Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 CelticPaladin Jul 03, 2014 13:16:56	Over at Enworld, someone ran a simulation: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?356419-Great-Weapon-Fighting&prefixid=dndnext   His findings were that the Greatsword does an average of 1 more damage, but that the Great Axe does max damage twice as often. I'm not math person. Can anyone verify this? I think it seems like a fine give and take.
#2 Lawolf Jul 03, 2014 13:21:28	CelticPaladin wrote:
#3 Polaris Jul 03, 2014 13:38:32	Lawolf wrote:
#4 Lawolf Jul 03, 2014 13:46:41	Polaris wrote:
#5 Paraxis Jul 03, 2014 13:45:57	Polaris wrote:
#6 Polaris Jul 03, 2014 13:51:34	Paraxis wrote:
#7 jaelis Jul 03, 2014 13:49:01	I think I might have to houserule greatswords and mauls to 1d12. The great weapon fighting issue is a bit too much for me otherwise.
#8 Mithrus Jul 03, 2014 13:55:20	They should not have used a reroll mechanic in a *basic* version of the game. It would have been vastly better to keep the rules much simpler, such as "Count all 1s and 2s as 3s" or similar, and keep to using a single die (1d12) instead of multiple (2d6). Save more complicated damage mechanics for optional modules.
#9 Polaris Jul 03, 2014 14:00:04	Mithrus wrote:
#10 Lawolf Jul 03, 2014 14:04:49	Polaris wrote:
#11 Polaris Jul 03, 2014 14:06:08	Lawolf wrote:
#12 Paraxis Jul 03, 2014 14:15:43	If the expected average damage gain is around +2, a simple replacement would be you gain +2 damage when using two-handed weapons.  If archers can get a +2 to attack rolls, it doesn't seem to out of whack.
#13 CelticPaladin Jul 03, 2014 14:16:43	How would it affect if you could only reroll the Greatsword's damage if it were snake eyes? That's 2 damage. Would this intepretation, while not RAW, make the dichotomy more viable?
#14 Polaris Jul 03, 2014 14:58:48	CelticPaladin wrote:
#15 mellored Jul 03, 2014 15:31:56	Yyou get +2 damage on 1 handed weapons. And +5 1/turn on 2-weapons. Greataxes simply suck.
#16 bawylie Jul 03, 2014 15:33:44	Yeah, I'm gonna HR that to be the weapon's damage value. If less than 3, then re-roll.    That seems to be the spirit of the thing, if not the letter.
#17 Pyromantic Jul 03, 2014 17:10:52	Expected damage on 2d6 with a single reroll of 1s and 2s is 8 and a third.  For d12 it's 7 and a third.  The 2d6 also has significantly lower variance.    The greatsword definitely gets an edge with this feature.
#18 Eric888 Jul 03, 2014 17:48:44	I imagine the Great Axe damage was a carry over from the previous rules for critical hits. Critical hits used to only add one die, so a 2d6 weapon would do 3d6 on a crit, whereas a d12 weapon would do 2d12. So great axes did slightly less damage on normal hits, but significantly more on a crit.   When they changed how crits work, they overlooked how this would affect the great axe, which makes it pretty terrible. An unfortunate oversight.
#19 Shasarak Jul 03, 2014 20:15:18	As I tend to favour the Greatsword over the Great Axe then I guess my reaction is a pleasent sense of well being and satisfaction.
#20 ChrisCarlson Jul 03, 2014 20:17:13	Shasarak wrote:
#21 FFSAA Jul 03, 2014 20:39:08	Lawolf wrote:
#22 Shasarak Jul 03, 2014 20:43:15	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#23 Pyromantic Jul 04, 2014 11:17:15	Looked over this thread again and wanted to comment on a couple of things.   CelticPaladin wrote:
#24 Karnos Jul 04, 2014 11:21:11	This could be fixed in the future through feats.  For example, a weapon specilization feat might add "1 extra die of damage" to a weapon, making the great axe 2d12 vs 3d6 for great sword.
#25 kalil Jul 04, 2014 11:36:21	What annoys me the most about all this is that the greataxe and greatsword were almost perfectly balanced in the last playtest packet. Then they go muck it up in their internal "play testing". Sad really :/
#26 Polaris Jul 04, 2014 11:41:21	kalil wrote:
#27 Unahim Jul 04, 2014 11:59:20	I'll just add a house rule that adds a weapon property to weapons such as the greataxe. It'll make it so that the weapon uses a variation of the old crit rule (maximize your normal damage, roll the 'doubled' dice) instead of the new one. That makes a greataxe crit 13-24 base damage, while a greatsword would crit 4-24. I'd keep tweaking it from there, but a boring solution such as "all weapons use a d12" is not my cup of tea. Perhaps others prefer the expedience of such a fix, though.   Call it "Devastating".   The greatsword's advantage is mostly one of preference outside of great weapon fighters (and i personally reject the idea that every 2h weapon needs to be exactly as mathematically powerful in such a fighter's hands as all others) so this should be more than enough, imo.
#28 moes1980 Jul 04, 2014 12:04:52	In the last play test a crit meant you did max damage plus one extra damage die. So a crit with great sword was 12+1d6 and great ax was 12+1d12. So great sword did average one extra point of damage on a hit but great ax had more nasty crit. He ever, in the new rules crits just roll double damage dice. Sounds like they changed the crit rules without considering how it affected the two great weapons. Now, the only thing the great ax has going for it is it's a cheaper weapon.
#42 Sword_of_Spirit Jul 04, 2014 18:59:09	How would it work if the greatsword's numbers had to be 1 or 2 on both dice, and you rerolled them both? Looks like you'd be rerolling the greatsword around 11% of the time to the greataxe's 17%. How does average damage come out?
#43 Pyromantic Jul 04, 2014 19:16:48	Expected damage on the greatsword hit goes to 7 and 4/9.  Very close to the greataxe...but you are significantly reducing the effectiveness of the feature, and it may no longer be competitive.
#44 Leugren Jul 04, 2014 19:38:38	Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
#45 Archon007 Jul 05, 2014 18:44:04	Sorry I'm a roleplayer that's why I play roleplaying games, not a min/maxer so 1 or 2 point difference isn't going to change what my character would use. If I wanted to min/max I would play an MMO.
(Reply to #45) Leugren	Archon007 wrote:
#47 FFSAA Jul 05, 2014 19:57:14	Leugren wrote:
#48 Sword_of_Spirit Jul 05, 2014 21:09:36	Pyromantic wrote:
#49 Ahglock Jul 06, 2014 13:54:07	Leugren wrote:
(Reply to #49) Leugren	Ahglock wrote:
(Reply to #45) Samrin	Archon007 wrote:
#52 Lawolf Jul 06, 2014 16:21:49	Anyone who says their PC chooses an inferior weapon for RP purposes is deluding themselves.    What trained professional in the art of war would not use the best equipment available. When you need to trust your safety to your weapon every single day, only an idiot would choose the inferior weapon.
(Reply to #52) AaronOfBarbaria	Lawolf wrote:
#54 MechaPilot Jul 06, 2014 17:39:00	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#55 Pyromantic Jul 06, 2014 17:46:22	Well, here's a case in which I disagree with people on both sides of the spectrum.   Samrin wrote:
#56 Nimloh Jul 06, 2014 17:47:42	Can someone explain what the big deal is? I'm seeing numbers in this thread of 7.33 (GA) vs. 8.33 (GS) or similar. Is it really a point difference per swing?
#57 Lawolf Jul 06, 2014 17:52:33	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#58 Shasarak Jul 06, 2014 17:51:51	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #54) AaronOfBarbaria	MechaPilot wrote:
(Reply to #57) AaronOfBarbaria	Lawolf wrote:
#61 MechaPilot Jul 06, 2014 18:01:37	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#62 quindia Jul 06, 2014 18:02:08	There's no need for EITHER side to call names.   It CAN be a roleplaying choice to choose a specific weapon and you're not 'moronic' for not worrying about a 1-2hp average.    If you enjoy running all these numbers and that adds to your enjoyment of the game great. I normally DM, but when I have the occasion to play I generally have a concept in mind and my choice of equipment will be based on that, regardless if it is the optimum gear.   As a DM, I don't mind if players optimise their characters, but if I feel you're wading through encounters with ease, guess what? The monsters start to have more hit points. You're extra damage output goes out the window. Conversely, if characters aren't optimized and seem to be struggling early on, I might drop a monster or reduce their hit points.
#63 Lawolf Jul 06, 2014 18:04:46	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #61) AaronOfBarbaria	MechaPilot wrote:
#65 MechaPilot Jul 06, 2014 18:21:25	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #63) AaronOfBarbaria	Lawolf wrote:
#67 Pyromantic Jul 06, 2014 18:39:23	Leugren wrote:
#68 Sword_of_Spirit Jul 06, 2014 18:43:27	I also like to create a "bardiche" that is simply a refluffed greatsword. Anyone who wants to wield an axe with greatsword damage uses a bardiche. I even have vague recollections of some cool axe-wielding barbarian pictures which fit my image of what I would call my D&Dized bardiche. To make the standard greataxe more useful, I make it better at chopping through objects than a greatsword. So your bardiche is there if you just want to damage monsters. If you want to break through the door to get to them, use a greataxe.
#69 Orethalion Jul 06, 2014 21:53:51	Pyromantic wrote:
#70 Foxface Jul 06, 2014 22:20:28	Generally speaking, I prefer axes to have wider variance of damage, coupled with higher spike damage in the form of 3x damage on crits, but lower accuracy.  I'll probably tweak the weapon chart to match my priorities.
#71 Tony_Vargas Jul 06, 2014 23:17:05	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#72 ORC_Lolth Jul 06, 2014 23:41:05	I've removed content from this thread because Trolling & Baiting are violations of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: http://www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_company_about_codeofconduct Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the Report Post button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
#73 Samrin Jul 07, 2014 6:11:08	Tony_Vargas wrote:
(Reply to #71) AaronOfBarbaria	Tony_Vargas wrote:
#75 Samrin Jul 07, 2014 7:05:38	The great axe is strictly inferior for no good reason. Your argument has nothing to do with mine in terms of game mechanics. The sidearm choice largely comes down to politics and bureaucrats deciding what's best for the city rather than the officer.   Smaller caliber rounds hold significant advantages over larger caliber rounds. There are many pros and cons to each. You're comparing apples to oranges here.
#76 Pyromantic Jul 07, 2014 7:18:20	Orethalion wrote:
#77 Leugren Jul 07, 2014 7:30:00	Pyromantic wrote:
(Reply to #75) AaronOfBarbaria	Samrin wrote:
#79 Samrin Jul 07, 2014 9:25:50	Budget constraints don't really matter for this argument when you consider starting equipment. The great sword is a mechanically superior weapon in the basic rules. It wasn't in the playtest. They need to balance them
#80 Lawolf Jul 07, 2014 9:38:27	Samrin wrote:
(Reply to #79) AaronOfBarbaria	Samrin wrote:
#82 Lawolf Jul 07, 2014 10:13:10	Odd, the maul does 2d6 and only costs 10 GP. Why use a greataxe and save 20 when you can use a maul and save 40 while still dealing just as much damage as te greatsword.
#83 Grifford Jul 07, 2014 10:22:49	It's more absurd to assume that there's no reason behind the disparity between the two weapons than to assume otherwise. Until someone on the dev team comes out and tells us why all the big 2H weapons aren't doing the same damage, we'll just be forced to assume that the intention is self-evident in the stats alone.    Meaning that the reason is just that greatswords are simply better than greataxes, not by some strange oversight, but simply by design. Since there isn't a whole lot of subtlety in the rules for dealing damage, the choice to make one weapon deal 2d6 and another deal 1d12 is simply to make one better than the other. End of story.   The greataxe is not a "trap option". In black-and-white, on the page, it's simply an inferior weapon to the greatsword. It's slightly cheaper, that's it.   If I had my druthers, I'd allow a greataxe to deal slashing and bludgeoning damage to give it a tactical niche that neither the greatsword nor the maul, for that matter, can occupy. That alone, for me, would create incentive for the greataxe without leveling it off with the greatsword, damage-wise.
(Reply to #82) AaronOfBarbaria	Lawolf wrote:
#85 ChrisCarlson Jul 07, 2014 10:38:43	Mauls are also the most heavy of all three. Significantly. For what it's worth...
#86 Lawolf Jul 07, 2014 10:46:22	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#87 ChrisCarlson Jul 07, 2014 10:59:31	Lawolf wrote:
#88 Tony_Vargas Jul 07, 2014 16:36:32	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#89 Lawolf Jul 07, 2014 16:59:09	Here is an interesting fact.   The damage boost from using the greatsword/maul over the greataxe when combined with great weapon fighting style is between +7% to +10%. The damage boost from +1 to hit is usually around +5% to +7%. So the DPR increase from choosing the greatsword/maul over the greataxe almost universally greater than a flat +1 to hit. Note that this calculation doesn't take into account hits required to kill, which further favor the more stable 2d6 damage weapons.   Would you feel the game was balanced if the greatsword and maul both did 1d12 damage like the greataxe, but also received a +1 bonus to attack rolls? If that feels unbalanced to you, then how can you feel that the greatsword and maul are balanced as is?
(Reply to #89) AaronOfBarbaria	Lawolf wrote:
#91 Tony_Vargas Jul 08, 2014 9:16:39	Lawolf wrote:
#92 Lawolf Jul 08, 2014 10:31:53	Tony_Vargas wrote:
#93 DemoMonkey Jul 10, 2014 15:09:05	From the Mike Mearls tweets thread:   @s_grindeland  : Liked playtest Greataxe critting for more damage vs Greatsword as more reliable damage. Now only flavor & gp favor the Greataxe @wotc_rodney : Also anyone that gets to roll one extra die on crits will favor the greataxe (like barbarians). ‏@s_grindeland : touché salesman - touché @GX_Sigma : Wait, is that a feat or something? Fighters don't get that, right? @wotc_rodney  : Barbarian class feature.   So, what say you Mathevengers? Does this make the Axe the best choice for Barbarians?
#94 Lawolf Jul 10, 2014 15:28:56	DemoMonkey wrote:
#95 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 10, 2014 18:33:06	I'm missing something on the math. A Greatsword has a 1/3 chance of rolling a 1or 2. That's even true on a re roll. The Great axe only a1/6 chance that's also on the re roll. So the Great Axe with this ability has a better chance of doing more dmg on a constant basis then the sword. Overall the sword can hit big but it has a higher ratio to snake eyes and hit small.
#96 jaelis Jul 10, 2014 18:58:30	Fantasyfilmsman wrote:
#97 Polaris Jul 10, 2014 19:00:10	Fantasyfilmsman wrote:
#98 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 10, 2014 19:08:16	But also a significant chance or rerolling those same numbers or actually decreasing my damage compared to the Great Axe. Also the Great Axe has a better chance with one roll to hit max where the great Sword has to have a Six on one die for that to ever happen. Now add in criticals the Great Axe can hit for 24 where the sword hits for 18.  It may be high reward with the axe but it's also low risk for min dmg. Hence why the different die. Cause in a game you never know when that may happen and I've seen it happen a lot in my 31 years at the table.
#99 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 10, 2014 19:13:45	Thanks for the replies. I just wanted to make sure my math was correct and got where everyone was coming from. I just like the fact that the axe guy can decimate a high lvl monster in that one fight compared to the sword. As anything you never know and that to me is why you would take the axe over the sword. There can just be those moments of are you kidding me rolls that turn into memorable memories for a player and why the Axe should not be changed or why someone would choose it.
#100 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 10, 2014 19:18:45	Sorry strike that on the crit. Both can do equal. I guess I like a high risk high reward style of an axe. Now if they add feats it could get very interesting.
(Reply to #53) CVB	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#102 DemoMonkey Jul 11, 2014 9:05:13	If there were even one circumstance or condition under which the Greataxe was the better choice - other than "Oh no, wherever will I find an extra 20 gold? Perhaps I'll trade in this solid silver ogre statue we picked up yesterday."  - I would be much happier.   Actually, thats an interesting challenge. Can anyone FIND a combination of circumstances - other than "Do I have the extra 20 gold for the greatsword" under which the Greataxe is a better choice than the Greatsword, taking only game rules into account?
#103 Lawolf Jul 11, 2014 9:09:54	DemoMonkey wrote:
#104 DemoMonkey Jul 11, 2014 9:26:20	"P.S. Mauls also deal 2d6 damage and cost 10 GP less than the axe!!!"   That's true. And I don't think the handful of gold or 3 or 4 extra pounds of weight are significant. However Bludgeoning vs Slashing is an actual difference that can be very significant vs certain monsters. So I left the maul out of the comparison deliberately.
(Reply to #102) AaronOfBarbaria	DemoMonkey wrote:
#106 Lawolf Jul 11, 2014 9:36:55	DemoMonkey wrote:
#107 jaelis Jul 11, 2014 9:52:41	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#108 DemoMonkey Jul 11, 2014 11:14:12	"Circumstances like a player desiring to have a greater chance to roll 9+ on each damage roll, even if it means greater chance of rolling 4 or less - which they don't as much care about because they get to re-roll each 1 or 2 once, thus having an even bigger chance of getting 9+?"   Good clarification, Aaron. Specifically, no, not because of reasons like that. Not for reasons of player psychology or aesthetics. Those are perfectly valid reasons for making a choice if they add to your fun ("Axes are cooll! Gunna use an axe!"); I'm just looking for a situation in which the rules make it a better choice to take the Axe.   Also, if you look further up someone already crunched the numbers on that promised "roll an extra dice", and the Axe STILL comes in second, so no love there.
#109 Pyromantic Jul 11, 2014 11:04:51	Specifically in reference to GW fighting, in general it's a pretty extreme corner case to prefer GA over GS, and even in such cases the difference would be miniscule.  Actually, only 11+ is more likely on d12 over 2d6 with the reroll.  (The probabily of 10+ on d12 is 21/72, approximately 0.2917, while on 2d6 it's 24/81, approximately 0.2962.)  However, even if facing a target that has 11 or 12 hit points plus your flat modifier, that doesn't necessarily give GA the advantage for a couple of reasons.  Firstly, crits.  If your opponent's hp total falls into that range then the more reliable damage of the GS makes it much more likely to defeat the opponent in a single crit.  Secondly, even if you are slightly more likely to defeat the target in a single hit with the GA, depending on the particular bonuses and totals it may be significantly more likely to require a third hit over the GS, in which case the GS is the better choice.  So, you're pretty well limited to situations in which the enemy's hit points falls into a narrow range and you need to take it out now.   We have no reasonable way to measure GA with GS for the barbarian at the moment, which has been indicated will still have a way to add a single die to damage.  It depends on the frequency at which you activate that effect.
#110 Sword_of_Spirit Jul 11, 2014 14:46:35	Okay, try it this way.   1. Barbarians get a feature that lets them roll an additional extra die on a crit. So with the greatsword that is a total of 5d6, while with the greataxe it is 3d12. How does the average damage math work out this way? (I'm assuming greatsword is still ahead.) 2. Pretend barbarians get fighting styles, so they can use great-weapon fighting along with that. How about now?
#111 Sifaka Jul 11, 2014 15:18:06	Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
#112 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 11, 2014 15:58:01	The only downside to the sword is it has a higher chance to do less damage from GWF. If you roll double 2's you have a higher chance to roll a 2 then the axe but the axe can still get a one just only 1/12 th the time.
#113 Lawolf Jul 11, 2014 16:09:08	Fantasyfilmsman wrote:
#114 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 11, 2014 16:21:47	I'm talking about dropping damage. If I roll a 2 and another 2 for 4 damage I have a higher chance of rolling lower damage and a 1/6th chance on each die to roll a 1. So if I pick up 2 dice the chance of me rolling a 1 is 33%.  The theory of adding in you have to roll this Many times may get you an average but the % chance of my one roll a 1 is greater then the axe which if I roll a 2 is only 1/12th the chance to actually drop in damage to a 1.   Overall yes you should in theory do more consistent damage over many rolls to do more dmg with a sword but on any given singular roll of GWF you have a higher basis to lose dmg with a Great Sword. Someone asked about a negative to using a Greatsword there it is.  There are times where you will lose 2 points of dmg to a roll. In the grand scheme of things does this matter but the way people act it does.  Right now I have a PC using the axe and frankly he's Crushing it.  We will see tonight how that goes for him but last Friday he was a beast and he never once had to use his GWF but again with only a1/6 the chance of that popping up per roll I expected as much.
#115 Lawolf Jul 11, 2014 16:30:56	Fantasyfilmsman wrote:
#116 durntaur Jul 11, 2014 16:58:35	Fantasyfilmsman wrote:
#117 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 11, 2014 17:43:58	I was taking it as per roll. I am not saying you throw out probability but it's still probability.  I can run all sorts of numbers. Hence basic damage. In % terms for averages in terms of how the boards have done it may be mathmatically correct but it's still a probability.  Hence the dice does not know how many times I have rolled. You can go over all the probabilitys but what then is the probability that you will roll a 1+2+3+4+5+6 on a given dice to get your average. Someone asked what would be the downside of the sword. The fact is you can turn a 4 into a 2.   Over the course of many rolls the probability may be low but it still can happen and some may find that bothersome.  In action when going back over my Friday adventure last week the Great sword did 83 dmg for a 6.91 DPR. The Axe did 91 for a 7.58 DPR. May be a small sample size of 12 different rolls but that's what happened. And GWF turned two 1's into  10. The sword lost damage three times by 1 and gained damage by 4 on a roll.  Maybe over the course of a full career the Greatsword will do more. Statically speaking by the math I see here that may be the case but it's still only a probability.
#118 jaelis Jul 11, 2014 18:16:08	I guess your point is something like: "I would really hate hate hate it if I rolled my damage, and then rerolled for a result two lower than what I started with. This is possible with the sword, but not with the axe. Therefore I like the axe."   OK, but then you can still just say you won't reroll double 2's and you'll still be better off with the sword.
#119 Fantasyfilmsman Jul 11, 2014 18:44:45	We'll if someone feels that way. I don't. I was just responding to someone asking what disadvantage the Greatsword has with GWF and I posted.   Visually and thematically I like the axe better.  But I usually run Half Elf rouges when I play who love poison so as you can see I could care less about DPR and min/max classes.  I've DM' d enough power gamers is don't need to be one. Not a knock against the guys who do it just different style of play.  If you are not well rounded at my table you will have a tough time depending on party size. I just find it fun to get in here and see where people are coming from and see all the people who need to change rules and throw away weapons because they don't stack up to one another. Though a bonus of 1 dmg each round when you are talking about monsters can be good and bad. It could be a complete waste or the difference between going another round or death. That's where the real question comes in.