D&D 5E sharpshooter math meaning

snickersnax · Jul 22, 2017

Does anyone have a good explanation of sharpshooter math (-5/+10). I understand the idea that the extra damage is due to the more difficult shot hitting a more vulnerable area. * But why would there be a penalty to the the regular shot. For example If you are targeting a vulnerable area (say the heart or throat or eye), if you miss, there is still some likelihood that you would do some regular damage. Basically why does aiming for the bulls-eye create an increased miss chance for the target?

This seems to be fundamentally different from GWM where you are taking a power swing, generating more force, but the windup for such a swing has a bigger tell and so is much easier to dodge.

I'm more inclined to let these benefits be available to everyone who uses certain weapons (kind of like a x3 crit converted to 5e)

*(Which raises the question that if a creature has no "vulnerable areas" should sharpshooter apply (IDC about RAW, more interested in having a the game make sense))

Anyway, just trying to make some meaning with the rules we have.... or change the rules... because I like meaning and consistency in my rules... probably more that game balance

FormerlyHemlock · Jul 22, 2017

First up, there's nothing wrong with letting these benefits be more widely available. I let anyone at all attack at -5 for +5 to damage with no feat required. (That includes monsters--a zombie can flail away at -2 to hit for d6+6 points of damage, instead of +3 for d6+1.) The feats just allow you to gain a larger bonus with certain weapons.

In response to your second question about how to interpret it: well, the +10 damage is IMO for hitting a vital target. Throat, eye, heart, etc. The -5 to-hit represents the fact that those vital areas are often smaller and better-protected: shooting for center-of-mass means you'll probably hit SOMETHING, but if you go for a headshot you can easily miss the target entirely, which is why soldiers don't typically train for headshots (AFAIK). Maybe you'll get lucky and still hit the cheek or the neck instead of the eye, but maybe you'll miss eight inches to the right instead of down and it will just go by the target's ear.

MarkB · Jul 22, 2017

If you're aiming for a person's head, most of what's around that target is empty space - it's only if you miss low that you stand a chance of hitting them anywhere else. There's good reason why soldiers are trained to aim for center of mass.

Besides, there's already a mechanic in place for targeting sensitive spots without suffering an aim penalty - it's called Sneak Attack.

To address your footnote, it's not about hitting vulnerable areas, it's about hitting vital areas - that's why it deals more damage.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

Li Shenron · Jul 22, 2017

snickersnax said:
Does anyone have a good explanation of sharpshooter math (-5/+10). I understand the idea that the extra damage is due to the more difficult shot hitting a more vulnerable area. * But why would there be a penalty to the the regular shot. For example If you are targeting a vulnerable area (say the heart or throat or eye), if you miss, there is still some likelihood that you would do some regular damage. Basically why does aiming for the bulls-eye create an increased miss chance for the target?

This seems to be fundamentally different from GWM where you are taking a power swing, generating more force, but the windup for such a swing has a bigger tell and so is much easier to dodge.

I'm more inclined to let these benefits be available to everyone who uses certain weapons (kind of like a x3 crit converted to 5e)

*(Which raises the question that if a creature has no "vulnerable areas" should sharpshooter apply (IDC about RAW, more interested in having a the game make sense))

Anyway, just trying to make some meaning with the rules we have.... or change the rules... because I like meaning and consistency in my rules... probably more that game balance

The truth is a lot more simple and a lot more sad:

Sharpshooter is merely s copycat of GWM but for ranged combat characters. It copies the mechanics because they are assumed to be already balanced. It ignores any real need to make sense narratively.

snickersnax · Jul 22, 2017

Li Shenron said:
The truth is a lot more simple and a lot more sad:

Sharpshooter is merely s copycat of GWM but for ranged combat characters. It copies the mechanics because they are assumed to be already balanced. It ignores any real need to make sense narratively.

That's too bad. I like narrative

Harzel · Jul 22, 2017

Making narrative sense of it seems to me like it would have to be done on a case-by-case basis. That said, at least one common circumstance is that vulnerable areas are better protected, so you may be less likely to find a chink in the armor.

EDIT: Heh. Ninja'd multiple times on that part.

One way to handle filtering out situations where it does not make sense would be to treat it as a case of the player needing to describe their approach instead of just invoking a rule. So "I aim for the hill giant's eye." might work, but "I aim for the gray ooze's groin." does not. That way you are adjudicating a specific approach as opposed to whether or not one exists. Probably best to have player buy-in in advance for that, though. It might be more palatable (for tactically oriented players at least) if you agreed to consider minor riders instead of some of the additional damage. For instance, foot shot is -5/(+5 + reduced speed), or even -5/(+ reduced speed). Would mean additional on-the-fly adjudication, but often things that 'make more sense' are like that.

Coroc · Jul 22, 2017

Since atm I play a wood elf hunter ranger with sharpshooter feat I can tellyou something from my experience:

Sharpshooter only works well whne you got a cleric in your party who spends his concentration non a Bless spell. Otherwise it does not.

With the other thing Great weapon master it is the same.

Explanation with math: Since I chose a feat I got 2 points less in dex which results in
a -1 to hit. ad this to the -5 and you got -6

That's a freaking lot!!!!

with bless you can compensate a bit so you are actually at -2 to -5 compared to a featless archer.

Even with hunter giving me an additional +2 to hit with ranged weapons it really hurts without a bless spell. This feat definitely is balanced and no discussion about it being overpowered is justified,

Coroc · Jul 22, 2017

snickersnax said:
Does anyone have a good explanation of sharpshooter math (-5/+10). I understand the idea that the extra damage is due to the more difficult shot hitting a more vulnerable area. * But why would there be a penalty to the the regular shot. For example If you are targeting a vulnerable area (say the heart or throat or eye), if you miss, there is still some likelihood that you would do some regular damage. Basically why does aiming for the bulls-eye create an increased miss chance for the target?

This seems to be fundamentally different from GWM where you are taking a power swing, generating more force, but the windup for such a swing has a bigger tell and so is much easier to dodge.

I'm more inclined to let these benefits be available to everyone who uses certain weapons (kind of like a x3 crit converted to 5e)

*(Which raises the question that if a creature has no "vulnerable areas" should sharpshooter apply (IDC about RAW, more interested in having a the game make sense))

Anyway, just trying to make some meaning with the rules we have.... or change the rules... because I like meaning and consistency in my rules... probably more that game balance

It reflects the deadliness of a sniper who hits vital parts like head or heart. For some in game personal experiences with the feat check my other post in your thread.

MechaPilot · Jul 23, 2017

You're aiming for an area that's more vital (+10 damage) but is probably smaller, better protected by a shield or armor, and that may require good timing to hit at just the right angle (-5 to hit).

Now, one could reason that you should do regular damage if your roll but for the penalty would have beaten the target's AC.

The mechanical reason against allowing this is because a character would always sharpshoot if there were no penalty for not successfully making the more difficult shot. If you were going to allow it all the time, the feat should read as follows "if you beat the target's AC by five or more, you deal an extra ten damage."

The narrative reason against it is because of the same things that impose the penalty. If the vital spot is better protected and you don't hit it just right, your shot is blocked or deflected by the higher-quality protection you were trying to punch through. If it's about timing so you get the angle of the shot just right, you mistimed the shot and it was blocked or deflected. If the target was small, you missed it and hit a nearby protected area.

transtemporal · Jul 23, 2017

Li Shenron said:
The truth is a lot more simple and a lot more sad:

Sharpshooter is merely s copycat of GWM but for ranged combat characters. It copies the mechanics because they are assumed to be already balanced. It ignores any real need to make sense narratively.

It's just a game man, it's really not that sad.