D&D 5E Current take on GWM/SS

[FormerlyHemlock]

Note: The Shield spell often does not last close to a full round. It only lasts a full round if the Dragon uses it on the PC's init immediately next after the Dragon's. Otherwise, it often lasts way less than a round. In our Dragon encounter yesterday, there were 7 PCs, 4 monsters, and a Dragon. 12 inits. The Dragon's init was 2 creatures below the Wizard's init, so its Shield spell lasts for 2 inits out of 12 or 1/6th of a round (2/7th of PC's inits).

A distinction without a difference in DPR analysis. Since the Shield spell can be activated on any hit, it doesn't matter if an attack missed against its AC 22 and its AC only later becomes AC 27. What matters is that you have to hit AC 27 or prevent/counterspell/dispel the Shield in order to hit it.

 

[DaveDash]

A distinction without a difference in DPR analysis. Since the Shield spell can be activated on any hit, it doesn't matter if an attack missed against its AC 22 and its AC only later becomes AC 27. What matters is that you have to hit AC 27 or prevent/counterspell/dispel the Shield in order to hit it.

And you lose your ability to counter-spell when you pop shield.

It's easy for a group of players to overwhelm a solo Dragons reaction.

 

[Wulfgar76]

I don't know what the right fix would be – But I think these two feats put undue strain on the game and are overpowered.

I scouted them out early on and pre-emptively banned them.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I don't know what the right fix would be – But I think these two feats put undue strain on the game and are overpowered.

I scouted them out early on and pre-emptively banned them.

A balanced fix in my view, using other feats as examples, is to change the -5/+10 to +1 Str or Dex. They become a half feat, half stat raise, and they're both still good but not OP in that form. GWM really becomes WM for example - you get a free bonus action attack if you crit or drop a foe. It's still very good.

 

[KarinsDad]

And you lose your ability to counter-spell when you pop shield.

It's easy for a group of players to overwhelm a solo Dragons reaction.

Yup.

The Young Blue Dragon I was running yesterday had Shield and Counterspell (and Feather Fall and Lightning Bolt, and a few other spells, I give 2x Cha spells to Dragons). It was careful to cast the Shield only at a very opportune time and the Counterspell on a very opportune spell (the second Fireball thrown at it, not the first).

But, he brought 4 strong allies with him (solos can die pretty easy in 5E) and nearly killed a few of the 7 PCs (two PCs only survived because a player pointed out that Aid increases Maximum Hit Point total and death occurs at negative Maximum Hit Point total, I was thinking that death occurred at original negative Maximum Hit Point total, it was that close for 2 PCs).

 

[Ohillion]

It's my opinion that you can houserule anything in the book. However, once you houserule it, you have to be prepared to use it on either side of the DM screen. That goes to the players and the DM. I voted in favor of "The problem isn't that bad; use the feats as-is" because:

1) Changing a rule may have a domino effect and you end up rewriting more rules to fix the 'broken' rule.

2) WotC may end up rewriting the rule in an errata and you'll have to revisit it anyways.

3) Players will always find way to make another feat/rule work in their favor. This means you've only lowered the abuse cap and will have to figure out yet another loophole to close elsewhere. Go back to 1) and wash, rinse, repeat.

I'm not saying the RAW are perfect. On the contrary, they are flawed because of the wiles of human nature. What works for one or some may not work for others. it's your responsibility of the DM to be creative with how you implement the rules. I love these forums. I've recieved a good amount of advice and i've only joined in a few days ago.

I hope you sort out your feat dilemma and can bring lots of enjoyment to the story and the game.

 

[KarinsDad]

It's my opinion that you can houserule anything in the book. However, once you houserule it, you have to be prepared to use it on either side of the DM screen. That goes to the players and the DM. I voted in favor of "The problem isn't that bad; use the feats as-is" because:

1) Changing a rule may have a domino effect and you end up rewriting more rules to fix the 'broken' rule.

Feats are optional. Watering down or removing a feat is not going to cause a domino effect.

2) WotC may end up rewriting the rule in an errata and you'll have to revisit it anyways.

It takes 10 seconds to revisit it and state that you are either going with the errata, or your houserule. It took a lot more time for you to write this post than it would for a DM to decide to use errata or houserule.

3) Players will always find way to make another feat/rule work in their favor. This means you've only lowered the abuse cap and will have to figure out yet another loophole to close elsewhere. Go back to 1) and wash, rinse, repeat.

5E is fairly well balanced. These two feats are not (IMO). You are making an assumption here that the DMs who feel that these feats (combined with other obvious spells and such) are overpowered will feel that other combos are overpowered. That may or may not be true. I only have a handful of houserules since I see few problems in 5E.


After the abuse that was possible in 3E, Pathfinder, and 4E, 5E is fairly tame in that regard.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

5E is fairly well balanced. These two feats are not (IMO). You are making an assumption here that the DMs who feel that these feats (combined with other obvious spells and such) are overpowered will feel that other combos are overpowered. That may or may not be true. I only have a handful of houserules since I see few problems in 5E.

So you think Sharpshooter/GWM is more powerful and problematic than Polearm Master (with quarterstaff + shield), Crossbow Expert Warlock/Clerics, Inspired Leadership-powered skeletal archers, Animate Object on copper pieces, 16 Conjured cobras, Sorlocks, Simulacrum, Maze, assassination, assassination plus Divine Smite, and Planar Binding? The single best thing about Sharpshooter is that it works even when a beholder has you covered with an Anti-magic Ray and all of its goblin minions are shooting at you with advantage due to hiding. The second-best thing about it is that it works against Tiamat, unlike pretty much everything else. Outside of those two scenarios it is not dominant in any scenarios. It's good, but so are the alternatives.

 

[Ohillion]

Feats are optional. Watering down or removing a feat is not going to cause a domino effect.



It takes 10 seconds to revisit it and state that you are either going with the errata, or your houserule. It took a lot more time for you to write this post than it would for a DM to decide to use errata or houserule.



5E is fairly well balanced. These two feats are not (IMO). You are making an assumption here that the DMs who feel that these feats (combined with other obvious spells and such) are overpowered will feel that other combos are overpowered. That may or may not be true. I only have a handful of houserules since I see few problems in 5E.


After the abuse that was possible in 3E, Pathfinder, and 4E, 5E is fairly tame in that regard.

I see your points and I can agree in part.

1. Yes, feats are optional. That's one of the poll options...get rid of feats. Personally, I don't like this option. The players at my table like the variance in character creation.

2. The time to review the rules isn't really my issue. It's rewinding a character back to the level at which they might otherwise have taken the feat. Sorry I didn't state that properly as I should have.

3. We're only beginning our 5e gaming so I'll trust you on this. I'm open to any and all suggestions to improve play at our table.

Respectfully, I still hold to my position on my first two points because I've had experience with it through other game systems. We all play differently but the heart of the rules is to create a fun and enjoyable session for everyone involved regardless. I stick to the RAW and play, as the DM, to stick to the heart of the rule.

 

[KarinsDad]

So you think Sharpshooter/GWM is more powerful and problematic than Polearm Master (with quarterstaff + shield), Crossbow Expert Warlock/Clerics, Inspired Leadership-powered skeletal archers, Animate Object on copper pieces, 16 Conjured cobras, Sorlocks, Simulacrum, Maze, assassination, assassination plus Divine Smite, and Planar Binding? The single best thing about Sharpshooter is that it works even when a beholder has you covered with an Anti-magic Ray and all of its goblin minions are shooting at you with advantage due to hiding. The second-best thing about it is that it works against Tiamat, unlike pretty much everything else. Outside of those two scenarios it is not dominant in any scenarios. It's good, but so are the alternatives.

If you are making a claim on the power of any of these, please state the exact specifics of class, race, feats, and spells (and/or DPR) that make them so potent, more so than other options at those levels.

For example, Maze is an 8th level spell. That doesn't matter at ~95+% of all tables and there are other same level spells that are more potent like Feeblemind.

So to illustrate your point, you need to supply some specific details.