I am not a big fan of GWM and SS as feats. Firstly, they have become almost "must picks" for many martial builds as they offer a substantial power boost. I recognize that this power boost does help the damage of martial characters to keep up with high level casters. Secondly, the penalty does not feel very influential (especially at later levels), especially when you have ways to acquire advantage or fighting styles like Archery that give additional bonuses. I have recently been running a campaign taking place in Tiers 3 and 4 of play, I have two players who have sharpshooter (a fighter and a ranger) and it is very rare for either of them to state that they wont be applying sharpshooter to their attack.
At their core, I like the way that they work. Take a risk of a less accurate attack for more damage. Unfortunately, past a certain point the penalty doesnt seem to matter too greatly, and unless they are fighting a monster with AC of 19+, it feels like it gives characters a free extra 20, 30, or 40 damage per turn. So, I wanted to try and rework both feats.
Here are a few different ideas that I had, that I wanted to get feedback on:
Idea1) Instead of +10 damage, make it +1d10 damage. This overall lowers the average damage, but has the benefit of potentially being doubled if you score a critical hit. It also means that getting a ton of damage out of the risky shot isnt guaranteed.
Idea2) Change both the penalty and extra damage to scale with proficiency bonus. A penalty of -prof bonus and a bonus of + 2xprof bonus would mean that you would ultimately have a better bonus at higher level, but keep the extra damage low enough in the early game to make sure you arent able to melt enemies with lower health if you have a way to get around the penalty more easilty.
Idea3) Change the penalty from -5 to having disadvantage on the attack. Ultimately disadvantage may on average be a more forgiving penalty than -5, but it lowers the odds of the character scoring a critical hit and increases the odds that they score a critical failure. Maybe add the stipulation that you cannot use this option if you already have disadvantage on the attack from another source.
Idea4) Restrict this special attack to being 1/turn, so you cannot load it onto all of your extra attacks and bonus action attacks.
Idea5) Remove the penalty/extra damage from both feats and make it a house rule that any creature can do this with any weapon attack (I think this was called a Power Attack in previous editions).
Again, I dont want to nerf anything so much that it makes playing a martial-focused character less fun, but I do want these feats not to be such powerhouses that they already are.
Maybe the homebrew section will have more ideas than the DM section?
I was on the fence about where to put it. I agree it is a houserule moreso, but I was approaching this from a DMs perspective and wanted to see if other DMs had made similar changes for their game. In any case, I dont want to repost the thread.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I don't have an issue with GWM, because it only works for strength builds and strength builds are kinda weak. Sharpshooter is more of a problem, because it's being applied to attacks with lower base damage (making it more efficient) and the secondary effects (ignore 1/2 and 3/4 cover, ignore long range penalties) are also quite strong.
I'm somewhat tempted to make both of them 'disadvantage, double base weapon damage, not usable if you already have disadvantage from another source'.
I don't have an issue with GWM, because it only works for strength builds and strength builds are kinda weak. Sharpshooter is more of a problem, because it's being applied to attacks with lower base damage (making it more efficient) and the secondary effects (ignore 1/2 and 3/4 cover, ignore long range penalties) are also quite strong.
I'm somewhat tempted to make both of them 'disadvantage, double base weapon damage, not usable if you already have disadvantage from another source'.
One other change I was considering for SS was instead of ignoring half and 3/4 cover, you get to ignore half cover and nonmagical shields. In other words, you get to bypass sources of +2 AC. This is a slight buff, imo, because I feel you run into enemies with shields more often than those behind 3/4 cover, so youll get more use out of the feat; however, it still leaves 3/4 cover open as a tool for the DM to challenge the character.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I don't have an issue with GWM, because it only works for strength builds and strength builds are kinda weak. Sharpshooter is more of a problem, because it's being applied to attacks with lower base damage (making it more efficient) and the secondary effects (ignore 1/2 and 3/4 cover, ignore long range penalties) are also quite strong.
I'm somewhat tempted to make both of them 'disadvantage, double base weapon damage, not usable if you already have disadvantage from another source'.
I don't have an issue with GWM, because it only works for strength builds and strength builds are kinda weak.
While this is true, it also shoehorns strength builds onto a single optimal path, which is a different kind of weakness. A better solution is to buff strength across the board, not just give them one competitive option.
My group has settled on a combination of idea 2 and idea 4 along with a buff to TWF and some other perks for strength. I also like option 5 but applied to only strength-based attacks, as a solution for the above issue.
The average increase in damage from SS and GWM is about 5.2 damage (d8 weapon +5 modifier) a hit on average or less if you have other effects that boost per hit damage. For example if you used it with improved divine smite then the increase in damage is about 4. This is why it always pays to use the ability because on average it will always come out on top.
Idea 1) Changing the dice to 1d10 means on the same character with the d8 die +5 the average damage of your weapon increases by about 1.2 which is a massive drop but makes the feat about the same as the bless spell (1.18 damage increase for bless). This is because half of the damage lost to increase misses comes from the weapons normal damage not the increase so it stays the same while the average increase decreases.
Idea 2) 2xProf and negative prof will reduce your average damage when use so you really wouldn't want to use it all the time. In fact the higher your proficiency bonus the more on average it reduces your damage. I think you'd run into the opposite problem than you do now where it's never used.
Idea 3) If you used disadvantage then the average effect would depend on your attack modifier v.s the monsters ac but it would almost always be more powerful than it currently is. So it would become a more dynamic choice but its always going to be a net increase to damage so likely players will still always use it. Doing the math with disadvantage the increase in damage on average would be 4-9 damage so you have made the ability stronger. This includes the impact on crits which his the only reason there is a reduction at all. Basically disadvantage changes probability the most when the chance to hit is 0.5 in which case it reduces it by 2.5 the same as a -5 penalty as the probability increase or decreases the effect of disadvantage reduces.
Idea 4) means that the ability no longer scales with multi attack
My suggestion would be consider the called shot rules from older editions.They basically added buffs or debuffs based on where you chose to aim.
Another suggestion is only making it able to be activated in certain situations, like for example if you have advantage on an attack you can instead make an additional attack as a bonus action with +10 damage.
Idea 3) If you used disadvantage then the average effect would depend on your attack modifier v.s the monsters ac but it would almost always be more powerful than it currently is. So it would become a more dynamic choice but its always going to be a net increase to damage so likely players will still always use it. Doing the math with disadvantage the increase in damage on average would be 4-9 damage so you have made the ability stronger. This includes the impact on crits which his the only reason there is a reduction at all. Basically disadvantage changes probability the most when the chance to hit is 0.5 in which case it reduces it by 2.5 the same as a -5 penalty as the probability increase or decreases the effect of disadvantage reduces.
I appreciate your analysis on this option and the ones preceding it. One other thing to consider on this option is that it makes it applicable to less attacks if you cannot apply it to an attack that already has disadvantage. With the traditional route, if you had disadvantage on your attack you could still choose to apply the -5 penalty if you were confident in your base to hit bonus. With this option, for example, a character with SS could not take the penalty against creatures that lie prone to avoid their attacks. Not sure if it would significantly affect the numbers, but there would be situations where you were not able to use this option, even if you wanted to.
Another thing to consider, which I just thought of, is that this change would be a significant nerf to SS Rogues. I am not sure if it is a good thing or bad thing, but at the end of the day if you remove the rogue's source of advantage, they may not be able to apply their sneak attack and would be dissuaded from taking the penalty too often.
Idea 4) means that the ability no longer scales with multi attack
That was more or less the intention. Its one thing for any martial character to be adding a +10 bonus to their damage for a round, its another for a high level Fighter to be getting +30 or +40 damage per round. By Tiers 3 & 4, most creature's proficiency bonus alone will be enough to mitigate the penalty in most situations, so its reliable extra single target damage. This is just my opinion, and I acknowledge it may not be a popular one, but it feels kind of cheap to me to be able to reliably be getting extra damage in the double digits that you do not even have to roll for.
Thinking about all of this has given me another idea. What if we went for a combination of ideas 1 & 2. Idea 6: Change the damage bonus from +10 to 1d10+prof bonus. The 1d10 gives them a chance at a big damage bonus, but no guarantee, and the proficiency bonus gives a consistent value that increases with level so regardless of how poorly you roll you still get something for taking the penalty.
Edit: One other thing I want to add. Part of the goal of these changes is that I dont want the benefit to outweigh the penalty such that a character is using it for every attack. I want for the penalty/bonus damage balance to lie in such a place that a character will choose to take it on attacks they feel confident in or that they have taken extra steps to mitigate the penalty (like gaining advantage) and not just be applying to every single attack they make.
GWM or SS is worthwhile against a target with an AC of no more than 16 + (your attack bonus) - (your base damage)/2. Which is why SS is better -- a level 1 with a 16 stat using a greatsword has attack +5, base damage 10, and thus is worthwhile against AC 16 or lower, using a longbow it's attack +7, base damage 7.5, and thus is worthwhile against AC 19 or lower -- and why rogues don't want SS.
Another thing to consider, which I just thought of, is that this change would be a significant nerf to SS Rogues. I am not sure if it is a good thing or bad thing, but at the end of the day if you remove the rogue's source of advantage, they may not be able to apply their sneak attack and would be dissuaded from taking the penalty too often.
SS was never really strong on rogues because the difference to hit chance effected their sneak attack. At level 10 for example the normal SS would only increase the average damage for a rogue with a short bow and a +5 mod by about 1 damage. If it's going to cost them sneak attack they definitely wouldn't use it as it that would be a serious hit to their damage. Changing it to disadvantage would basically just cement the ability as not for rogues
The problem child with SS and GWM is the fighter because of the number of attacks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am not a big fan of GWM and SS as feats. Firstly, they have become almost "must picks" for many martial builds as they offer a substantial power boost. I recognize that this power boost does help the damage of martial characters to keep up with high level casters. Secondly, the penalty does not feel very influential (especially at later levels), especially when you have ways to acquire advantage or fighting styles like Archery that give additional bonuses. I have recently been running a campaign taking place in Tiers 3 and 4 of play, I have two players who have sharpshooter (a fighter and a ranger) and it is very rare for either of them to state that they wont be applying sharpshooter to their attack.
At their core, I like the way that they work. Take a risk of a less accurate attack for more damage. Unfortunately, past a certain point the penalty doesnt seem to matter too greatly, and unless they are fighting a monster with AC of 19+, it feels like it gives characters a free extra 20, 30, or 40 damage per turn. So, I wanted to try and rework both feats.
Here are a few different ideas that I had, that I wanted to get feedback on:
Idea1) Instead of +10 damage, make it +1d10 damage. This overall lowers the average damage, but has the benefit of potentially being doubled if you score a critical hit. It also means that getting a ton of damage out of the risky shot isnt guaranteed.
Idea2) Change both the penalty and extra damage to scale with proficiency bonus. A penalty of -prof bonus and a bonus of + 2xprof bonus would mean that you would ultimately have a better bonus at higher level, but keep the extra damage low enough in the early game to make sure you arent able to melt enemies with lower health if you have a way to get around the penalty more easilty.
Idea3) Change the penalty from -5 to having disadvantage on the attack. Ultimately disadvantage may on average be a more forgiving penalty than -5, but it lowers the odds of the character scoring a critical hit and increases the odds that they score a critical failure. Maybe add the stipulation that you cannot use this option if you already have disadvantage on the attack from another source.
Idea4) Restrict this special attack to being 1/turn, so you cannot load it onto all of your extra attacks and bonus action attacks.
Idea5) Remove the penalty/extra damage from both feats and make it a house rule that any creature can do this with any weapon attack (I think this was called a Power Attack in previous editions).
Again, I dont want to nerf anything so much that it makes playing a martial-focused character less fun, but I do want these feats not to be such powerhouses that they already are.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Maybe the homebrew section will have more ideas than the DM section?
I was on the fence about where to put it. I agree it is a houserule moreso, but I was approaching this from a DMs perspective and wanted to see if other DMs had made similar changes for their game. In any case, I dont want to repost the thread.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I don't have an issue with GWM, because it only works for strength builds and strength builds are kinda weak. Sharpshooter is more of a problem, because it's being applied to attacks with lower base damage (making it more efficient) and the secondary effects (ignore 1/2 and 3/4 cover, ignore long range penalties) are also quite strong.
I'm somewhat tempted to make both of them 'disadvantage, double base weapon damage, not usable if you already have disadvantage from another source'.
One other change I was considering for SS was instead of ignoring half and 3/4 cover, you get to ignore half cover and nonmagical shields. In other words, you get to bypass sources of +2 AC. This is a slight buff, imo, because I feel you run into enemies with shields more often than those behind 3/4 cover, so youll get more use out of the feat; however, it still leaves 3/4 cover open as a tool for the DM to challenge the character.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I'd be curious to see the Disadvantage concept... I feel like that's potentially more interesting, and easier to track.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I've been thinking this too
While this is true, it also shoehorns strength builds onto a single optimal path, which is a different kind of weakness. A better solution is to buff strength across the board, not just give them one competitive option.
My group has settled on a combination of idea 2 and idea 4 along with a buff to TWF and some other perks for strength. I also like option 5 but applied to only strength-based attacks, as a solution for the above issue.
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
I wonder what it would do for strength builds if shove was a bonus action by default.
The average increase in damage from SS and GWM is about 5.2 damage (d8 weapon +5 modifier) a hit on average or less if you have other effects that boost per hit damage. For example if you used it with improved divine smite then the increase in damage is about 4. This is why it always pays to use the ability because on average it will always come out on top.
Idea 1) Changing the dice to 1d10 means on the same character with the d8 die +5 the average damage of your weapon increases by about 1.2 which is a massive drop but makes the feat about the same as the bless spell (1.18 damage increase for bless). This is because half of the damage lost to increase misses comes from the weapons normal damage not the increase so it stays the same while the average increase decreases.
Idea 2) 2xProf and negative prof will reduce your average damage when use so you really wouldn't want to use it all the time. In fact the higher your proficiency bonus the more on average it reduces your damage. I think you'd run into the opposite problem than you do now where it's never used.
Idea 3) If you used disadvantage then the average effect would depend on your attack modifier v.s the monsters ac but it would almost always be more powerful than it currently is. So it would become a more dynamic choice but its always going to be a net increase to damage so likely players will still always use it. Doing the math with disadvantage the increase in damage on average would be 4-9 damage so you have made the ability stronger. This includes the impact on crits which his the only reason there is a reduction at all. Basically disadvantage changes probability the most when the chance to hit is 0.5 in which case it reduces it by 2.5 the same as a -5 penalty as the probability increase or decreases the effect of disadvantage reduces.
Idea 4) means that the ability no longer scales with multi attack
My suggestion would be consider the called shot rules from older editions.They basically added buffs or debuffs based on where you chose to aim.
Another suggestion is only making it able to be activated in certain situations, like for example if you have advantage on an attack you can instead make an additional attack as a bonus action with +10 damage.
I appreciate your analysis on this option and the ones preceding it. One other thing to consider on this option is that it makes it applicable to less attacks if you cannot apply it to an attack that already has disadvantage. With the traditional route, if you had disadvantage on your attack you could still choose to apply the -5 penalty if you were confident in your base to hit bonus. With this option, for example, a character with SS could not take the penalty against creatures that lie prone to avoid their attacks. Not sure if it would significantly affect the numbers, but there would be situations where you were not able to use this option, even if you wanted to.
Another thing to consider, which I just thought of, is that this change would be a significant nerf to SS Rogues. I am not sure if it is a good thing or bad thing, but at the end of the day if you remove the rogue's source of advantage, they may not be able to apply their sneak attack and would be dissuaded from taking the penalty too often.
That was more or less the intention. Its one thing for any martial character to be adding a +10 bonus to their damage for a round, its another for a high level Fighter to be getting +30 or +40 damage per round. By Tiers 3 & 4, most creature's proficiency bonus alone will be enough to mitigate the penalty in most situations, so its reliable extra single target damage. This is just my opinion, and I acknowledge it may not be a popular one, but it feels kind of cheap to me to be able to reliably be getting extra damage in the double digits that you do not even have to roll for.
Thinking about all of this has given me another idea. What if we went for a combination of ideas 1 & 2. Idea 6: Change the damage bonus from +10 to 1d10+prof bonus. The 1d10 gives them a chance at a big damage bonus, but no guarantee, and the proficiency bonus gives a consistent value that increases with level so regardless of how poorly you roll you still get something for taking the penalty.
Edit: One other thing I want to add. Part of the goal of these changes is that I dont want the benefit to outweigh the penalty such that a character is using it for every attack. I want for the penalty/bonus damage balance to lie in such a place that a character will choose to take it on attacks they feel confident in or that they have taken extra steps to mitigate the penalty (like gaining advantage) and not just be applying to every single attack they make.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
As an anecdote, every player in my game who has GWM or SS on their character uses it on almost every attack.
GWM or SS is worthwhile against a target with an AC of no more than 16 + (your attack bonus) - (your base damage)/2. Which is why SS is better -- a level 1 with a 16 stat using a greatsword has attack +5, base damage 10, and thus is worthwhile against AC 16 or lower, using a longbow it's attack +7, base damage 7.5, and thus is worthwhile against AC 19 or lower -- and why rogues don't want SS.
SS was never really strong on rogues because the difference to hit chance effected their sneak attack. At level 10 for example the normal SS would only increase the average damage for a rogue with a short bow and a +5 mod by about 1 damage. If it's going to cost them sneak attack they definitely wouldn't use it as it that would be a serious hit to their damage. Changing it to disadvantage would basically just cement the ability as not for rogues
The problem child with SS and GWM is the fighter because of the number of attacks.