Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6642195" data-attributes="member: 5834">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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celtavian, post: 6642195, member: 5834"] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification