D&D 5E Precision Attack + SS + CBE is like +2d6 sword

[Dausuul]

Why are you trying to force the comparison with greatsword fighter when I started with sword and shield? Maybe we should start there?

Sword and Shield at least has significantly higher AC to offset the benefits of 120 ft range. Which is the reason I chose sword and shield. It's at least arguable that +2 AC and OA's is worth trading for 120ft range.

Greatsword would actually need to do more damage than the SS + CBE + Precision fighter to be comparable - so that the range component is compensated for.

I did compensate for it, by forcing the greatsword fighter to throw javelins at the start of every other combat. Then we are comparing characters built for DPR, instead putting a DPR specialist against a defender. But fine; we'll do it your way... except that you still don't get a free feat. It's one thing to say that "ranged = +2 AC and opportunity attacks," it's quite another to say "range = +2 AC and opportunity attacks and a feat."

Removing the "javelin rounds" and using sword-and-board, the duelist deals 178 damage per short rest. They can be brought up to the crossbow fighter's level with +1d6 on the weapon. Not 2d6.

 

[Iry]

I'm not suggesting anything must be done about it - just that we are able to understand the combo's impact on fighter damage. If you are okay with it after understanding the impact then that's fine. I don't think most people really understand the true impact of it though - which is about the equivalent of adding a +2d6 sword to your sword and shield fighter. It's just when put in that light it's harder to argue nothing needs done about it.

I am okay with it, while acknowledging that it is pretty beefy. When you sit down and design a game, there's an understanding that someone is always going to find a way to break it. Always. You patch up the largest imbalances, and accept the smaller ones as the cost of designing a game. In fact, there's a concept in game design about how imbalances are more memorable, since our brains reward us with a big dopamine hit when we realize the cool stuff we can do.

(I'm looking at you, AD&D.)

Of course, SS+CBE is not an intentional imbalance, it's just a happy little coincidence that isn't so far out of line that it needs correction. It's close, and some people will correct it in their home games. But it's such a specific build. If it shows up in your game, the easiest answer it to let your player have their fun and not worry about it unless another player is unhappy.

 

[Dausuul]

I think your assessment is spot on for many combats. However, SS+CBE brings several quality of life improvements (negating cover, etc) that allow any character to maintain effective damage across a wide variety of situations. It even feels more fun.

That's why I forced the greatsword fighter to start every other fight lobbing javelins. Note, however, that the greatsword also has advantages; it leaves your bonus action open, and it's better at coping with disadvantage. Disadvantage is crippling to SS and GWM builds.

As for fun, that's entirely down to player preferences. Some folks enjoy playing the agile sniper, others like to be in the thick of battle swinging a big ol' sword around.

 

[FrogReaver]

Precision Attack: The math is a bit tricky on Precision Attack, because - unlike most such abilities, where you know in advance exactly how much it will boost your attack roll - PA involves a second die roll. If you miss by 3, and you throw your PA and roll a 2, you wasted the die. On the other hand, any time you get to your next short rest with superiority dice unused, those dice are also wasted. So there is a bit of strategizing around when you should throw a PA versus holding it for a better chance.

For a 6th-level fighter making 3 attacks/round, with the above assumptions, the optimal use of PA - i.e., the largest number of misses-converted-to-hits - is to use PA when you miss by 4 or less*. This results in 3.25 misses converted to hits per short rest.

Close enough.

Riposte:

A greatsword fighter is going to be in the thick of things and should have no shortage of opportunities to Riposte. This means 4 Riposte attacks, translating into 2.8 hits per short rest; each of those hits gets 1d8 bonus damage.

(Riposte is better than PA for the greatsword fighter because a) the greatsword fighter has only 2 attacks per round, forcing them to use PA more aggressively and increase the chance of wastage, and b) the bonus damage die on Riposte increases the value of each hit. Together, these factors put Riposte ahead.)

This isn't quite true. Even for a Melee Fighter - Against high AC's precision still tends to be better. Riposte is better against AC's 17 and below. That said, there's nothing to stop you from using a combo of both for slightly enhanced returns. Say, use precision when missing by 2 or on 18+ AC's. Use riposte is other situations? Calculating the effect of that may be a little harder but it should provide some small benefits.

Also, if we are looking at +XdY damage weapons then precision starts looking quite a bit better once those are added in.

The greatsword fighter's hit chance is 70% (Str 20 at 6th level is ahead of the curve). The sharpshooter fighter's hit chance is 45% (60% for Dex 16 at 6th level, +10% for Archery, -25% for Sharpshooter).

Not quite - factoring in precision adds bettween +10% and +15% to hit.

The greatsword fighter's Riposte attacks have the same chance to crit as any other attack. The sharpshooter's "extra hits" from PA cannot crit.

True, extremely small difference though...

Action Surge gives each fighter 2 extra attacks per short rest. This is a modest advantage to the greatsword fighter, since 2 extra attacks is a full round for them but only 2/3 of a round for the sharpshooter.

Agreed and it's one I included.

Per Jeremy Crawford, superiority dice are not doubled on a crit. If you ask me, this is in conflict with RAW, but I went with Crawford's ruling.

I'm in agreement that is a crap ruling on his part.

Outcome:

• Crossbow fighter deals ~228 damage per short rest.
• Greatsword fighter deals ~199 damage per short rest.
• If you give the greatsword fighter a sword with +1d4 damage, it jacks them up to ~239 per short rest. (Remember that the d4 benefits from Great Weapon style, so it's +3 damage instead of +2.5, and it's also doubled on a crit. However, it doesn't affect javelin attacks.)

*A more sophisticated strategy might take into account how far into the adventure you are, starting conservative and becoming more aggressive if you have dice unspent later on. However, I doubt it would make a big difference.

I'll post my numbers in a bit, but I think your math is off. I just calculated that it takes a +2d6 greatsword for a GWF to match the SS+CBE fighter in damage at level 6. I even made him a half orc so he can get a bit of bonus damage.

 

[Iry]

As for fun, that's entirely down to player preferences. Some folks enjoy playing the agile sniper, others like to be in the thick of battle swinging a big ol' sword around.

I mean fun as in "He has partial cover, but you have SS!" and "It's long range, but you have SS!" Moments where you would have a penalty, but your feat choice helps you avoid a miss. Because missing sucks.

 

[FrogReaver]

I am okay with it, while acknowledging that it is pretty beefy. When you sit down and design a game, there's an understanding that someone is always going to find a way to break it. Always. You patch up the largest imbalances, and accept the smaller ones as the cost of designing a game. In fact, there's a concept in game design about how imbalances are more memorable, since our brains reward us with a big dopamine hit when we realize the cool stuff we can do.

(I'm looking at you, AD&D.)

Of course, SS+CBE is not an intentional imbalance, it's just a happy little coincidence that isn't so far out of line that it needs correction. It's close, and some people will correct it in their home games. But it's such a specific build. If it shows up in your game, the easiest answer it to let your player have their fun and not worry about it unless another player is unhappy.

I agree there. It's a very specific build to take advantage of it. (Either that or a specific party).

 

[FrogReaver]

how does cross bow expert help on accuaracy or damage?

lol. You have alot to learn...

 

[FrogReaver]

What is +1 weapon means??? And +1d10???

No offense and I don't mind to help you out, but if you don't know what this stuff means how can you even have an opinion about what we are talking about?

 

[DnD Warlord]

No offense and I don't mind to help you out, but if you don't know what this stuff means how can you even have an opinion about what we are talking about?

Because when you take the jargon out we are talking about optimizing damage and accuracy.

Edit: In fact I will take this 1 step further... I am a DM that worries about Optimization but I don’t worry about feats. So I am your target audience. Tell me in plain English why I should worry about feats in general or the -5 to hit + 10 feats in particular.

 

[FrogReaver]

Because when you take the jargon out we are talking about optimizing damage and accuracy.

Those terms have been in use 30+ years. It's not jargon at this point. It's common knowledge and very straightforward terminology. A +1 weapon is a weapon that adds +1 to hit and +1 to damage. A +2d6 weapon is a weapon that adds +2d6 to damage.

Oh and Crossbow expertise is important because you get a bonus action attack when using a hand crossbow with it.