• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Needless comparison of EWP, WF & Imp Crit

FreeTheSlaves

Adventurer
Having delighted in lots of comparative math after being kindly presented with the below formula, I decided on a whim to run some numbers and see what could be seen.

Layout is the following: A = P{D[1+Pc(Mc-1)] + Db}
For bonus critical dice I insert: +Bd[Pc(Mc-1)] after the Db & before the closing }

where
A = average damage per attack
P = Probability to hit, as a fraction
D = average weapon damage plus Str, Magic, etc
Pc = Probability to Threaten, as a fraction
Mc= Critical Multiplier
Db = Bonus Damage dice that are not multiplied by a confirmed critical
Bd = Bonus die average damage that only occurs on confirmed criticals


The situation:
What are the differences between exotic weapon proficiency (Bastard sword), weapon focus & improved critical feats? The examples use an 8th level fighter with a +2 longsword (50/20 magic item rule), 17 str & gauntlets of ogre str+2 (ab+14/+9 vs AC20). I chose AC20 because it is CR+12, just like SR and eyeballing it & it looks about right.

Vanilla Longsword
7.0125 = 0.75{8.5[1.1]}
4.675 = 0.50{8.5[1.1]}
11.6875

Weapon focus (Longsword)
7.48 = 0.80{8.5[1.1]}
5.1425 = 0.55{8.5[1.1]}
12.6225

Improved critical (Longsword)
7.65 = 0.75{8.5[1.2]}
5.1 = 0.50{8.5[1.2]}
12.75

Exotic weapon proficiency (Bastard Sword)
7.8375 = 0.75{9.5[1.1]}
5.225 = 0.50{9.5[1.1]}
13.0625

What I find interesting is that a feat available at 1st level is the most damage dealing but then I would suspect that by another 2-4 levels or so the average damage increased by Improved critical would offset the Exotic weapon proficiency.

The second iterative attack of Weapon focus actually beats the Improved critical, but this is no surprise because the higher the target AC becomes the better the value of Weapon focus. The value of Weapon focus is highest when it allows a hit on a 19+ when the others require a natural 20, this situation of course spells doom & needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

It is all fine & dandy to take all 3 feats at level 8 but what about level 1, which is the first one you have to survive before anything else. The below assumes that you've only got 1 feat to spare, so which one? The examples use a 1st level fighter with a normal longsword & 15 str (ab+3 vs AC13). I chose AC13 because it is CR+12, just like SR and eyeballing it & it looks about right.

Vanilla Longsword
3.9325 = 0.55{6.5[1.1]}

Weapon focus (Longsword)
4.29 = 0.60{6.5[1.1]}

Exotic weapon proficiency (Bastard Sword)
4.5375 = 0.55{7.5[1.1]}

Before declaring an outright winner let's run the numbers versus a more formidable AC18 (CR+17).

Vanilla Longsword
2.145 = 0.30{6.5[1.1]}

Weapon focus (Longsword)
2.5025 = 0.35{6.5[1.1]}

Exotic weapon proficiency (Bastard Sword)
2.475 = 0.30{7.5[1.1]}

As suspected, the higher the AC the better the mileage gained from WF. The only problem with taking WF over EWP is that you generally* can't go back in time to change the weapon focussed in, although you could wield the Bastard sword 2handed for 1st level as a martial weapon. *I say generally because this doesn't apply to me what with my carefree dm, bwahaha!
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Infiniti2000 said:
I don't see how you figure in confirming the critical threat. Shouldn't the crit chance be lower?
For clarity I condensed the "[1+Pc(Mc-1)]" from "A = P{D[1+Pc(Mc-1)] + Db}" right down to the 1 + 0.fraction. The only time I worry about the threat confirmation is when the to hit % is lower than the threat %, or dealing with *3 weapons & increased threats.

The current formula, which I'm sorry to not be able to recall which ENworlder presented it to all on a thread dealing with imp crit & keen, could be flawed but not that I can see. The % chance to confirm is generally the same % chance to hit & thus is within the same calculation.
 

FreeTheSlaves said:
The situation:
What are the differences between exotic weapon proficiency (Bastard sword), weapon focus & improved critical feats? The examples use an 8th level fighter with a +2 longsword (50/20 magic item rule), 17 str & gauntlets of ogre str+2 (ab+14/+9 vs AC20). I chose AC20 because it is CR+12, just like SR and eyeballing it & it looks about right.

Average damage for the longsword +2 thus described is 10.5 (4.5 on the die, +2 sword, +4 strength). This changes your numbers as follows:

Vanilla Longsword
8.6625 = 0.75{10.5[1.1]}
5.775 = 0.50{10.5[1.1]}
14.4375

Weapon focus (Longsword)
9.24 = 0.80{10.5[1.1]}
6.3525 = 0.55{10.5[1.1]}
15.5925

Improved critical (Longsword)
9.45 = 0.75{10.5[1.2]}
6.3 = 0.50{10.5[1.2]}
15.75

Exotic weapon proficiency (Bastard Sword)
9.4875 = 0.75{11.5[1.1]}
6.325 = 0.50{11.5[1.1]}
15.8125

Your conclusions are, however, correct. That said, the utility of Weapon Focus relative to Exotic Weapon Proficiency goes up as the target AC goes up. The crossover point appears to be where the chance to hit with the primary attack is 0.65 (for vanilla longsword), or AC 22 in this case.

Your analysis of the 1st level case appears to be correct.

Of course, the Exotic Weapon Proficiency doesn't really lead into any feat chains that you couldn't already enter with a different weapon, while Weapon Focus gives you access to things like Weapon Specialisation. It might be worth analysing two 4th level elven Fighters, one with EWP(bastard sword) and WF(bastard sword) and the other with WF(longsword) and WSpec(longsword).

(Actually, after a moment's thought, there's no need. The second fighter will be superior at that point, as EWP gives an average +1 damage per hit, while WSpec gives +2. But then they'll switch places again when they next gain a feat, as the first fighter picks up the specialisation feat.)
 

FreeTheSlaves said:
The current formula, which I'm sorry to not be able to recall which ENworlder presented it .....
That'd be me. :)

Go nuts on the analyzing, man! :cool:
 
Last edited:

FreeTheSlaves said:
The current formula......(snip)..... could be flawed but not that I can see.
The formula is correct....so long as you assume that Pc (the chance to critical) is smaller than P(the chance to hit).

When that's not the case, you use a "min" function, available in a spreadsheet program (like MS Excel):

Pc = Min(threat_range/20, P)
 

FreeTheSlaves said:
For clarity I condensed the "[1+Pc(Mc-1)]" from "A = P{D[1+Pc(Mc-1)] + Db}" right down to the 1 + 0.fraction. The only time I worry about the threat confirmation is when the to hit % is lower than the threat %, or dealing with *3 weapons & increased threats.
The correct formula to account for confirmation would be A = P{D[1+PPc(Mc-1)] + Db}. (Assuming I got the variables right.) If you ignore the confirmation roll, any analysis on improved critical and weapons of differing threat ranges is rendered largely meaningless.
 



Infiniti2000, I may just take that formula for a spin and see what we get.

A = P{D[1+PPc(Mc-1)] + Db}
Vanilla Longsword
8.465625 = 0.75{10.5[1+0.75*0.10(2-1)]}

A = P{D[1+Pc(Mc-1)] + Db}
Vanilla Longsword
8.6625 = 0.75{10.5[1+0.10(2-1)]}

That 2nd % to hit is there to take account for the 2nd actual die roll, i.e. in this example 75% successful confirmation out of the 10% threats from the 75% successful hits. Yes?
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top