Tempests destroying two-hander style?

[Cadfan]

Infocynic0- is your greatweapon fighter using an at will attack power like your two weapon fighter?

 

[Lord Sessadore]

First, your math is off. Please double check. For instance:

You somehow got your miss chance to increase by adding HBM. ( EDIT: Sorry, I see that you just mistyped the % hit part. ) You also didn't add any damage from Reckless or Bloodclaw on hits.

Yes, it seems I just mistyped that. In my calculations, miss chance stays the same and hit chance goes down b/c of HBM. Also, it was 1:30 AM when I read Bloodclaw and Reckless, and I didn't see that they were at-will powers (which seems a little broken to me as well, but whatever) ... and for some reason I thought reckless gave you a bonus to attack rolls (which was stupid of me, nothing gives THAT big of a bonus to attack rolls, even on a daily item power). And that would be where you got those numbers that I couldn't figure out

You do not add anything to Miss: damage, if the feat or item specifies adding to damage roll, as there is never a damage roll when you miss. However, Pit Fighter's +wis modifier would add, it would seem. I've edited the above to reflect this; added +1.6 DPR to Mr. Reaping Strike. Reckless Weapon / Bloodclaw Weapon / Iron Bands / Marked Scourge / Weapon Focus / Pretty much anything else do not add to miss damage. And as you say, this does clearly put 2-handers in the dust.

Yes, I believe you're right. I knew I was probably in the wrong there, and now that I'm more lucid I remember a discussion on that very topic back at the beginning of summer. So yes, with the addition of Reckless damage and no-static-damage-on-reaping-strike-miss, the tempest will be clearly ahead.

It does not. Bloodclaw deals more damage than Reckless for a Great Weapon Fighter. +18 damage on hit is better than +12 on hit, and the drop from +6d8 critical dice to +6d6 is not nearly enough to beat that.

Once again, yes, you're right. Again, I thought the item powers were dailies or encounters at the least, not at-wills. I was tired

Anyhow, I apologize for the errors in my calculations. I'd offer to fix them, but I just don't have the time at the moment, and by the time I do I expect this thread will be far past my calcs.

Ok, so yes, RAW the tempest is quite ahead of the great weapon fighter. That makes me a sad panda. At least if they're going to have the highest damage for a fighter, they should have to give up more defense. They shouldn't be able to beat a great weapon fighter in both damage and durability, that's just wrong. Anyway, I guess that's up to house rules or errata now, isn't it?

I also agree with Obryn, however, that I don't think great weapon fighters are as behind as at-will damage indicates. Like I said, at 29 there's a fighter daily doing 8[W] damage; with my sample fighter (and not counting the damage bonus from Reckless or Bloodclaw) you do around 175 on a crit with that The next best thing a tempest can get is a power that does 3 attacks, 2[w] per hit with bonus damage for successive hits ... not nearly as impressive, in my eyes.

 

[Obryn]

I also agree with Obryn, however, that I don't think great weapon fighters are as behind as at-will damage indicates. Like I said, at 29 there's a fighter daily doing 8[W] damage; with my sample fighter (and not counting the damage bonus from Reckless or Bloodclaw) you do around 175 on a crit with that The next best thing a tempest can get is a power that does 3 attacks, 2[w] per hit with bonus damage for successive hits ... not nearly as impressive, in my eyes.

I think the key point is that simple "DPR" calculations (which I've never been a fan of, FWIW) are much less useful in 4e than they were in 3e. The powers systems, extra damage dice, and special effects all make DPR calculations far less worthwhile.

I mean, if you have a choice between a power that does 3[w] damage and a hypothetical one that does Str Bonus damage, but stuns the foe for 1 round, DPR calculations will never account for how much better that second power is.

-O

 

[Milambus]

As a Tactical Warlord I would much rather have a fighter using a big Two-hander, rather than have them Duel Wielding.

 

[Mengu]

As a Tactical Warlord I would much rather have a fighter using a big Two-hander, rather than have them Duel Wielding.

True, but I would rather they have Battlerager Vigor for the extra damage, and so I don't have to heal them as often.

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that Battlerager is hurting Greatweapon fighter as an option.

 

[aurance]

I think the key point is that simple "DPR" calculations (which I've never been a fan of, FWIW) are much less useful in 4e than they were in 3e. The powers systems, extra damage dice, and special effects all make DPR calculations far less worthwhile.

I mean, if you have a choice between a power that does 3[w] damage and a hypothetical one that does Str Bonus damage, but stuns the foe for 1 round, DPR calculations will never account for how much better that second power is.

-O

I agree with this in general. But when we're talking about two types of fighters who do nearly the same type of things (defend, while sacrificing a little bit of defense for offense), the DPR comparison is much more relevant; i.e. the confounding variables are relatively few.

 

[aurance]

I also agree with Obryn, however, that I don't think great weapon fighters are as behind as at-will damage indicates. Like I said, at 29 there's a fighter daily doing 8[W] damage; with my sample fighter (and not counting the damage bonus from Reckless or Bloodclaw) you do around 175 on a crit with that The next best thing a tempest can get is a power that does 3 attacks, 2[w] per hit with bonus damage for successive hits ... not nearly as impressive, in my eyes.

Catastrophic Flurry (the 2[w]+str x 3 attacks power) will almost always do more damage on average than Avalanche of Steel (the 8[w]+str power). Neither power is weapon style specific. Sorry to keep picking on your math. There is some satisfaction in getting one giant crit though, as opposed to several smaller hits.

 

[Lord Sessadore]

Right ... I totally forgot about the static damage bonus to each attack again. My bad. But still, the great weapon fighter will come out ahead with either power, since he has a larger damage die (the extra ~+3 damage to each attack from being a tempest won't stack up as much, in my opinion). And, in fact, having the three attacks would make high crit more valuable. Which means the tempest is really stuck without a paddle there

I might be dreaming, but was there some warlord power or other that gave a higher (or guaranteed? that seems too good) crit chance to an ally? I'm probably hallucinating, but if anyone knows for sure or not, I'd appreciate a reference.

 

[aurance]

I might be dreaming, but was there some warlord power or other that gave a higher (or guaranteed? that seems too good) crit chance to an ally? I'm probably hallucinating, but if anyone knows for sure or not, I'd appreciate a reference.

Sunder Armor, encounter level 7. It's a good power to use before going action point nova on a solo bad guy.

 

[Obryn]

I agree with this in general. But when we're talking about two types of fighters who do nearly the same type of things (defend, while sacrificing a little bit of defense for offense), the DPR comparison is much more relevant; i.e. the confounding variables are relatively few.

It's kinda not, though, in-game. If you can find a way to put stunning, dazing, slowing, and blinding - along with area attacks, pushes, and pulls; and along with bonuses to your allies - into a formula, sure, but as it stands this DPR stuff has little relevance to actual combat in 4e - certainly less relevance than it did in 3e..

The special effects are what really elevate combat, even for fighters.

-O