. Until high levels, most enemies only have an AC of 14-16 (with the occasional outlier).
2. Even at high levels, AC typically range from 16-18. An AC of 19+ is rare, and ACs of 22 or higher are typically reserved for CR 20+ enemies.
3. Using random treasure tables, most PCs will have a +2 weapon by level 15, and a +3 weapon by level 20. This means your typical level 20 PC will have +14 to hit, and hit an AC 20 on a 6+ and an AC 22 on an 8+.
4. Also, at higher levels, buffs become more readily available. Bless, Faerie Fire, knocking enemies prone, stunning enemies, paralyzing enemies, and restraining enemies all significantly increase accuracy.

These factors combine to make SS and GWM significantly better than they appear on paper (which is already well above and beyond most feats and even a +2 to an ability score).

Thanks for the reply. I'm aware that all the buffs and condition you listed will make those two feats even stronger. I just tried to show, that the targets AC is the main factor and if you guys think that GWM and SS are hurting your game you can play with them, just give monsters a +2 or +3 on their AC, limit magic items with high +hit mods and you are good to go.
I believe stunning, knocking enemies prone, etc. should be effective methods to increase your damage output. The only thing we cut is "bless".

 

[Celtavian]

They were fighting creatures with an AC range of 13-18. Attack bonus of +14.5 with bless, so +9.5 using the -5/+10, which means he was hitting on rolls of 3.5-7.5 effectively. Even against the AC18 creatures it's still worth his time using -5/+10 since his hit chance is over 50%, and on four attacks the +10 makes up over 50% of his average damage (otherwise 8.5).

I have lots more data like this but I think its time for the nay Sayers to generate their own data.

The reason these feats are so good is because in real game scenarios your often fighting a mix of ACs and usually have buffs like Bless up. With ways of gaining advantage (shield bashing foes for the crossbow expert to walk up and nail) for example brings out damage levels that the game isn't designed to handle.

Just to add one of the major factors is the hit point of the creature is insufficient for a battle to last beyond a round or two.

In the above example we were fighting an adult green dragon with 207 hit points. The GWF did 115 points in the first round action surging with GWF. He took half its hit points in one turn. The paladin smote it for probably another 50 (not a GWM). My wizard didn't bother to attack because it was already handled, Why waste a spell slot when a thing is near dead. The bard was built to buff, not do damage. He might have thrown an orb for 15 points or so. So you have a dragon with a finite number of hit points getting hammered with a GWF nova.

Maybe if the fight lasted longer, the damage would spread itself enough to do less of a percentage. Of course, if the fighter does huge upfront damage, that makes casters less willing to spend slots to do damage. Why bother if the thing is near dead and the fighter is using resources he recovers on a short rest.

That's why these variables are so hard to calculate. If everyone in the group were novaing, maybe the GWF doesn't do the same percentage of damage over everyone else. It's so easy to preserve resources and use the GWF as a limitless source of high damage, that is what they ended up doing. The ability to nearly double his damage makes it very efficient for others to simply support the GWF's attacks rather than blow limited resources on their nova.

So obviously player behavior also influenced the percentage of damage the GWF did over the others. The group found an efficient way to kill enemies buffing the GWF and they used it. I was an evoker. I sat on spell slots not using them to do damage because ti was so easy to cast a single fly or launch cantrips while the GWF went to town. Once you kill a dragon, not much else wants to disrupt your Short Rest. Pretty easy for the fighter to recover his resources a few times a day to use on any other big fights.

It's probably true that players that don't like to buff the fighter and take the easy GWF damage don't see the same spikes. Some groups like to use their resources to shine in combat. I know our group and Dave's tend to have fun finding the optimal way to win. When the game system hands you a softball with Sharpshooter or GWF, we use it. Makes tons of sense to let the GWF hammer away since he can do it at will. Even the paladin runs out of spell slots for smiting. The wizard runs out of spells. The GWF keeps on going. We buff him with some stuff to take damage and make hitting easier, we get to save our slots in case the dragon dung hits the fan. I spent a lot of time preserving my magic thinking I would need it. I only really had to pull out the kitchen sink maybe two or three times over 16 levels.

At this point, I've reached fatigue arguing this stuff. It seems so obvious to some of us because we have min-maxer groups that find the optimal way to win and repeat it endlessly. I'm getting the feeling that many groups like to mix it up. I've been in those groups too where it's sort of every man for himself as far as the spotlight goes. I imagine GWF or Sharpshooter maybe don't have the same effect in such groups. I imagine I'm too stuck in my group's play-style to consider that other groups may not focus their group's efforts on maximizing the effect of Sharpshooter and GWF, while withholding their own damage dealing capability to extend the adventuring day as long as possible. It's one of the reasons why the 5-7 encounter day doesn't work for group. We try to be so efficient with resources to extend the day that it lead to a bunch of trivial encounters breaking them up into smaller, easier fights.

 

[Minigiant]

I still don't see the problem.

Archery and Heavy Weapons styles are offensive damage dealers.
The feats are balanced with +2 Strength/Dexterity.

The only valid complaint to the power of these feats is when you hit the ability score cap for your attack stat. The feats are more valuable to boosting a secondary score like +2 Con for 1/HP per level and +1 to poison/cod/necrotic/death saves.

And even that is debatable as monsters do crazy damage by the time you hit the ability score cap.

 

[Celtavian]

I still don't see the problem.

Archery and Heavy Weapons styles are offensive damage dealers.
The feats are balanced with +2 Strength/Dexterity.

The only valid complaint to the power of these feats is when you hit the ability score cap for your attack stat. The feats are more valuable to boosting a secondary score like +2 Con for 1/HP per level and +1 to poison/cod/necrotic/death saves.

And even that is debatable as monsters do crazy damage by the time you hit the ability score cap.

What type of style is TWF?

Monsters don't that crazy of damage compared to a party, at least not single target monsters. Groups of things like giants or demons do pretty decent damage though. There are ways to get rid of them as well.