D&D 5E Why Good Players Do Not 14.25.

[Zardnaar]

Only if you never, ever miss. And that's not true.

The crossbow expert only has to hit 50% of the time anything above that is gravy. 50% hit ratio with -5 is not hard. With 14.25 average AC you only need +8 to hit which is level 4 or 5 without any buffs. 1d6+15 X2 damage is an average of 37 damage 4 shots at 75% hit ratio is 1d6+5X3 which is only 25.5 damage.

If AC is higher buff. By level 9 +11 to hit is very doable which is AC 17 50% of the time.

Throw is bless those numbers creep up around AC 19 and 20 and with advantage it doesn't matter to much they can reliably hit AC 20+ easy enough.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The crossbow expert only has to hit 50% of the time anything above that is gravy. 50% hit ratio with -5 is not hard. With 14.25 average AC you only need +8 to hit which is level 4 or 5 without any buffs.

Firstly, 50% is NOT every attack. Your +10 damage goes to +5 damage on average. That's important. Secondly, you'd only get a +8 to hit if you were a variant human fighter sharpshooter (if you want a crossbow expert like you say, then you'd not have that bonus until you gained a few more levels to get another ASI to get the feat)--a highly specific single case, which is also not representative of fighters in general. But even with that, the net bonus is only a +3 to hit total. A quick skim through the MM and it looks like most monsters you'd face at level 4-5 have AC between 14-18, and pretty evenly spread. So that's an AC of 16 on average, so at a +3 bonus, that's less than a 50% chance to hit, which reduces that average damage bonus even further.

So when you say it give a +10 damage to every attack, that's simply not true at all. Not even close.

 

[Zardnaar]

Firstly, 50% is NOT every attack. Your +10 damage goes to +5 damage on average. That's important. Secondly, you'd only get a +8 to hit if you were a variant human fighter--a highly specific single case, which is also not representative of fighters in general. But even with that, the net bonus is only a +3 to hit total. A quick skim through the MM and it looks like most monsters you'd face at level 4-5 have AC between 14-18, and pretty evenly spread. So that's an AC of 16 on average, so at a +3 bonus, that's less than a 50% chance to hit, which reduces that average damage bonus even further.

So when you say it give a +10 damage to every attack, that's simply not true at all. Not even close.

Never claimed it the example I provided was 50%.

I have seen level 11 fighters with action surge connect with all 7 shots for +70 damage vs ACs in the 18 to 20 range. 4 or 5 hits would be more typical only 50% is required though (or 40-45% even)

At level 11 spellcasters can provide enough sources of advantage and buffing that spell slots don't matter (bless, faerie fire, greater invisability etc).

Even knocking stuff prone works for the great weapon fighter.

 

[Cyrinishad]

Sure a DM can add higher ACs to the game but should not have to its the same as using s heap of fire immune creatures if there is a fire sorcerer in the party... feats over shadow the other players, encourage the DM to metagame against you which then encorages you to metagame back (such as using bless all the time)... Upping ACs was one of the 1st things tried... The players doing it just buffed more the players not using those feats got hosed and spellcasters just used hypnotic pattern and fireballs more... (5E doesn't handle 6 member parties well)... on some rounds the sharpshooter fighter dealt more damage than the rest of the party put togather.

Variety is the spice of life. So, yeah if were DMing I would have some encounters with very high ACs... and I would absolutely have some encounters with fire immune creatures, and I would have some encounters that encouraged spellcasters to adapt to circumstances by using hypnotic pattern or fireball, especially if that isn't their default strategy... A divine caster using bless all the time just seems like a rational use of divine spellcasting... It may be surprising, but all of my 5E game sessions have been with 6 players, and I have found the game handles 6 players very well... and I will once again reiterate that the damage output of some characters on some rounds of some encounters is a completely meaningless metric in the game.

 

[Zardnaar]

Variety is the spice of life. So, yeah if were DMing I would have some encounters with very high ACs... and I would absolutely have some encounters with fire immune creatures, and I would have some encounters that encouraged spellcasters to adapt to circumstances by using hypnotic pattern or fireball, especially if that isn't their default strategy... A divine caster using bless all the time just seems like a rational use of divine spellcasting... It may be surprising, but all of my 5E game sessions have been with 6 players, and I have found the game handles 6 players very well... and I will once again reiterate that the damage output of some characters on some rounds of some encounters is a completely meaningless metric in the game.

We did but we had a DM use high ACs the majority of the encounters (hobgoblins, veterans, knights, monsters etc).

The hit ratio is not 50% is somewhere just over 40% for sharpshooter+crossbow expert to pay off so even if you gamble lots as long as you can hit around 42% of the time you will deal the same amount of damage as not using those feats. That is the break even point its closer to 40% than 45%. I'm not sure how to crunch the numbers just at 50% vs 75% over 100 attacks the CE+SS deals 1850 damage vs the normal attacks with a 75% hit ratio dealing 1700.

At 50% hit ratio you are pulling out ahead and its not hard to get that hit ratio over 50%.

Sorcerers often deal more damage buffing the GWM and SS fighters/warrior types than casting actual spells. Twin a haste or greater invisibility (or even untwinned).

 

[TwoSix]

Hey. I work with what I'm given.

Poorly.

But I'm going to go ahead believe your initial post. IMO, the impression I get is that the bitterness you feel towards the situation rings more true there than this new, improved, altruistic re-fluff here.

Let's recap a few choice words you used in the last post: gave up, compete, pointless, humbling, outclassed.

Yeah, you're A-OK with it. Clearly.

No, you saw the word "compete" and jumped to the conclusion I had an agenda. Despite me saying "I think martial classes should be better at single-target damage" in the exact same post. I don't have an agenda.

Simply put, I used scorching ray for single target damage back when the party had no characters with those feats. Once they took them, their damage went up. So I said, "Guess I don't need to worry about single-target damage" and I dropped (or gave up, or abandoned, or had a small ceremony where I ritually erased it from my character sheet for failing me. You know, whatever supports your narrative.) scorching ray. I still have fireball, so it isn't like my damage still isn't valued by the party. We all contribute, and everyone has a good time. Acknowledging that SS or GWM buffed up their damage by a lot is simply an observation that a well-built martial can out-damage a caster (single target only) who's expending a small resource on it. That's a good thing in my book.

 

[TwoSix]

The main point that is trying to be made is that the D&D game is not designed as a competitive zero-sum tactical board game, it is designed as a cooperative survival story-driven game... The character with the highest damage output is not "better" than the other characters at the table, and isn't "winning" the game more than the other characters.

It's weird, it's almost like I never said it was.

 

[seebs]

I see your "entire sharpshooter party" and raise you "the Castle Full of 2hp Kobolds in Full Plate".

 

[Zardnaar]

I see your "entire sharpshooter party" and raise you "the Castle Full of 2hp Kobolds in Full Plate".

Unless you have a full martial party the spellcasters have a field day with sleep, fireball and effects like radiance of the dawn.

Its porbably more realistic to have a PC using a bow over a hand crossbow as its less feat intensive and magic bows are more common. Its still OP though just a bit less abusable,

 

[seebs]

The point is, -5/+10 is not merely not great against things with high AC and low HP, it's actively detrimental and you would never use it. So you've cost the party a feat.