That might be interesting. To really examine it's efficacy you'd want to include:Something to track the effectiveness of the GWM -5/+10 versus ascending AC might be a simple but interesting place to start. I'm sure it's been done before, but that's no reason not to give your own go. It's one of those statistical things in the game that a lot of people don't really grok.
I don't know...what makes a data set interesting?Given that the problem space is gigantic, perhaps give us more criteria? What makes a data set interesting? A natural next step might be damage per second extended to other classes against different targets. Of course, this has probably been exhaustively done elsewhere, which might or might not dissuade some.
Yeah I think if you have 3 attacks its the same math as for one attack, but you use it three times.Would taking multi-attack into account mean anything one way or the other? I know the really savage examples of GWM I have seen have been on high attacks per round. That might just be a matter of addition though. My stats repertoire definitely fits on the back of napkin, and I always get a little lost past rocking a bell curve or piles of d6s for 40k.
Since SS uses the same mechanic you could do both. I'm thinking there of a an actual statistical understanding of the efficacy of the archery fighting style, and thus the worth of one-level fighter dip for a rogue.
That would be an interesting one, for sure. It would need some boundary conditions, though. It's only interesting when accuracy is high enough that a normal SS shot with no sneak attack is better than a normal shot, otherwise not using Sharpshooter for both shots is always the better option. The really interesting point is in the situations where the first shot has advantage (due to Rogue Aim or some other bonus, like Help or Guiding Bolt) and the second doesn't, that's going to be really sensitive to any bonuses on the normal damage as well as the amount of Sneak Attack dice. The increased chance to crit will definitely play a role, as well.Yeah I think if you have 3 attacks its the same math as for one attack, but you use it three times.
For rogues with sharpshooter and multiple attacks (e.g. 5 levels in Ranger or Fighter) there might be some interesting considerations for sneak attack. I.e., does it make sense to make a normal shot first, and if you hit (and trigger sneak attack) then go ahead and throw the hail mary? Or maybe you should try sharpshooter on your first attack, then switch to normal if you miss?
Hmm. This is pretty straightforward to do manually (and I've seen good analyses) but maybe there's a nifty way to visualize it.I'm interested in Sorcerer Metamagic and what spells are best at what levels to do most damage to 1, 2, 5, and 10 opponents within a 20ft square.
I've been thinking about this one, too. Here's something similar I did for The One Ring a long time ago.The dataset(s) I'd be interested in would be comparing all of the different fighting styles. But it's not just about DPR, it's also about defense and survivability. A reckless barbarian with GWM is going to win the DPR race, but are they going to survive the fight? Someone doing sword and board is going to get hit less, but is Defense better or Dueling?
While you're at it throw in a variety of opponents with differing numbers and ACs. Then start adding in feats and ... well the list goes on.
Yeah, that’s easy. I’ll throw something together.Are you taking requests? I'd be interested to see what a series of DC 6 rolls looks like when failures add a cumulative -1 and a critical failure requires a DC 9 save or the series ceases. I can't figure out what the average number of successes would be before a failed save. I'm working on a non-spell slot magic alternative and I'm having trouble balancing the system above with the current 1st and 2nd level spell slot allotment.
Is the idea that a nat 1 followed by failing the save, as modified by the previous number of failures, is the only stopping condition?Are you taking requests? I'd be interested to see what a series of DC 6 rolls looks like when failures add a cumulative -1 and a critical failure requires a DC 9 save or the series ceases. I can't figure out what the average number of successes would be before a failed save. I'm working on a non-spell slot magic alternative and I'm having trouble balancing the system above with the current 1st and 2nd level spell slot allotment.
Sort of. The failures add cumulative levels of fatigue, each of which give a -1 mod to subsequent rolls. The crit fumble is CON save vs exhaustion, and every fatigue past 3 also requires a test vs exhaustion. Exhaustion doesn't actually stop the ability to cast, but does grant disadvantage, and all failures to cast when exhausted cost CON vs additional levels of exhaustion, and eventually death. Casting after getting a level of exhaustion is obviously a bit of a death spiral, but that's on purpose. Players can take that chance if it's really important, but the consequences I hope are high enough to mostly dissuade pushing too hard. That'ts the plan anyway.Is the idea that a nat 1 followed by failing the save, as modified by the previous number of failures, is the only stopping condition?