D&D (2024) The math of the GWF Fighting Style and why its as good as a +1 (and possibly better than defense)

[ezo]

Something has to be wrong. Theres no way TWF with a total of 46.5 average damage before accuracy adjustment per round beats GWF with a total of 52 average damage before accuracy adjustment per round.

I'll double-check it tomorrow. I added TWF as an afterthought, so there could be something I messed up on. I'll let you know.

Found it. It was adding damage for both weapons (d8 and d6) in each of the 5 attacks made each round. Updated the post above and thanks!

 

[FrogReaver]

I'll double-check it tomorrow. I added TWF as an afterthought, so there could be something I messed up on. I'll let you know.

Found it. It was adding damage for both weapons (d8 and d6) in each of the 5 attacks made each round. Updated the post above and thanks!

Looks better. I’m personally surprised about GWF vs Defense B (defensive style). I don’t think anything is wrong with your sim just that result of GWF being better surprised me.

 

[FrogReaver]

@ezo can you run a defensive duelist (should just be the same as increasing ac) vs GWM version through your sim?

 

[ECMO3]

Ok with some specific asumptions it is as good as a +1 damage ..... then why not just make it a +1 damage ????

 

[clearstream]

Because it's 2d6. So it's ((3+3+3+4+5+6)/6)*2, or divide by 3.

I'm just being flippant, @Charlaquin's intent was clear!

 

[clearstream]

I'll double-check it tomorrow. I added TWF as an afterthought, so there could be something I messed up on. I'll let you know.

Found it. It was adding damage for both weapons (d8 and d6) in each of the 5 attacks made each round. Updated the post above and thanks!

Does the ranking change at levels the game is more often played. Levels 5 and 9, say?

 

[Ashrym]

Ok with some specific asumptions it is as good as a +1 damage ..... then why not just make it a +1 damage ????

A greater degree of diversity in fighting style feats would be my first thought.

My second thought is that an eldritch knight subbing in truestrike, green-flame blade, or booming blade for an attack adds several more dice into the equation. Truestrike dice at 11th level is 4d6 using a greatsword. That's 16 average damage vs 14 for the +2 damage bonus as long as the INT bonus equals the STR bonus.

That got me thinking that in epic tier the cantrip attack does more damage in the attack chain but the rest of the attacks still do less so dueling would still be overall more damaging, but the base weapon is still more damaging but a person would be looking for niche builds along that line of reasoning.

So that led my thoughts to the paladin and smites. A thunderous smite in a 3rd level spell slot with a greatsword does 6d6 for 24 damage instead of 21 for +3 damage. I think there's a place for the fighting style with that low roll protection and better average while smiting significant opponents. It also benefits d6 smites better than d8 smites to close the damage gap a little and therefore better encourages those d6 smites with status effects over just d8 smites.

Then I thought about d4 bonus damage spells paladins have. Divine favor or crusader's mantle adds with the great weapon fighting style +1.75 damage. With both on it's +2.5 damage. So the EK at higher levels concentrating on enlarge and also subbing in cantrip attacks or the paladin concentrating on elemental weapon in a higher slot plus divine favor suddenly look better. That paladin is getting +3.25 and better smites.

After that I thought about hunter's mark. Then I thought the base damage argument still applies but there aren't enough bonus dice in hunter's mark to catch up in the direct comparison. Elemental weapon upcast would be better.

I think we have to make assumptions to keep the damage down to +1 when instead there are options for players to stack on dice to take advantage of those mechanics for a better effect.

Anyone taking a weapon like that for damage anyway is going to consider the fighting style. The easiest way to make better use of this particular fighting style is by using classes that can stack on several dice. It seems made for a paladin -- if I roll a natural 20 for a crit I can apply my bonus action for a smite spell and combine the extra dice from the crit with the low roll protection from the feat to make sure my crits count for a lot.

I don't think the fighting style is nearly as bad as some people think because we're not looking at the bigger picture.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It’s very simple. (3+3+3+4+5+6)/6=4 and 4*2=8, so the expected damage per attack on a greatsword with Great Weapon Fighting is 8. Compared to the 7 without Great Weapon Fighting. So, +1 expected damage, compared to the +2 you get from Dueling or the +[Dex mod] or +[Str mod] from Two Weapon Fighting. Obviously, Great Weapon Fighting is the worst of these options by a wide margin.

That said, you're applying GWF to arguably the best damage dice for weapons (2d6), so while the absolute benefit is less on average, you are on the net still doing more damage than you would if you went for the other choices. No one-handed weapon does more than 1d8+MOD damage when wielded in one hand, so getting +2 is very nearly the same as going from 1d8 to 1d12, because the static damage bonus doesn't carry forward into crits (whereas GWF does apply to crits), trading lower maximum for higher minimum damage. But 1d12 is merely comparable to plain 2d6, and 1d8+2 (average 6.5) is still worse than 2d{3,3,3,4,5,6} (average 8) by 1.5 points. The bigger issue with Dueling is that it allows you to carry a shield and get +2 damage, meaning it acts like a

Of course, I still think GWF should do something about it being pretty clearly the worst choice of the set, but I'm not sure what that should be without accidentally making it the best of the set. Perhaps have it increase crit range with one chosen compatible weapon type, which you can then swap out whenever you gain a new level?

Assuming a +5 modifier and 60% hit rate, which contains the percentage points of critting inside it, here's some number cruching.

Duelist: 0.55(1d8+7)+0.05(2d8+7) = 0.55(11.5)+0.05(16) = 7.125 expected damage per attack (eDPA)
Current GWF: 0.55(2d{3,3,3,4,5,6}+5)+0.05(4d{3,3,3,4,5,6}+5) = 0.55(13)+0.05(21) = 8.2 eDPA
"Revised" GWF: 0.5(13)+0.1(21) = 8.6 eDPA

Relatively modest increase, but now at least closer to that of Dueling, and more importantly having its own distinctive benefit (playing real nice with crit-fishing builds). Diegetically, you're throwing your all into these attacks (whether it's actually a "great weapon" or just a versatile one). This might still be the weakest fighting style option, but it would have a place, especially since Advantage isn't that hard to get on attacks at higher levels, and characters often get at least two attacks per Attack. With Advantage, my "Revised" GWF becomes 0.65(13)+0.19(12) = 12.44 eDPA, while Duelist only increases from 7.125 to 0.7425(9.5)+0.0975(14) = 8.41875.

Again, not saying this makes it GOOD, just that this would work as a simple, ready-made "fix" for it being smaller in absolute terms than the comparable options for weapons with smaller dice.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

A greater degree of diversity in fighting style feats would be my first thought.

My second thought is that an eldritch knight subbing in truestrike, green-flame blade, or booming blade for an attack adds several more dice into the equation. Truestrike dice at 11th level is 4d6 using a greatsword. That's 16 average damage vs 14 for the +2 damage bonus as long as the INT bonus equals the STR bonus.

That got me thinking that in epic tier the cantrip attack does more damage in the attack chain but the rest of the attacks still do less so dueling would still be overall more damaging, but the base weapon is still more damaging but a person would be looking for niche builds along that line of reasoning.

So that led my thoughts to the paladin and smites. A thunderous smite in a 3rd level spell slot with a greatsword does 6d6 for 24 damage instead of 21 for +3 damage. I think there's a place for the fighting style with that low roll protection and better average while smiting significant opponents. It also benefits d6 smites better than d8 smites to close the damage gap a little and therefore better encourages those d6 smites with status effects over just d8 smites.

Then I thought about d4 bonus damage spells paladins have. Divine favor or crusader's mantle adds with the great weapon fighting style +1.75 damage. With both on it's +2.5 damage. So the EK at higher levels concentrating on enlarge and also subbing in cantrip attacks or the paladin concentrating on elemental weapon in a higher slot plus divine favor suddenly look better. That paladin is getting +3.25 and better smites.

After that I thought about hunter's mark. Then I thought the base damage argument still applies but there aren't enough bonus dice in hunter's mark to catch up in the direct comparison. Elemental weapon upcast would be better.

I think we have to make assumptions to keep the damage down to +1 when instead there are options for players to stack on dice to take advantage of those mechanics for a better effect.

Anyone taking a weapon like that for damage anyway is going to consider the fighting style. The easiest way to make better use of this particular fighting style is by using classes that can stack on several dice. It seems made for a paladin -- if I roll a natural 20 for a crit I can apply my bonus action for a smite spell and combine the extra dice from the crit with the low roll protection from the feat to make sure my crits count for a lot.

I don't think the fighting style is nearly as bad as some people think because we're not looking at the bigger picture.

I was given to understand that GWF exclusively applied to the dice of the actual weapon itself. Wasn't that a "rules clarification" that was handed down during 5.0 at some point? I swear I remember it and people being Rather Annoyed about it.

Edit: Yep. Back in 2015, when Crawford's tweets were still canonical rule clarifications, rather than <things Mr. Crawford does at his own table that have no actual bearing on anything else,> he explicitly said that GWF only applies to the weapon's actual damage dice, not Smite damage nor other sources of bonus damage on a weapon attack (e.g. Battle Master maneuvers). The one exception is magical weapons, e.g. flame tongue, because the extra fire damage dice are part of that weapon, not a bonus effect tacked on top.

 

[FrogReaver]

I was given to understand that GWF exclusively applied to the dice of the actual weapon itself. Wasn't that a "rules clarification" that was handed down during 5.0 at some point? I swear I remember it and people being Rather Annoyed about it.

Edit: Yep. Back in 2015, when Crawford's tweets were still canonical rule clarifications, rather than <things Mr. Crawford does at his own table that have no actual bearing on anything else,> he explicitly said that GWF only applies to the weapon's actual damage dice, not Smite damage nor other sources of bonus damage on a weapon attack (e.g. Battle Master maneuvers).

Doesn’t appear to be worded the same way in 2024. I believe it applies to all damage dice in 2024.