D&D 5E GWM, SS, CEx: updated!

[Oofta]

FYI - while I haven't added battle master, I did turn my simulation up to 11 ... and then kept going to 12 because I've only been doing even levels. I was curious how the additional attack affected things.

Long story short, Duelist/Shield Master is best against everything but huge creatures at that level.

 

[FrogReaver]

As in battle master precision? In a simulation of a champion fighter?

Not sure it would make much of a difference, but would vary depending on how many superiority dice you have available. For action surge I'm assuming only a 1 in 3 chance, so i'd probably do something similar for superiority dice so maybe 1 or 2 per fight?

I'm sorry if I misunderstood. You are saying that for champion fighters GWM is worse than Shield Master. I can buy that. But if you really want to say GWM isn't that much better then you are going to have to look at a fighter that uses precision.

See the issue is that GWM is kinda lackluster till high levels due to low attack bonus and no attack bonus compensation anywhere especially against the AC's you are looking at. As such against AC's near the range you are looking at there is little difference in it's damage output and a duelist sword and shield fighters damage output. Heck the duelist with shield master may even do more damage than the GWM fighter without precision. Precision changes that dynamic a lot though.

 

[FrogReaver]

I wanted to add that I crunched the damage numbers for a GWM champion at level 5 and they are pathetic compared to the Shield-Master duelist fighter fighting anything with 15+ AC. This is with crit factored in and the extra attack from GWM on crit factored in.

However, if we change to a battlemaster then in the 16-17 AC ranges we seem to be looking at the BattleMaster pulls ahead around 10-20% in damage (with one less AC per he took the defensive style). I'd anticipate these fighters will fight roughly equal against an enemy those AC ranges. I'd probably give the shield master a slight nudge against a single enemy at that AC.

 

[FrogReaver]

Of course I was looking at landing shield masters bonus action prone every round. Things change a bit without that every round.

 

[Oofta]

I'm sorry if I misunderstood. You are saying that for champion fighters GWM is worse than Shield Master. I can buy that. But if you really want to say GWM isn't that much better then you are going to have to look at a fighter that uses precision.

See the issue is that GWM is kinda lackluster till high levels due to low attack bonus and no attack bonus compensation anywhere especially against the AC's you are looking at. As such against AC's near the range you are looking at there is little difference in it's damage output and a duelist sword and shield fighters damage output. Heck the duelist with shield master may even do more damage than the GWM fighter without precision. Precision changes that dynamic a lot though.

I can add it, maybe I'll have a chance this weekend. I just don't expect it to make enough of a difference to matter.

 

[FrogReaver]

I can add it, maybe I'll have a chance this weekend. I just don't expect it to make enough of a difference to matter.

Against your allisaurus he will do about 33% more DPR than the champion GWM version. I'm pretty sure that will make a large difference.

 

[Oofta]

Against your allisaurus he will do about 33% more DPR than the champion GWM version. I'm pretty sure that will make a large difference.

Well I was surprised by my results the first time, so I make no predictions one way or another.

 

[clearstream]

Well I was surprised by my results the first time, so I make no predictions one way or another.

Certainly I found that GWM really kicks in once you have Precision. Remember the superiority dice limit. Maybe for your simulation you can allow 2 dice per combat, only used on misses by say 1-4 (or 1-3 if 1-4 is burning through the dice too fast).

Are you including multiple foes, so that the cleave can kick in? If you're not, then per this thread http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?590936-Average-number-of-enemies-per-encounter you are representing very unusual combats.

 

[CapnZapp]

No, you will allow some misses in order to conserve your dice. Turning a 3 into a hit by using a Precision die is often too unlikely.

Say 1s are caught by Lucky or Halfling. Then say 2-4 is the acceptable miss range; that you start using your Precision dice when you roll 5 or more. (This still allows a small risk of using a die, rolling low, and still missing)

Something like it at any rate; the analysis should tell you the optimal cut-off number (where you no longer gain any DPR by gambling a die, as opposed to saving it for a less risky time)

But as a general approach towards number crunching the effect, I'd recommend it.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[clearstream]

No, you will allow some misses in order to conserve your dice. Turning a 3 into a hit by using a Precision die is often too unlikely.

Say 1s are caught by Lucky or Halfling. Then say 2-4 is the acceptable miss range; that you start using your Precision dice when you roll 5 or more. (This still allows a small risk of using a die, rolling low, and still missing)

Something like it at any rate; the analysis should tell you the optimal cut-off number (where you no longer gain any DPR by gambling a die, as opposed to saving it for a less risky time)

But as a general approach towards number crunching the effect, I'd recommend it.

Yup. The way it should be estimated is count the number of misses. Count misses and multiply by 0.2/(1-accuracy) then only apply Precision to those.

It means that if your attack chance is great - maybe because you have advantage - you don't get to spend all your Precision dice.

[Edit: corrected to give the right formula; needs a further correction to consider miss is on natural 1)