Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="spinozajack" data-source="post: 6642802" data-attributes="member: 6794198">I wouldn't use the -5 / +10 clause for high AC opponents, or if I had disadvantage. Once you know roughly speaking the target's AC to within a few points, you can decide if any given attack should use it. Usually, the dark knight in plate and shield is probably not the best pick for GWM.The big problem isn't with GWM or SS per se, it's with all the other interactions in the game that it disrupts. If one character has such a feat, and another doesn't, then the one who has it will definitely contribute more to combat. Whether that matters to them or not is up to them, but it's worth considering. I'm more against the idea the polearms should deal substantially more damage on average than a greataxe or greatsword yielder. And insanely more than the dual wielder. PM + GWM is better than dual yielder with a hypothetical -5 / +10 feat that works on non-heavy weapons. It's still more possible attacks and chances to crit and kill and threaten and reach than a dual wielder has, with the same AC too (assuming the PM + GWM guy actually picked the power gamer option which is the +1 to AC and not GWF).That's another thing I don't like about GWM, it makes GWF's DPR contribution positively anemic. You're much, much better off sacrificing GWF's tiny +1.33~ damage boost for +1 to AC. +1 to hit or to AC is worth more than +1 to damage. But 1.33 damage compared to +10 damage? (even with the -5) is pretty weak. Sure, GWF is a level 1 or 2 fighting style, but in my opinion it should grow up with your character and remain pertinent to your character's total damage contribution beyond level 4 when he picks up GWF. Or level 6/8 when he picks up GWF after picking up PM. PM is probably a better feat choice for level 1 or 4, given bounded accuracy's low rate of monster AC improvement.PM adds roughly 50-75% more damage at level 1, I would guess. That's a much better 1st level feat than GWM. And more if the player is smart tactically. And it only gets better as you gain extra attacks and accurary. I'd say take GWM at level 4 or 6 (if you are a fighter). I haven't run any numbers, but that's my gut feeling about the risk of taking that -5 to hit penalty. You can easily get around that by using that part only when it's to your advantage. Such as when you have advantage. Barbarians, for example, should never be estimated in DPR terms without both PM and GWM factored in. It's too unlikely to see a damage focused class not use the highest damaging weapon in the game (the polearm).Regardless of whether people think these -5 / +10 feats are fine as is, the fact is that the way they were designed makes iconic character build choices (dual wielding, s&b) completely sub-par. +2 AC from a shield is worth +10 on all your attacks, plus bonus attacks? Not likely. Compared to killing mobs 2-3x faster. I think not. It's laughable.If you want to win at damage, you pick a polearm. Maybe a crossbow if you want to mix it up as an artillery unit and already have a linebacker.</blockquote>

Verification