I have been trying out a way to tone down these two feats but still make them worth while. Let me know what you all think.
I've changed the plus ten to damage to 1d10, this gives it a still significant damage increase without an automatic huge increase. But it also gives the player a chance of inflicting heavy damage and worse on a crit.
Why though? You're losing 25% to hit your target in exchange for guaranteed damage. I don't think that's unreasonable at all and I don't understand the need to town it down.
Unless you're primarily playing low level adventures where 10 is a big chunk. Which at that point you may as well scale down Heavy Armor Expert from -3 damage to -1 but, that's my opinion.
The homebrew that I've seen to scale down those feats changes the penalty to the attack so that it is equal to the user's proficiency bonus, then changes the bonus to damage to an amount equal to twice the user's proficiency bonus.
This stops the feat from trivializing encounters at low levels, but still allows it to retain its full power at later levels.
The homebrew that I've seen to scale down those feats changes the penalty to the attack so that it is equal to the user's proficiency bonus, then changes the bonus to damage to an amount equal to twice the user's proficiency bonus.
This stops the feat from trivializing encounters at low levels, but still allows it to retain its full power at later levels.
This is a really good idea that I'd be in favor of making official errata. Does nothing to change the ratio or cap of the feat, and makes it suitable to take at any point in a character's progression.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I see no reason to change the Feat. You're losing 2 Ability points, 4 if you go Variant human, to gain a -5 to hit and +10 to damage. Sure, at lower levels this seems like a huge boon but you're pretty much only seeing the reward side of this Feat. That -5 to hit is a 25% increased chance to miss, that is significant at lower levels.
The average person, using any method of Attribute generation will have a +5 to hit at level 1-4. This means that when they roll to hit they're using a straight die roll. If you look at a Goblin, the AC is 15, a Kobold has an AC of 12, a Brown Bear 11. Of the three the player is going to be able to hit the Brown Bear, an CR 1 creature, more often than the Goblin, a CR 1/4.
When combats happen there will probably be 2 brown bears max due to difficulty calculators. This means the supposedly more difficult challenge will be made easier due to Sharpshooter right? Not so much, brown bears don't have a strategy, they run in, the smack their opponents till they die, or run away when it's to dangerous to stick around. The player will have to roll a 11 on the die to hit, that's a pretty good chance, and even then it won't kill the bear. Then the bear will be in range and can really mess up a party in their low levels.
4 goblins would equal the challenge of 2 brown bears, and this is a significantly more difficult fight now. First a straight roll of 15 is needed to hit the goblin with sharpshooter. Sure that means one good shot will drop the goblin, but the chances aren't good. Then you have the tactics that a goblin uses, the hit and hide, the fact that there are now 4 of them, all capable of attacking at range and hiding. This fight will not go well if you're relying on sharpshooter to do the heavy lifting.
Then we have Kobolds, to equal the challenge rating of 2 brown bears we'll need 7 of them. You'll have to roll a 12 to hit them, this isn't a hard number to hit on a straight roll. Seven of these things, with pack tactics, swarming your party will make the sharpshooter feat very difficult to use. They may be the weakest of the three but with that many of them as opponents the fight becomes very difficult to manage, and the chances of being able to attack at range will be much more difficult.
Sharpshooter is a dangerous feat, it can cause serious damage and it can really turn the tide of battle, but it's not as powerful as it seems. I say this as a DM and Player who has had it in my games. My Ranger/Rogue can, on a successful Sharpshooter attack, deal 1d8 (bow) + 3d6 (sneak attack) + 1d6 (hunter's mark) + 1d8 (Colossus Slayer) + 10 (Sharpshooter) + 3 (dex) = 36 damage average. However, the chances of that happening are fairly slim since I only have a +6 to hit, I have to make sure I get advantage in order to make it work. So, yea, I'm a dangerous character, but it requires the right situation and proper usage of my abilities to make it work. At lower levels, I rarely used Sharpshooter unless I had something to guarantee advantage or a bonus to hit.
I have been trying out a way to tone down these two feats but still make them worth while. Let me know what you all think.
I've changed the plus ten to damage to 1d10, this gives it a still significant damage increase without an automatic huge increase. But it also gives the player a chance of inflicting heavy damage and worse on a crit.
Why though? You're losing 25% to hit your target in exchange for guaranteed damage. I don't think that's unreasonable at all and I don't understand the need to town it down.
Unless you're primarily playing low level adventures where 10 is a big chunk. Which at that point you may as well scale down Heavy Armor Expert from -3 damage to -1 but, that's my opinion.
The homebrew that I've seen to scale down those feats changes the penalty to the attack so that it is equal to the user's proficiency bonus, then changes the bonus to damage to an amount equal to twice the user's proficiency bonus.
This stops the feat from trivializing encounters at low levels, but still allows it to retain its full power at later levels.
This is a really good idea that I'd be in favor of making official errata. Does nothing to change the ratio or cap of the feat, and makes it suitable to take at any point in a character's progression.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I see no reason to change the Feat. You're losing 2 Ability points, 4 if you go Variant human, to gain a -5 to hit and +10 to damage. Sure, at lower levels this seems like a huge boon but you're pretty much only seeing the reward side of this Feat. That -5 to hit is a 25% increased chance to miss, that is significant at lower levels.
The average person, using any method of Attribute generation will have a +5 to hit at level 1-4. This means that when they roll to hit they're using a straight die roll. If you look at a Goblin, the AC is 15, a Kobold has an AC of 12, a Brown Bear 11. Of the three the player is going to be able to hit the Brown Bear, an CR 1 creature, more often than the Goblin, a CR 1/4.
When combats happen there will probably be 2 brown bears max due to difficulty calculators. This means the supposedly more difficult challenge will be made easier due to Sharpshooter right? Not so much, brown bears don't have a strategy, they run in, the smack their opponents till they die, or run away when it's to dangerous to stick around. The player will have to roll a 11 on the die to hit, that's a pretty good chance, and even then it won't kill the bear. Then the bear will be in range and can really mess up a party in their low levels.
4 goblins would equal the challenge of 2 brown bears, and this is a significantly more difficult fight now. First a straight roll of 15 is needed to hit the goblin with sharpshooter. Sure that means one good shot will drop the goblin, but the chances aren't good. Then you have the tactics that a goblin uses, the hit and hide, the fact that there are now 4 of them, all capable of attacking at range and hiding. This fight will not go well if you're relying on sharpshooter to do the heavy lifting.
Then we have Kobolds, to equal the challenge rating of 2 brown bears we'll need 7 of them. You'll have to roll a 12 to hit them, this isn't a hard number to hit on a straight roll. Seven of these things, with pack tactics, swarming your party will make the sharpshooter feat very difficult to use. They may be the weakest of the three but with that many of them as opponents the fight becomes very difficult to manage, and the chances of being able to attack at range will be much more difficult.
Sharpshooter is a dangerous feat, it can cause serious damage and it can really turn the tide of battle, but it's not as powerful as it seems. I say this as a DM and Player who has had it in my games. My Ranger/Rogue can, on a successful Sharpshooter attack, deal 1d8 (bow) + 3d6 (sneak attack) + 1d6 (hunter's mark) + 1d8 (Colossus Slayer) + 10 (Sharpshooter) + 3 (dex) = 36 damage average. However, the chances of that happening are fairly slim since I only have a +6 to hit, I have to make sure I get advantage in order to make it work. So, yea, I'm a dangerous character, but it requires the right situation and proper usage of my abilities to make it work. At lower levels, I rarely used Sharpshooter unless I had something to guarantee advantage or a bonus to hit.