The reason for this question/debate is: what would it be worth getting for a Bow/Crossbow user? Piercer or Sharpshooter?
By default I would assume Sharpshooter is better because it allows you to shoot at max range without disadvantage, ignore half and third cover, and take a reduction to hit chance for a flat 10 increase to damage.
Piercer would allow you every turn to reroll one low damage die every turn and on critical hit you can also roll an additional damage die along with critical bonus.
Would both be worth it, or perhaps neither?
Could also be a "depending on the level" answer. If over all the enemy has a lower base AC, just going for Sharpshooter's bonus damage every turn could make up for any misses. While if the base AC generally is higher, Piercer could help make sure each shot that hits deals as much damage as possible.
Sharpshooter is really, really, really, reaaaaalllly good. Piercer is not on the same level, but that's not to say it's bad. There may be some builds that would want to take both.
Sharpshooter has more than the +10/-5 thing. It also helps by allowing you to ignore 3/4 cover and you can attack at long range without disadvantage. It's pretty much a must have for any kind of archer build. Piercer on the other had is what I'd call a nice to have.
It also really depends on the weapon being used. A dart or a dagger won't benefit as much from a single damage reroll or from the extra die on crits. Where as a heavy crossbow will benefit from those features a lot more..
Which is frankly sad.. We still don't have any feats that really boosts daggers any in meaningful way, despite it being such an iconic weapon.
One thing to bear in mind, though it's not always going to be pertinent, is that while Sharpshooter offerous so much boost to an archer build that it often feels mandatory, Piercer works with all piercing weapons. If, as an example, you're playing a longbow fighter with a rapier for melee work, Sharpshooter turns off the moment you get pressed in close, while Piercer works as well with the rapier as it does with the bow. Not usually critical as very few characters try to make effective use of more than one weapon type, but it's worth bearing in mind for those that do.
Just a thought. The dex bonus that can come along with Piercer might require another perspective for a fair contrast. An ASI for +2 Dex and sharpshooter feat take up two. Piercer adds 1 dex and the abilities discussed. With other choice take a +1 dex feat and this is what should be compared to Sharpshooter. This would be something like the below. A tougher choice now. Thoughts?
PiercerTCoE, pg. 80
You gain a bonus to Strength or Dexterity. Once per turn, you can reroll the piercing damage from an attack. On a critical hit, you can roll one additional damage die.
Piercer: Reroll Damage: (No Action)
Piercer: Critical Hit: (No Action)
Skill ExpertTCoE, pg. 80
You gain proficiency in a skill. You also gain expertise in a skill which you are already proficient in.
Piercer is very good for longbow/crossbow-focused characters. I mean, it's good. Sharpshooter is better.
Bear in mind, that just last night, my Swashbuckler/Fighter got Piercer, and in his first three turns, he turned a 1 to a 4, a 2 into a 2, and a 1 to a 6. So, I'm pretty happy with Piercer. With Rakish Audacity (and his personality) he's usually on the front lines, so it's clearly the better option for my character. Any Dex-based character that does that uses ranged half the time or less, and uses a piercing weapon the other half or more should consider Piercer over Sharpshooter.
That said, the original question isn't about that. So let's talk about longbow/crossbow-focused characters in specific. Piercer is still good for them, just not as good. Let's look at the pros and cons:
Piercer: Pros: - Slightly increase your average damage - Significantly decrease your chance of doing minimum damage - Significantly increase your chance of doing maximum damage - Nice boost to damage on crits - More useful for "heavier" weapons, e.g. longbows and light and heavy crossbows. (1d10 weapons' average dmg goes up 1. 25, while 1d6 goes up .75. But the average isn't the reason to take this Feat, it's the distribution Cons: - Only comes into play 50% of the time on regular hits - Crits only happen 5% of the time (10% in a few cases) so doesn't apply often. - Less useful for "lighter weapons.
Sharpshooter: Pros: - No disadvantage on long range. Great when you can use it. - Ignoring 1/2 and 3/4 cover. This is pretty useless against stupid monsters. But it's the smart monsters that are usually the real threat and this is great against them. - -5 to hit for +10 damage. That's a large minus to take, but a huge damage bonus. PCs with Extra Attack can do an extra twenty points of damage every round. Cons - No disadvantage on long range. Great when you can use it... but in many campaigns, fighting at that kind of range is really rare. - Yes, that -5 is harsh, but for a character taking Sharphooter, every aspect of your character should be centered around maximizing your attack and damage rolls with that bow/crossbow, so it shouldn't be as bad as it sounds. Things like a +1 Bow, Bless, Bardic Inspiration, Faerie Fire, etc all mitigate that a lot.
Again, they're both really good Feats. But if you're just trying to be that gunship, staying at distance and unloading ranged damage into the enemy, Sharpshooter is better.
Piercer is better for my Hobgoblin Gloom Stalker. I got a free feat at level four, so I boosted my odd Con and even DEX with the ASI, then Piercer boosted my Dex to an even again. The 'ignores cover' bit of Sharpshooter is essentially nullified by my Fortune From The Many racial trait which can do the same thing since I'll usually have allies in sight. The +10 damage would be nice, since the - 5 to hit would be negated by hiding. This is a character that gets up close and nasty too, so Peircer is stronger overall.
I don't think it's particularly useful to compare half-feats and feats that don't boost a stat. They generally occupy different spaces within the concerns of building a character.
Almost always, some amount of your ASI's are dedicated to boosting an important ability score or two. Within that space, if you have an odd number to boost, then you would consider Piercer alongside the other relevant half-feats. There, it might be compared against things like slasher, skill expert, or squat nimbleness when it comes to the relative value it brings to the build.
The other portion of ASI's is dedicated to other abilities that help and even define the build. This is the space where Sharpshooter is considered and judged against other feats such as Polearm Master, Shield Master, Inspired Leader, Mounted Combatant etc when it comes to fleshing out the character's tactical identity.
For dedicated ranged characters I think Sharpshooter is a must. Beyond the damage, ignoring 1/2 and 3/4 cover is a huge boon. Meanwhile, Piercer is simply a nice option if starting with a 17 dex. If you were to take both, then which one you take first depends on how dedicated you are to staying at range versus mixing it up in melee as a switch-hitter.
Piercer is very good for longbow/crossbow-focused characters. I mean, it's good. Sharpshooter is better.
Bear in mind, that just last night, my Swashbuckler/Fighter got Piercer, and in his first three turns, he turned a 1 to a 4, a 2 into a 2, and a 1 to a 6. So, I'm pretty happy with Piercer. With Rakish Audacity (and his personality) he's usually on the front lines, so it's clearly the better option for my character. Any Dex-based character that does that uses ranged half the time or less, and uses a piercing weapon the other half or more should consider Piercer over Sharpshooter.
That said, the original question isn't about that. So let's talk about longbow/crossbow-focused characters in specific. Piercer is still good for them, just not as good. Let's look at the pros and cons:
Piercer: Pros: - Slightly increase your average damage - Significantly decrease your chance of doing minimum damage - Significantly increase your chance of doing maximum damage - Nice boost to damage on crits - More useful for "heavier" weapons, e.g. longbows and light and heavy crossbows. (1d10 weapons' average dmg goes up 1. 25, while 1d6 goes up .75. But the average isn't the reason to take this Feat, it's the distribution Cons: - Only comes into play 50% of the time on regular hits - Crits only happen 5% of the time (10% in a few cases) so doesn't apply often. - Less useful for "lighter weapons.
Sharpshooter: Pros: - No disadvantage on long range. Great when you can use it. - Ignoring 1/2 and 3/4 cover. This is pretty useless against stupid monsters. But it's the smart monsters that are usually the real threat and this is great against them. - -5 to hit for +10 damage. That's a large minus to take, but a huge damage bonus. PCs with Extra Attack can do an extra twenty points of damage every round. Cons - No disadvantage on long range. Great when you can use it... but in many campaigns, fighting at that kind of range is really rare. - Yes, that -5 is harsh, but for a character taking Sharphooter, every aspect of your character should be centered around maximizing your attack and damage rolls with that bow/crossbow, so it shouldn't be as bad as it sounds. Things like a +1 Bow, Bless, Bardic Inspiration, Faerie Fire, etc all mitigate that a lot.
Again, they're both really good Feats. But if you're just trying to be that gunship, staying at distance and unloading ranged damage into the enemy, Sharpshooter is better.
THIS! Is the most helpful post! I didn't even think to have a PC try to use Sharpshooter multiple times in a single round. For some reason I had assumed it was a 'once per turn,' (like most of the helpful yet not as good feat options). I am truly grateful you posted this!
I don't think it's particularly useful to compare half-feats and feats that don't boost a stat. They generally occupy different spaces within the concerns of building a character.
Almost always, some amount of your ASI's are dedicated to boosting an important ability score or two. Within that space, if you have an odd number to boost, then you would consider Piercer alongside the other relevant half-feats. There, it might be compared against things like slasher, skill expert, or squat nimbleness when it comes to the relative value it brings to the build.
The other portion of ASI's is dedicated to other abilities that help and even define the build. This is the space where Sharpshooter is considered and judged against other feats such as Polearm Master, Shield Master, Inspired Leader, Mounted Combatant etc when it comes to fleshing out the character's tactical identity.
For dedicated ranged characters I think Sharpshooter is a must. Beyond the damage, ignoring 1/2 and 3/4 cover is a huge boon. Meanwhile, Piercer is simply a nice option if starting with a 17 dex. If you were to take both, then which one you take first depends on how dedicated you are to staying at range versus mixing it up in melee as a switch-hitter.
Also if you plan on using a handcrossbow its pretty important as the 30ft shooting distance can come up a fair amount.
The reason for this question/debate is: what would it be worth getting for a Bow/Crossbow user? Piercer or Sharpshooter?
By default I would assume Sharpshooter is better because it allows you to shoot at max range without disadvantage, ignore half and third cover, and take a reduction to hit chance for a flat 10 increase to damage.
Piercer would allow you every turn to reroll one low damage die every turn and on critical hit you can also roll an additional damage die along with critical bonus.
Would both be worth it, or perhaps neither?
Could also be a "depending on the level" answer. If over all the enemy has a lower base AC, just going for Sharpshooter's bonus damage every turn could make up for any misses. While if the base AC generally is higher, Piercer could help make sure each shot that hits deals as much damage as possible.
So unsure!
Sharpshooter and Piercer on a Rogue is extra deadly with Steady Aim
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Sharpshooter is really, really, really, reaaaaalllly good. Piercer is not on the same level, but that's not to say it's bad. There may be some builds that would want to take both.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Sharpshooter has more than the +10/-5 thing. It also helps by allowing you to ignore 3/4 cover and you can attack at long range without disadvantage. It's pretty much a must have for any kind of archer build. Piercer on the other had is what I'd call a nice to have.
Both help with damage, but only one helps with hitting. Stuff that helps you hit is almost always powerful in 5E.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It also really depends on the weapon being used. A dart or a dagger won't benefit as much from a single damage reroll or from the extra die on crits. Where as a heavy crossbow will benefit from those features a lot more..
Which is frankly sad.. We still don't have any feats that really boosts daggers any in meaningful way, despite it being such an iconic weapon.
Sharpshooter is great for any ranged weapon
One thing to bear in mind, though it's not always going to be pertinent, is that while Sharpshooter offerous so much boost to an archer build that it often feels mandatory, Piercer works with all piercing weapons. If, as an example, you're playing a longbow fighter with a rapier for melee work, Sharpshooter turns off the moment you get pressed in close, while Piercer works as well with the rapier as it does with the bow. Not usually critical as very few characters try to make effective use of more than one weapon type, but it's worth bearing in mind for those that do.
Please do not contact or message me.
Just a thought. The dex bonus that can come along with Piercer might require another perspective for a fair contrast. An ASI for +2 Dex and sharpshooter feat take up two. Piercer adds 1 dex and the abilities discussed. With other choice take a +1 dex feat and this is what should be compared to Sharpshooter. This would be something like the below. A tougher choice now. Thoughts?
Piercer is very good for longbow/crossbow-focused characters. I mean, it's good.
Sharpshooter is better.
Bear in mind, that just last night, my Swashbuckler/Fighter got Piercer, and in his first three turns, he turned a 1 to a 4, a 2 into a 2, and a 1 to a 6. So, I'm pretty happy with Piercer. With Rakish Audacity (and his personality) he's usually on the front lines, so it's clearly the better option for my character. Any Dex-based character that does that uses ranged half the time or less, and uses a piercing weapon the other half or more should consider Piercer over Sharpshooter.
That said, the original question isn't about that. So let's talk about longbow/crossbow-focused characters in specific. Piercer is still good for them, just not as good. Let's look at the pros and cons:
Piercer:
Pros:
- Slightly increase your average damage
- Significantly decrease your chance of doing minimum damage
- Significantly increase your chance of doing maximum damage
- Nice boost to damage on crits
- More useful for "heavier" weapons, e.g. longbows and light and heavy crossbows. (1d10 weapons' average dmg goes up 1. 25, while 1d6 goes up .75. But the average isn't the reason to take this Feat, it's the distribution
Cons:
- Only comes into play 50% of the time on regular hits
- Crits only happen 5% of the time (10% in a few cases) so doesn't apply often.
- Less useful for "lighter weapons.
Sharpshooter:
Pros:
- No disadvantage on long range. Great when you can use it.
- Ignoring 1/2 and 3/4 cover. This is pretty useless against stupid monsters. But it's the smart monsters that are usually the real threat and this is great against them.
- -5 to hit for +10 damage. That's a large minus to take, but a huge damage bonus. PCs with Extra Attack can do an extra twenty points of damage every round.
Cons
- No disadvantage on long range. Great when you can use it... but in many campaigns, fighting at that kind of range is really rare.
- Yes, that -5 is harsh, but for a character taking Sharphooter, every aspect of your character should be centered around maximizing your attack and damage rolls with that bow/crossbow, so it shouldn't be as bad as it sounds. Things like a +1 Bow, Bless, Bardic Inspiration, Faerie Fire, etc all mitigate that a lot.
Again, they're both really good Feats. But if you're just trying to be that gunship, staying at distance and unloading ranged damage into the enemy, Sharpshooter is better.
Piercer is better the more often you crit and the bigger your damage dice. I like it in this build:
Half-Elf Samurai: Elven Accuracy, Sharpshooter, Gunner, Piercer.
Piercer is better for my Hobgoblin Gloom Stalker. I got a free feat at level four, so I boosted my odd Con and even DEX with the ASI, then Piercer boosted my Dex to an even again. The 'ignores cover' bit of Sharpshooter is essentially nullified by my Fortune From The Many racial trait which can do the same thing since I'll usually have allies in sight. The +10 damage would be nice, since the - 5 to hit would be negated by hiding. This is a character that gets up close and nasty too, so Peircer is stronger overall.
I don't think it's particularly useful to compare half-feats and feats that don't boost a stat. They generally occupy different spaces within the concerns of building a character.
Almost always, some amount of your ASI's are dedicated to boosting an important ability score or two. Within that space, if you have an odd number to boost, then you would consider Piercer alongside the other relevant half-feats. There, it might be compared against things like slasher, skill expert, or squat nimbleness when it comes to the relative value it brings to the build.
The other portion of ASI's is dedicated to other abilities that help and even define the build. This is the space where Sharpshooter is considered and judged against other feats such as Polearm Master, Shield Master, Inspired Leader, Mounted Combatant etc when it comes to fleshing out the character's tactical identity.
For dedicated ranged characters I think Sharpshooter is a must. Beyond the damage, ignoring 1/2 and 3/4 cover is a huge boon. Meanwhile, Piercer is simply a nice option if starting with a 17 dex. If you were to take both, then which one you take first depends on how dedicated you are to staying at range versus mixing it up in melee as a switch-hitter.
THIS! Is the most helpful post! I didn't even think to have a PC try to use Sharpshooter multiple times in a single round. For some reason I had assumed it was a 'once per turn,' (like most of the helpful yet not as good feat options). I am truly grateful you posted this!
Also if you plan on using a handcrossbow its pretty important as the 30ft shooting distance can come up a fair amount.
Since Piercer is a half feat, it really comes down to whether you need to round your Dex/Str out.
To me Sharpshooter is definitly top choice over Piercer.
Assuming you're DEX 20 otherwise ASI is really worth considering as well.