Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6641904" data-attributes="member: 5834">They've been presented multiple times. Sorry my math was loose this time. I'm getting tired of presenting them.The only problems are players like you continuing to ignore the data offered by players like Dave Dash and myself in real game situations. Your white room math means absolutely nothing compared to my real data.Did you seriously include crits? I don't even bother with them they happen so rarely in fights with a finite number of rounds. Not even worth calculating since they happen only on a 20 and are negligible extra damage for anyone but a paladin, who can chose to smite when he knows the hit is a crit.It's way more than 12% in real play. This is pure dragon dung.You mean like actual numbers like dice rolls in the game? I've seen those. Way more than your math represents. That's why I assumed they all hit. When I'm actually running it, the usually hit five out of six attacks.You don't have to be really nice. With variable die 10s in finite combat situations, you get a lot of variation which is extraordinarily hard to account for. Your white room math doesn't mirror it very well. Get back to me when you have hard data in a group focusing on maximizing the feat with recorded damage. Should be easy for you to run using designed encounters.Over 100s of combats? Did you miss the data Dave posted? You're not even close to a worst case scenario, most likely because you have near zero real game experience with these things.  No. I don't ignore it. I've stated it myself.I can't believe I have to list this garbage again:1. It overshadows TWF making it a gimp option.2. It allows a huge damage spike on single target monsters rendering fights against them trivial when a party focuses on maximizing feats.You've been informed of the problem multiple times. You keep up this insistence that the white room averages you present are the norm. They are not. It doesn't work the way your BS math just tried to illustrate. Fights are done in small finite situations, not over hundreds of rounds. They are done in highly focused environments with a heavy level of focus on maximizing the feats.Dave and I have already illustrated how numerous, easily available variables affect GWM and Sharpshooter over the course of battles conducted over 3 to 5 rounds. There's always a guy like you on every one of these threads attempting to white room the math with the assumption that fights occur over 100s or rounds. They don't. I have seen the fighter with Precision and bless active hit on five out of six attacks nearly every battle using GWM. Get back to me when you have real game data in a group optimizing for the feat in a variety of combat encounters. Otherwise, your white room math means about nothing. When I post this math analysis, I post the damage potential per hit. I'm not even trying to do the math for an optimized round because there are way too many variables such as the following:1. AC of creature.2. Buffs on PC using GWF or Sharpshooter.3. Actions of other party members like familiars granting advantage.4. Magic items being used.5. Visibility.7. Hit points of target which determines how many rounds the GWF or Sharpshooter needs to focus fire to destroy them.8. Spells on target such as hold person or faerie fire. 9. Use of Inspiration.Too many variables to calculate anything but average damage per hit. Which makes each hit about potentially 80% higher using GWM. How many of those will actually hit the target is dependent on the other variables. In my experience as a DM, the GWM fighter was hitting 5 out of 6 times on average.Until I see you listing actual data from play, I'm going to ignore this white room math garbage that tries to portray things in a fashion that doesn't mirror the data I and a few others have collected.</blockquote>

Verification