Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Iku Rex" data-source="post: 2680175" data-attributes="member: 752">You haven't &quot;proven&quot; anything false.&nbsp; :\ You've referred to some obscure third-party product you know I probably don't have access to. Add since you didn't even bother to explain why this &quot;table&quot; of yours proved me wrong I'm thinking you don't even understand what you're reading. Now take a look at Power Attack.A 2-handed fighter or a two-weapon fighter with one-handed weapons can trade -1 to hit for +2 damage - the same as my rule of thumb.&nbsp; Is power attack adding heaps of damage to your average damage per attack? No. If you'd been more familiar with this subject you'd know that it's a more-or less balanced feat. (On lower levels, with low standard damage, some power attack can be a good thing. On higher levels, when you do more damage, power attack tends to be undesirable unless the target's AC is really low.) &nbsp;What you don't seem to understand is that simply hand-waving away a penalty because of some unrelated bonus is complete nonsense. They only way you could reasonably disregard the penalty was if your fighting style, by it self, gave equivalent bonuses.&nbsp;I didn't want a straight on comparison. I wanted a straight answer. You didn't give one, but from your answer I'll assume you think your TWF tactic will be superior at 12th level. &nbsp;I am going to try to save myself a lot of time by simply disregarding your attempts to prove your point. Let me know if you still hold the same opinions after reading my examples, then I'll get back to you about it. (Comparing a Str 14 fighter with a Str 10 fighter when trying to prove your fighting style superior?!&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!&nbsp; &nbsp; :eek:"&nbsp; data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" />&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!&nbsp; &nbsp; :eek:"&nbsp; data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" />&nbsp; )I'll use a 12th level Orc fighter as my &quot;base&quot;. He has Str 26 (15+4 Orc+3 levels+4 item).He's got the Weapon Focus/Specialization feats, Improved Critical and Power Attack. I'll include average damage per round against AC 18 (frost worm, CR12), AC 28 (mature adult&nbsp; white dragon, CR 12) and AC 23 (midpoint). I'll be assuming optimal power attack. That's not entirely realistic, since players don't usually know the perfect PA value. It does help &quot;my&quot; version more than yours. But it's hardly fair to assume that a high attack bonus will always be wasted on a low AC target either. (This may seem like a lot of work, but I found an old excel spreadsheet I made a few years back, so it's just a matter of punching in a few numbers. Please ask if you want me to show or explain my calculations.) Two-weapon fighting, small greataxes Three feats spent on two-weapon fighting. I'll let him have the Dex without lowering Str, although that's not entirely realistic. I'll give him two +2 weapons (16640gp).Attack bonus: +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8&nbsp; (12 BAB + 8 Str + 2 GWF + 2 enh. - 4 TWF - 2 size)Damage: 1d10 + 14/ 1d10 +10 (8/4 Str + GWS + enh)(This is the equivalent of three attacks at +18/+13/+8 for 34 damage. For example, 30% chance to deal 10 damage = 2 30% chances to deal 6 and 4 damage respectively)Sample calculation: vs. AC 28Average damage 35, +18/+13/+81st attack: 35*1,2*0,55=23,12nd attack: 35*1,2*0,30=12,63rd attack: 35*1,1*0,05=1,9Total damage full attack: 37,6[CODE]AC&nbsp; &nbsp; (PA)&nbsp; &nbsp; Average damage18&nbsp; &nbsp; -2&nbsp; &nbsp; 98,323&nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp; 69,328&nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 37,6[/CODE]2-handed greataxe-wielderOne +3 weapon (18320 gp). Attack bonus: +25/+20/+15&nbsp; (12 BAB + 8 Str + 2 GWF + 3 enh.)Damage: 1d12 + 19 (12 Str + 3 enh. + 4 WS) = 25,5[CODE]AC&nbsp; &nbsp; (PA)&nbsp; &nbsp; Average damage18&nbsp; &nbsp; -8&nbsp; &nbsp; 109,623&nbsp; &nbsp; -4&nbsp; &nbsp; 84,428&nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 54,9[/CODE]Hmm. That's quite an improvement, isn't it... And this fighter doesn't need a high dex. He deals more damage with single attacks (charge, AoO, hit-retreat). And he's got 3 more feats(!).&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> Let's introduce a more sensible 2-weapon fighter.2-weapon fighting, 2 short-swords(Combining attacks for simplicity.)Attack: +22/+17/+12 (12+8+2+2-2)Damage: 2d6 + 24 = 31[CODE]AC&nbsp; &nbsp; (PA)&nbsp; &nbsp; Average damage18&nbsp; &nbsp; NA&nbsp; &nbsp; 98,623&nbsp; &nbsp; NA&nbsp; &nbsp; 81,828&nbsp; &nbsp; NA&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 55,8[/CODE]The only time the first guy can compete is when he gets to take advantage of Power Attack. This build is roughly equal to the 2-H fighter. (If you disregard the feat cost.)Complete Adventurere in introduced the Oversized TWF feat. Let's burn a couple of extra feats for that and EWP: Dwarven Waraxe and see how that looks.2-weapon fighting, 2 dwarven waraxes, Oversized TWF(Combining attacks for simplicity.)Attack: +22/+17/+12 (12+8+2+2-2)Damage: 2d10 + 24 = 35[CODE]AC&nbsp; &nbsp; (PA)&nbsp; &nbsp; Average damage18&nbsp; &nbsp; -5&nbsp; &nbsp; 118,823&nbsp; &nbsp; -1&nbsp; &nbsp; 93,228&nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 63,0[/CODE]Yay! We have a winner. The extra damage (+10) turns out to be worth more than the -2 on attacks. (No surprise there.) Still, if you factor in the &quot;cost&quot; of 5 feats, it's not such a great build anymore. Now to my rule of thumb. Let's use &quot;your&quot; fighter as the example.Again, I'm using optimal PA values. [CODE]AC&nbsp; &nbsp; Strd&nbsp; &nbsp; +1 att&nbsp; &nbsp; +2 dam&nbsp; &nbsp; +3 dam18&nbsp; &nbsp; 98,3&nbsp; &nbsp; 103,3&nbsp; &nbsp; 103,3&nbsp; &nbsp; 105,823&nbsp; &nbsp; 69,3&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 75,6&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 73,3&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 75,228&nbsp; &nbsp; 37,6&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 44,1&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 39,8&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 40,9[/CODE]As you can see, the inaccuracy of my rule of thumb is actually in the favor of increased attack bonus here. A +1 attack is better than even +3 damage against AC 23 if you have the choice. (This is because of the high damage. Lower damage output shifts the scale in the other direction.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Iku Rex, post: 2680175, member: 752"] You haven't "proven" anything false. :\ You've referred to some obscure third-party product you know I probably don't have access to. Add since you didn't even bother to explain [I]why[/I] this "table" of yours proved me wrong I'm thinking you don't even understand what you're reading. Now take a look at Power Attack. A 2-handed fighter or a two-weapon fighter with one-handed weapons can trade -1 to hit for +2 damage - the same as my rule of thumb. Is power attack adding heaps of damage to your average damage per attack? No. If you'd been more familiar with this subject you'd know that it's a more-or less balanced feat. (On lower levels, with low standard damage, some power attack can be a good thing. On higher levels, when you do more damage, power attack tends to be undesirable unless the target's AC is really low.) What you don't seem to understand is that simply hand-waving away a penalty because of some unrelated bonus is complete nonsense. They only way you could reasonably disregard the penalty was if your fighting style, by it self, gave equivalent bonuses. I didn't want a straight on comparison. I wanted a straight answer. You didn't give one, but from your answer I'll assume you think your TWF tactic will be superior at 12th level. I am going to try to save myself a lot of time by simply disregarding your attempts to prove your point. Let me know if you still hold the same opinions [I]after[/I] reading my examples, [I]then[/I] I'll get back to you about it. (Comparing a Str 14 fighter with a Str 10 fighter when trying to prove your fighting style superior?! :eek: :eek: ) I'll use a 12th level Orc fighter as my "base". He has Str 26 (15+4 Orc+3 levels+4 item). He's got the Weapon Focus/Specialization feats, Improved Critical and Power Attack. I'll include average damage per round against AC 18 (frost worm, CR12), AC 28 (mature adult white dragon, CR 12) and AC 23 (midpoint). I'll be assuming optimal power attack. That's not entirely realistic, since players don't usually know the perfect PA value. It does help "my" version more than yours. But it's hardly fair to assume that a high attack bonus will always be wasted on a low AC target either. (This may seem like a lot of work, but I found an old excel spreadsheet I made a few years back, so it's just a matter of punching in a few numbers. Please ask if you want me to show or explain my calculations.) [U]Two-weapon fighting, small greataxes [/U] Three feats spent on two-weapon fighting. I'll let him have the Dex without lowering Str, although that's not entirely realistic. I'll give him two +2 weapons (16640gp). Attack bonus: +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8 (12 BAB + 8 Str + 2 GWF + 2 enh. - 4 TWF - 2 size) Damage: 1d10 + 14/ 1d10 +10 (8/4 Str + GWS + enh) (This is the equivalent of three attacks at +18/+13/+8 for 34 damage. For example, 30% chance to deal 10 damage = 2 30% chances to deal 6 and 4 damage respectively) Sample calculation: vs. AC 28 Average damage 35, +18/+13/+8 1st attack: 35*1,2*0,55=23,1 2nd attack: 35*1,2*0,30=12,6 3rd attack: 35*1,1*0,05=1,9 Total damage full attack: 37,6 [CODE]AC (PA) Average damage 18 -2 98,3 23 +0 69,3 28 +0 37,6[/CODE] [U]2-handed greataxe-wielder[/U] One +3 weapon (18320 gp). Attack bonus: +25/+20/+15 (12 BAB + 8 Str + 2 GWF + 3 enh.) Damage: 1d12 + 19 (12 Str + 3 enh. + 4 WS) = 25,5 [CODE]AC (PA) Average damage 18 -8 109,6 23 -4 84,4 28 +0 54,9[/CODE] Hmm. That's quite an improvement, isn't it... And this fighter doesn't need a high dex. He deals more damage with single attacks (charge, AoO, hit-retreat). And he's got 3 more feats(!). :p Let's introduce a more sensible 2-weapon fighter. [U]2-weapon fighting, 2 short-swords[/U] (Combining attacks for simplicity.) Attack: +22/+17/+12 (12+8+2+2-2) Damage: 2d6 + 24 = 31 [CODE]AC (PA) Average damage 18 NA 98,6 23 NA 81,8 28 NA 55,8[/CODE] The only time the first guy can compete is when he gets to take advantage of Power Attack. This build is roughly equal to the 2-H fighter. (If you disregard the feat cost.) Complete Adventurere in introduced the Oversized TWF feat. Let's burn a couple of extra feats for that and EWP: Dwarven Waraxe and see how that looks. [U]2-weapon fighting, 2 dwarven waraxes, Oversized TWF[/U] (Combining attacks for simplicity.) Attack: +22/+17/+12 (12+8+2+2-2) Damage: 2d10 + 24 = 35 [CODE]AC (PA) Average damage 18 -5 118,8 23 -1 93,2 28 +0 63,0[/CODE] Yay! We have a winner. The extra damage (+10) turns out to be worth more than the -2 on attacks. (No surprise there.) Still, if you factor in the "cost" of [I]5[/I] feats, it's not such a great build anymore. Now to my rule of thumb. Let's use "your" fighter as the example. Again, I'm using optimal PA values. [CODE]AC Strd +1 att +2 dam +3 dam 18 98,3 103,3 103,3 105,8 23 69,3 75,6 73,3 75,2 28 37,6 44,1 39,8 40,9[/CODE] As you can see, the inaccuracy of my rule of thumb is actually in the favor of increased attack bonus here. A +1 attack is better than even +3 damage against AC 23 if you have the choice. (This is because of the high damage. Lower damage output shifts the scale in the other direction.) [/QUOTE]

Verification