D&D 5E Current take on GWM/SS

[Celtavian]

Umm [MENTION=6786202]DaveDash[/MENTION]. Could you break down you SS fighter a bit. How is he doing 135 points in 3 attacks?

That's probably an Action Surge round, possibly with haste.

 

[DaveDash]

Umm [MENTION=6786202]DaveDash[/MENTION]. Could you break down you SS fighter a bit. How is he doing 135 points in 3 attacks?

Action surge + Haste. But if this guy was a Crossbow Expert he'd have done similar damage without haste due to Crossbow Expert bonus action attack.

 

[spinozajack]

Problems with GWM :

1) Makes weapon choice for damage die, and fighting style, nearly irrelevant. +10 damage is close to the max damage of all heavy weapons, and great weapon fighting style's benefit is similarly a minimal contribution of no real importance compared to this feat's.
2) It stacks with polearm master, which gets a bonus attack and fighting style with PM, and adds an extra +10 attack, plus even one more from an OA. Too good. Giving up 1 W DPR to get reach, also means that when you kill or crit, you can more easily reach the next target.
3) +10 damage is literally three times greater than the highest bonus damage from a legendary weapon. And available at level 1. Kind of hard to feel like this sword's really powerful when that non-magical polearm over there is doing loads more damage all day, every day.

Not sure the best way to fix it, but reach weapons definitely need to not benefit from this feat. There is already a feat for that. If polearms can get +10 on all those extra attacks, why can't Dual wielder too? I can't comprehend the balance logic behind making polearms so overwhelmingly superior in this edition. It's quite beyond compare.

At level 5 you will have 3-4 attacks (closer to 4 is you know how to position yourself and pick your targets), each with +10 damage and reach. The problem I have with GWM isn't that it's powerful, but that it applies to polearms and stacks with the other most powerful feat. It's like if SS + something else allowed 3-4 arrows a round at level 5 with +10 each. Right now SS allows +10 on two attacks per round at level 5, not three. And certainly not 4. SS is a picture of balance compared to GWM + PM.

PM needs a hard nerf and lose the bonus extra attack with free twf style baked in to it. And it shouldn't be possible to get +10 damage on reach weapons but not dual wielded short range weapons. Polearms are too powerful thanks to both these feats stacking. It was a big mistake making them stack like this.

 

[Celtavian]

I don't know about you guys, but what really makes me unhappy is none of the designers of the feats noticed the problem. Once you let something into the game, it is hard to get back out. Players don't feel the same bang for their buck and begin to feel cheated. If they had vetted the feats to begin with, players don't feel like they're missing something. You get no sour looks or intense discussions over the feats.

 

[S_Dalsgaard]

I wish we could focus this mostly on DMs. Players rarely want to give up power. Though it is nice to know at least the community is fairly split with 54% wanting to do something about the feat and 46% wanting to leave it as is.

I imagine it's the group with optimizers that see the problems the feats cause. I know the problem is rather narrow. It's the ability to focus fire using multiple attacks with Sharpshooter or Great Weapon Master often in combination with an ability like Action Surge, haste, or Smiting that is the primary cause of the problem. As a DM I don't mind when the players can take down multiples faster, in those circumstances I like GWM and Sharpshooter at full strength. When a party is fighting a single powerful monster or NPC supposedly strong enough to challenge them alone, and GWM and Sharpshooter double the damage on the target on top of everyone else novaing while buffed to the gills creates a very anticlimactic battle. There have been multiple instances where the players have taken a fight and turned it trivial due to those two feats doubling the damage of an Action Surging fighter or increased the damage by about 30% per hit for a smiting paladin. Even might dragons go down quick to this damage, creatures less powerful than dragons go down in a round of two. I recall fighting a supposedly strong single target non-legendary creature and a supposedly powerful priest using a legendary artifact, the fights lasted 6 to 12 seconds due to GWF and Sharpshooter damage. A lot of caster enemies are fairly easy to hit and have low hit points making these feats particularly effective against such enemies.

Given this narrow situation for their abuse, I can see why there are still quite a few that don't see the problem with them. I hope as time goes by, more will see it.

So basically what you are saying is, that 54% wants to do something about the feats and the other 46% just needs to come to their senses?

 

[Celtavian]

So basically what you are saying is, that 54% wants to do something about the feats and the other 46% just needs to come to their senses?

Is that how you take it? As some sort of implied personal insult?

The reason I said as times goes by is because 5E is relatively new. The current campaigns are petering out at around level 6 according to surveys with very few going to level 12. You won't get much information from a game system if most are playing to level 6 out of 20 possible levels. I'm hoping once there is a larger number of people that have played past level 6 or even 12, other DMs will note the damage discrepancy and the issues the feats cause. We will see more hop on board of the "change these feats" wagon. Even many posting on these threads have very little experience with the feats. I think of the people posting often on the topic only Dave and I have played a fairly core rules campaign to 16th level with characters and parties taking optimal advantage of the feats. I believe Merric has played to level 12. If I recall his party was an odd set of classes that I'm not sure had either feat present.

Most people are probably on their first or second campaign given how new 5E is. When a game is that new, you don't see issues with it. Dave and I happen to have some serious optimizers in our groups. They know how to read the rules and make a crazy powerful character. Not everyone does this whether by choice or lack of system mastery. For me it is important to slow down options that shunt players into certain feats or types of characters that overshadow other types. It creates a bad situation where you have guys that may want to make a TWF or blaster wizard and feel vastly underpowered compared to a GWF or Sharpshooter. I feel that is the main problem with the feats. Until more people have a chance to play in groups where the feats are used by optimized characters, the problem will be hard to see.

So hopefully you now understand why I said "I hope as time goes by, more will see it", it being the problem with the feats.

 

[iserith]

If a player (or that player's DM) knows that a given game mechanic "overshadows" others and negatively impacts their game experience, why then do they choose to take it? Or, having taken it, self-regulate its use to only those times when it is really necessary and will be fun for everyone? If the player has read and understands the goals of play as discussed in the Introduction of the game - having a good time together and creating an exciting, memorable story as a result of play - then why doesn't he or she keep that in mind when taking or using these mechanics?

In other words, are people house-ruling or denying the use of these feats to curb abuse? And, if so, isn't the underlying problem players who are willing to abuse these mechanics in a way that negatively impacts the game experience rather than the mechanics themselves?

 

[TwoSix]

The reason I said as times goes by is because 5E is relatively new. The current campaigns are petering out at around level 6 according to surveys with very few going to level 12. You won't get much information from a game system if most are playing to level 6 out of 20 possible levels. I'm hoping once there is a larger number of people that have played past level 6 or even 12, other DMs will note the damage discrepancy and the issues the feats cause. We will see more hop on board of the "change these feats" wagon. Even many posting on these threads have very little experience with the feats. I think of the people posting often on the topic only Dave and I have played a fairly core rules campaign to 16th level with characters and parties taking optimal advantage of the feats. I believe Merric has played to level 12. If I recall his party was an odd set of classes that I'm not sure had either feat present.

I agree with this. The problem becomes more recognizable at higher levels, as increased stats, proficienices, and possible magical weapon up a character's accuracy, as well as more attacks leading to more visibility of the elevated damage on a round-to-round basis. It's not such a big deal when you change your odds from hitting on an 11 to a 16 once a round, but when you have 3 attacks that hit on an 8 instead of a 3, you start seeing those rounds of 60+ damage a lot more frequently. That's when people at the table really start to take notice.

 

[Valador]

So apparently no one here has enough 5e experience to really come to an accurate conclusion, so therefore this witch hunt against these feats really seems kind of moot. I mean how can all of these ignorant people come to a reasonable decision on what to do with these outrageous feats if they haven't seen just how truly earth shattering they are?

/end sarcasm

Sorry, couldn't help myself considering you can follow someone's personal vendetta against these feats amongst numerous different threads... I just wish that some day many years from now I can attain legendary 5e experience enough that my brain can some how manage to formulate a way to deal with these feats...

 

[S_Dalsgaard]

Is that how you take it? As some sort of implied personal insult?

The reason I said as times goes by is because 5E is relatively new. The current campaigns are petering out at around level 6 according to surveys with very few going to level 12. You won't get much information from a game system if most are playing to level 6 out of 20 possible levels. I'm hoping once there is a larger number of people that have played past level 6 or even 12, other DMs will note the damage discrepancy and the issues the feats cause. We will see more hop on board of the "change these feats" wagon. Even many posting on these threads have very little experience with the feats. I think of the people posting often on the topic only Dave and I have played a fairly core rules campaign to 16th level with characters and parties taking optimal advantage of the feats. I believe Merric has played to level 12. If I recall his party was an odd set of classes that I'm not sure had either feat present.

Most people are probably on their first or second campaign given how new 5E is. When a game is that new, you don't see issues with it. Dave and I happen to have some serious optimizers in our groups. They know how to read the rules and make a crazy powerful character. Not everyone does this whether by choice or lack of system mastery. For me it is important to slow down options that shunt players into certain feats or types of characters that overshadow other types. It creates a bad situation where you have guys that may want to make a TWF or blaster wizard and feel vastly underpowered compared to a GWF or Sharpshooter. I feel that is the main problem with the feats. Until more people have a chance to play in groups where the feats are used by optimized characters, the problem will be hard to see.

So hopefully you now understand why I said "I hope as time goes by, more will see it", it being the problem with the feats.

I understood what you meant (and I didn't feel insulted in the least).

You are so convinced about your conclusion that these feats are overpowered, that you assume that anyone not agreeing with you simply haven't played the game as much as you have. You believe that anyone disagreeing with you are doing so because of a lack of information and experience and that we mere novices will certainly see the light when we finally reach your level of mastery.

I certainly haven't played as much as you, I am sure, but I am not at all convinced I will find these feats overpowered when I become a D&D 5e Expert.