Power Attack, Two Handed Weapons and Crit

[JimAde]

FWIW, let me throw on my support for this particular spreadsheet. It's the one I use (and annoy my DM with ). It's excellent.

It must be good. Frisbeet has exceeded his bandwidth allotment.

 

[frisbeet]

Thanks for the kind words. Never fear, my site activity will decay down to a couple hits/day.

As for the Falchion/Greatsword debate, there is a somewhat useful formula for average weapon damage/automatic hit against opponents when you need <= your lowest threat # to hit their AC (got that?):

(1 + C/20*(M - 1)) * D.

C = threat range
M = multiplier
D = average weapon damage + damage bonus (db)

For a falchion, that's (1 + 3/20*(2-1))*(5 + db) = 1.15*(5 + db)
= 5.75 + 1.15*db

For a greatsword, it's (1 + 2/20*(2-1))*(7 + db) = 1.1*(7 + db)
= 7.7 + 1.1*db

Clearly, when db is low the greatsword does more damage (plug in 0 for db to check). Set these two equations equal to each other to find when falchion wins.

5.75 + 1.15*db = 7.7 + 1.1*db

db = 1.95/0.05

db = 39

When you're doing db of +39 or better, the falchion wins--and not by much. Rearranging the equation gives the falchion/greatsword straight line damage-difference equation:

(Fdam - Gdam) = 0.05db - 1.95

When your db is +100 (Wow!), that's a whopping 3.05 average hit point damage/hit difference. Improved critical increases this difference. Then the turnover point is around db=20.

Edit: This does NOT explicitly take into account power attack. Implicitly, it can as PA adds directly to db. The caveat is, this formula is incorect when you consider "automatic hitting" against opponents when a roll > threat range is needed (only a 20 hits, for example). The PA hit penalty will thus exclude a greater set of opponents from consideration. It this case, you're better off with the numerical approach as calculated by spreadsheets like the one on my site.

 

[ForceUser]

...Math stuff...

So if I understand correctly, what you are saying is that a falchion's greater threat range does not equate to more damage over time than a greatsword, unless the falchion's wielder has a db of +39 or more? If this is true, it seems to suggest that any weapon that crits more often but does less base damage is essentially inferior to a weapon with greater base damage that crits less. Would that be accurate?

 

[Victim]

So if I understand correctly, what you are saying is that a falchion's greater threat range does not equate to more damage over time than a greatsword, unless the falchion's wielder has a db of +39 or more? If this is true, it seems to suggest that any weapon that crits more often but does less base damage is essentially inferior to a weapon with greater base damage that crits less. Would that be accurate?

Not necessarily. First of all, as mentioned above, Improved Critical changes when the falchion catches up, so at higher levels, weapons with bigger threat ranges become superior. Also, there's a 2 point difference in average damage between the falchion and the greatsword, and only a 1 point difference when comparing 1 handed weapons. Without improved critical, the rapier catches up to the longsword at +18.5 damage. So yes, straight from the box, weapons that do more damage are better. However, once you get improved critical, boosted strength and magic weapons, the bigger threat range weapons overtake the normal ones. Of course, a weapon like a rapier has other advantages over a longsword like finess.

 

[atra2]

So if I understand correctly, what you are saying is that a falchion's greater threat range does not equate to more damage over time than a greatsword, unless the falchion's wielder has a db of +39 or more? If this is true, it seems to suggest that any weapon that crits more often but does less base damage is essentially inferior to a weapon with greater base damage that crits less. Would that be accurate?

Popping in for a moment here, some minor history as learned from Sean Reynolds site.

It used to be that Keen (weapon enchantment) and Imp Crit stacked. This is what
made the low-damage/high-threat weapons comparable to high base-damage weapons.

This is in the days of 3.0 Power Attack.

And all was right with the world.

Then 3.5 Power Attack entered the picture, and threw the math and balance out of
whack.

To compensate, Andy Collins & crew left 3.5 PA as-is, but removed the stacking of
Keen and Imp Crit.

GP cost of weapons also pretty much stayed the same.

People relying on the high-crit weapons are hoping for the lucky one-shotting of
some foe in round 1, which greatly increases party survivability, or at least, incoming
damage.

The Greatsword user smiles whenever he faces foes immune to critical hits, such as:

Oozes, Elementals, Constructs, Undead, and certain other foes.

Relying on crits and sneak attacks requires one to understand the world the DM has
provided.

If you are in a city campaign with 95%+ humanoid encounters, these powers RULE.

If you are not in a city campaign, they're still pretty good.

If your DM is enamored of strange templated monstrosities, and Half-[fill in the bank]
monster mixes from the various MMs, stick with the greatsword, and think about
multiclassing your Rogue into Barbarian to get some dependable offense

See, that's the one variable missing from all the spreadsheeting: percentage of foes
you can actually make use of your crit vs.

Around 12th level+, unless your DM is regularly statting up humanoids with class levels
for you to face (which should be a portion of your "diet") then any DM pulling from the
Monster Manual is going to be pulling an increasingly larger percentage of crit-immune
foes.

This of course is painful, cause you had to wait till BAB +8 for Improved Crit in the
first place, and now elementals, golems, undead, oozes and the like are more
prevalent.

But, hey, if you have that human-politics centered campaign, you're golden
(until all the rulers start making pacts with planar powers and templating themselves
to be immune to crits...)

 

[frisbeet]

My spreadsheet can be parameterized to consider crit-immune opponents. ehh, anyway...

The point as I see it is that there isn't that much difference between two-handed weapons when it comes to average damage/hit. While it is true that without improved critical it takes a db of +39 for Falchion to exceed Greatsword, it doesn't mean the GS blows Fal out of the water (against critable opponents) with wimpier dbs. Just as the Fal wins at +100 db by a "whopping" 3.05 pts/hit, the GS beats Fal by a whopping 1.6 with a +7 db. Exceptions perhaps are The Club (which is still a good thing to clip onto your belt for DR/bludg opponents) and The Spiked Chain (see Kill Bill Vol I). The crit/dam system is pretty well balanced for similar type weapons.

The Exotic Weapon Stunt Uncanny Blow (Complete Warrior)--that's a bit more unbalancing(why can't I wield a longsword w/ two hands and do the same things as with a bastard sword?). It's also really a must for sword types.

 

[Piratecat]

Yoink - grabbed your spreadsheet, Frisbeet. Thanks!

 

[Hypersmurf]

The Exotic Weapon Stunt Uncanny Blow (Complete Warrior)--that's a bit more unbalancing(why can't I wield a longsword w/ two hands and do the same things as with a bastard sword?).

Although Uncanny Blow's 'benefit' for Power Attack is completely illusory

-Hyp.

 

[TerraDave]

I disagree. Any weapon with a natural 18-20 threat range is not to be dismissed so lightly. Once character are past the newbie levels, a weapon's damage dice becomes far less important than a character's accumulated damage bonuses. For instance, my 12th-level fighter is specialized in the falchion, and the weapon's 2d4 base damage is nearly irrelevant--what matters much more is the character's +12 modifier to damage (which, more often than not, is more like +22 thanks to Power Attack). When you're doing 2d4+22 damage, you can take or leave the roughly 5 extra points of damage the weapon itself brings per hit. It's just gravy at that point. What's much more important about the falchion is that by the time you have Improved Critical, you threaten 1 out of 4 attacks, and convert most of those, which means you crit about 30% of the time. In those cases, my fighter is now doing 4d4+44, and still, the weapon's damage is gravy--it's all about what the character brings to the damage, not the weapon itself.

I am so over greatswords.

(OK, SO I JUST MISSED A BUNCH OF POSTS ON THIS, I STILL DID ALL THESE CALCULATIONS...)

Well, you are basically making my point: a big dmg bonus makes weapons like the scythe or falchion more viable, and Improved Critical makes them even more viable--though that is a feat you could have used on something else.

But let us look at your example more closely. If you have a 50% chance to hit, and no improved crit, then with a base +12 dmg bonus the long sword does an expected 0.5*(7+12)+0.05*(7+12)=10.45 points of damage per swing (twice as much per hit), whereas the falchion does 0.5*(5+12)+0.075*(5+12)=9.77. Even when it is +22 dmg the totals are 15.95 and 15.52 (the expected dmg is exactly the same for the scythe BTW).

Ok, now with the feat the formula in this case becomes 0.5*(5+X)+0.15*(5+X). In this case the falchion gets the edge at +8 to dmg, and by +12 expected dmg is 11.05, so you are up half a point on the great sword per swing, or 1 point per hit. But is that worth a feat? (at +22 you are at 17.55, so up about 1.5 per attack).

A better chance to hit, and hence turn your threat into a crit, does change the equation: at a 70% chance to hit, with +22 dmg the long sword does an expected 22.3 points of damage on a given swing, the falchion with improved crit does 24.57. Not bad

So, if you have a very high chance to hit (remember, iterative attacks are also a factor) and a feat to burn, sure, its great. But it would be even better if keen weapons stacked with improved crit, or your DM makes it easier to turn crits into threats ( I recomend both)

 

[TerraDave]

Thanks for the kind words. Never fear, my site activity will decay down to a couple hits/day.

As for the Falchion/Greatsword debate, there is a somewhat useful formula for average weapon damage/automatic hit against opponents when you need <= your lowest threat # to hit their AC (got that?):

but how much does this "lowest threat #" matter--it seems pretty restrictive.

But your broader point is well taken, and confirmed by my calculations above.

The point about oppenent type and world is also highly relevant (so be sure to carry that silvered undead bane great sword as well as the falchion)