D&D 5E So Was That Z Fellow right?

[Nick Hatfield]

If you don't care, then why are you so opposed to admitting the feats are OP? Why are you even in this thread?

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

This thread is about someone asking if they were right about some things in the game being OP or broken. They weren't.
The thread isn't titled "Only post here if you will admit these specific feats are OP."

The feats do what they are supposed to; increase your damage. They provide nothing out of combat. They provide no benefit to your group. They make you a one trick pony who can do increased DPR and not much else. How valuable that is will depend on the table. I know that most people don't follow the 6-8 encounter a day guidelines; it's often more like 2-3. At those tables these feats are not going to do much of anything because the long rest classes are going to make short work of those meager encounters.

 

[Sadras]

Well, in 2e, there was two weapon fighting from Complete Fighter. A 1st level fighter, with no strength bonus at all, could still down an ogre in a single round. That was pretty OP. To the point where not taking 2WF was a pointless choice. 2WF was just that much better than any other option you could take.

Forgot about this!

In 3e, you've got a shopping list of stuff. There's a reason for the Tier description of 3e and casters and caddies was a thing

I never saw this as an OP issue, rather mimicking a specific playstyle (which I personally prefer) - where those that tap into the power of magic will one day overshadow their mundane counterparts. I still love playing fighters, even with that mindset.

4e? I never really delved too much into 4e classes and splats to be honest, so I'm not the one to ask here. I know at release, with just the PHB 1 classes, there was pretty close parity between all the classes and nothing stuck out as a major issue. I mean, even something like the Expertise feat was only a +1-3 over 30 levels. It certainly wasn't necessary and tells me that the math in the game was pretty darn tight.

The infamous feat tax started from 3e, 4e just continued it.

5e? Yeah, not seeing anything outright broken. I disagree strongly with the notion that there are class tiers in 5e.

I'm not informed enough to offer much value to the class tier debate, however I'm a little more open to the discussion about SS and GWM and how it might affect the level of contribution in a fight between fighters with GWM and those without such feat.

But there are many factors to consider - how easy is it for one to gain advantage at a particular table; level of magic item availability; level of the party; ease of the encounter...etc I find myself swaying from side to side, listening to the various arguments and challenging both sides.

 

[Nevvur]

[MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION]

I strongly agree with the bulk of what you've been writing, but I feel obliged to point out Adventurer's League. Mixed system expertise among players combined with DM constraints can create a jarring situation when these builds come into play. Not a big deal in home games where you have a consistent group of players and a DM who can tailor the game to them.

I'm reminded of the end of one session with a CE/SS who argued he deserved a magic item more than anyone else at the table because he did the most damage. The sad thing was, two other players agreed with him. <facepalm>

 

[pemerton]

Why is this even considered a problem?

I thought the problem was overshadowing other damage-focused PCs who - by not choosing this particular combo - have trouble keeping up.

I disagree strongly with the notion that there are class tiers in 5e.

most people don't follow the 6-8 encounter a day guidelines; it's often more like 2-3. At those tables these feats are not going to do much of anything because the long rest classes are going to make short work of those meager encounters.

That sounds a bit like tiers to me.

 

[smbakeresq]

But all the GWM analysis does include the chance of missing.

You have totally missed the point, so far over your head the breeze didn't even touch your scalp.

Look at every GWM analysis. The most common is GWM with BM precision strike. As an example none of them compare that to a Shield Master fighter using BM Precision Strike. The Shield Master will always hit more, as under the same conditions the Shield Master will have +5 to hit and +2 to damage from Dueling. The base comparison should be -5/+10 against 0/+2 (for dueling style) So we start there, and then add in precision strike.

The Shield Master will also be alive longer to do damage, certainly more then just the +2 to AC would indicate as you do get some save bonuses also.

But we are not done, the Shield Master fighter will have mores instances of advantage because his bonus action will be used to prone people, creating more advantage for himself. How much? Well you it depends, but from experience more than you think, as you fight many enemies size large or smaller. I would posit about %25-35 more instances of advantage but its just an observation, I don't track it, you also get 2 chances at a crit. When you have a player with Shield Mastery in your group it also makes Enlarge a useful spell or potion or scroll or magic item. The Shield master will also create advantage for his teammates, which a GWM fighter doesn't do. When the Shield prones someone and then the rogue or paladin lands sneak attack or smite some of that damage is because of the Shield Master, especially if their hit is a critical hit. Setting a Paladin up for a double smite is a big thing, but not really quantifiable.

Finally a shield master adds damage by pushing people off cliffs, ledges, into lava, into a Spirit Guardians zone and then damaging them twice (6d8 total, 2 saves + speed reduction), once on the Shield's turn and also when the creature starts its turn there.

A raging Barbarian with a Shield Mastery gets advantage on all those checks to prone people, they succeed even more.

As a note, Shield Mastery is used more, if you don't have anything else to do with your bonus action you take a shot, and its used on defense also. GWM sometimes you turn it off. Its just fun to use also, more than just getting bigger damage numbers.

Here on the forums in math rooms, the GWM will always win any static DPM challenge since many things you can do with a Shield Mastery feat are not quantifiable. At the tables were the important number is effective DPR on a target for the whole team, its a wash at best. The GWM is good in every group and can always be useful at what they do, but a Shield Master will be able to do more and different things and will get alot more of the groups damage across.

The point is that in evaluation these builds and how feats interact with them the analysis is always short, due to lack of information about how it is played at the tables. While some feats are certainly better than others, I don't think of any of them as out right OP. IMO Bless spell is more OP than any feat is.

 

[pemerton]

[MENTION=28301]smbakeresq[/MENTION]

I'm sure that Shield Mastery is a good feat. But I don't see how that bears on the fact that Duelist add +2 damage to a hit, which means that - if the chance to hit is less than 100%, which by the rules I think it must be - then Duelist adds less than +2 damage per attack.

 

[Oofta]

[MENTION=28301]smbakeresq[/MENTION]

I'm sure that Shield Mastery is a good feat. But I don't see how that bears on the fact that Duelist add +2 damage to a hit, which means that - if the chance to hit is less than 100%, which by the rules I think it must be - then Duelist adds less than +2 damage per attack.

If you knock your opponents prone you have advantage which increases your chance to hit which increases damage significantly. It's a lot more than just the +2 damage from duelist.

It's very situational of course, just like GWM. If you have a wolf totem barbarian ally for example, you're already getting advantage on your melee attacks.

 

[FrogReaver]

You have totally missed the point, so far over your head the breeze didn't even touch your scalp.

Look at every GWM analysis. The most common is GWM with BM precision strike. As an example none of them compare that to a Shield Master fighter using BM Precision Strike. The Shield Master will always hit more, as under the same conditions the Shield Master will have +5 to hit and +2 to damage from Dueling. The base comparison should be -5/+10 against 0/+2 (for dueling style) So we start there, and then add in precision strike.

The Shield Master will also be alive longer to do damage, certainly more then just the +2 to AC would indicate as you do get some save bonuses also.

But we are not done, the Shield Master fighter will have mores instances of advantage because his bonus action will be used to prone people, creating more advantage for himself. How much? Well you it depends, but from experience more than you think, as you fight many enemies size large or smaller. I would posit about %25-35 more instances of advantage but its just an observation, I don't track it, you also get 2 chances at a crit. When you have a player with Shield Mastery in your group it also makes Enlarge a useful spell or potion or scroll or magic item. The Shield master will also create advantage for his teammates, which a GWM fighter doesn't do. When the Shield prones someone and then the rogue or paladin lands sneak attack or smite some of that damage is because of the Shield Master, especially if their hit is a critical hit. Setting a Paladin up for a double smite is a big thing, but not really quantifiable.

Finally a shield master adds damage by pushing people off cliffs, ledges, into lava, into a Spirit Guardians zone and then damaging them twice (6d8 total, 2 saves + speed reduction), once on the Shield's turn and also when the creature starts its turn there.

A raging Barbarian with a Shield Mastery gets advantage on all those checks to prone people, they succeed even more.

As a note, Shield Mastery is used more, if you don't have anything else to do with your bonus action you take a shot, and its used on defense also. GWM sometimes you turn it off. Its just fun to use also, more than just getting bigger damage numbers.

Here on the forums in math rooms, the GWM will always win any static DPM challenge since many things you can do with a Shield Mastery feat are not quantifiable. At the tables were the important number is effective DPR on a target for the whole team, its a wash at best. The GWM is good in every group and can always be useful at what they do, but a Shield Master will be able to do more and different things and will get alot more of the groups damage across.

The point is that in evaluation these builds and how feats interact with them the analysis is always short, due to lack of information about how it is played at the tables. While some feats are certainly better than others, I don't think of any of them as out right OP. IMO Bless spell is more OP than any feat is.

Want to give us a few "reasonable" assumptions about shield master and I'll tell you how much it increases DPR?

To begin I need these things:
1. An estimate for what percentage of rounds you are able to attempt to use it on.
2. An estimate for how often it's successful when you do use it.
3. An estimate for how many melee party members including yourself are going to be attacking the proned creature on a typical round.

My estimates would be.
1. 99%
2. 60% unless you are using it on a class that ups athletics.
3. 2, yourself and one other

 

[Hussar]

Again, though, it's not about any one character. I care about the group as a DM, not any one PC. So, if my group is going through about 100 hp/round and would go to 125/round using your build, what impact is that going to have?

A pretty bog standard encounter for a 10th level party is going to have around 300 HP between the baddies. Give or take. So, my group finishes that encounter in 3 rounds, typically. So does your group. Net effect is zero. The baddies get the same (or close enough) number of actions, the same resources spent.

So, again, who cares? This effectively does not change how the game is played. How can something be OP or broken if it doesn't actually have any impact? In 2e, TWF was broken because it effectively TRIPLED the damage the PC could do, PLUS it was easily available to all fighter types (and later clerics as well). Effectively it doubled or more the DPS of the party, not an individual.

Adding a 25% bump to the party is hardly broken and probably won't even be noticed in game.

 

[FrogReaver]

Again, though, it's not about any one character. I care about the group as a DM, not any one PC. So, if my group is going through about 100 hp/round and would go to 125/round using your build, what impact is that going to have?

So, again, who cares? This effectively does not change how the game is played. How can something be OP or broken if it doesn't actually have any impact? In 2e, TWF was broken because it effectively TRIPLED the damage the PC could do, PLUS it was easily available to all fighter types (and later clerics as well). Effectively it doubled or more the DPS of the party, not an individual.

Adding a 25% bump to the party is hardly broken and probably won't even be noticed in game.

Just because you want to act like 25% to group DPR isn't significant and that it doesn't change anything doesn't make it so.

A pretty bog standard encounter for a 10th level party is going to have around 300 HP between the baddies. Give or take. So, my group finishes that encounter in 3 rounds, typically. So does your group. Net effect is zero. The baddies get the same (or close enough) number of actions, the same resources spent.

I shouldn't have to point out what all you did wrong in this part.
1. 300/100 = 3, 300/125 = 2.4, because damage isn't discrete in 5e (ie because their are damage ranges and chances to hit), it's simply not true that your group will dispatch 300 HP worth of enemies at the same rate that a 125 DPR group of PC's. Occasionly you will finish the fight in 2 rounds. Heck maybe miracously you all roll high on attack rolls and damage and finish it in turn 1. Most of the time you will finish it on turn 3. Sometimes you will finish it on turn 4, etc.

The 125 DPR group will have much higher chances of finishing it on round 1 or 2. It will almost be guaranteed to finish the fight by round 3 while your group has a decent chance for the fight to continue on.

The point is there is a very good chance to finish the whole fight a round before your party, saving all the damage and effects etc that such entails. Over the course of an adventuring day all those extra combat rounds will add up. Further, within a combat, every foe my group dispatches a round earlier than yours means a less enemy turn and potentially less future enemy turns. Every foe my team dispatches faster means the next foe can be attacked sooner and dispatched ever faster etc.