D&D 5E Great Weapon Master vs. Hex/Hunter's Mark

[Slit518]

Inspired by the recent Feats threads, I am working on my own list heavily inspired by the others. Two of the feats some consider too strong are Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master with their -5/+10 features. To replace this feature, I have thought of something like this:

Great Weapon Master
- Increase your Strength score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
- You learn the spell Hunter's Mark and can cast it without expending a spell slot. You regain this ability when you finish a short or long rest. If you already know Hunter's Mark, its damage and range are doubled and it no longer requires Concentration.

How do you think this mechanic compares to the stock Great Weapon Master feat, and how would you improve it?

You could just have great weapon master and sharpshooter roll damage twice, and take the best result of the damage die?

 

[Stalker0]

I liked the just add +1d6 option. It's solid, sexy for crits, requires no attack roll readjustments, and sometimes can actually be stronger than the current feat because no attack bonus loss...but it doesn't feel as strong.

I like that one myself.

 

[clearstream]

That's probably fair. Assuming no CEx/SS, but leaving in GWM (assuming we agree that the -5/+10 mechanic isn't inherently problematic, which I think may be a point of contention), I'd like to see:

1) More 1d8 finesse options. Scimitar/rapier/mace, possibly? So there are S/P/B options?
2) TWF bonus action should do +mod damage by default. Fighting style should allow any two one-handers. The feat should give a damage bump close to the GWM one, and +1 AC, no ASI.
3) Versatile weapons should have their own fighting style/feat combination, preferably one that encourages tactical switching between one-handed and two-handed use.

I like the sense behind all of those ideas and would like to take them on as design goals.

 

[TwoSix]

I like the sense behind all of those ideas and would like to take them on as design goals.

I'd definitely be interested to see anything you came up with.

 

[Coroc]

Why do all the posts concerned with GWM and sharpshooter asume that PCs with this feat always hit despite the -5 which is MORE than the whole +2 to +6 prof Bonus !!!!!!!!!!!!!

That means in other words your Level 20 Char asuming he has the same attack stat would be worse than your Level 1 Char !!!!!!!

The Argument always goes: you always have some means of bless or Advantage or yadda yadda.

For me it seems that the DMs of the People demanding a nerf on GWM / SS have a favored Monster: a giant slug stuck in a pit for AC 8 and Advantage .

Really do your clerics never get hit to get rid of their concentration? Do your GWM and SS Players use fudged dice?

I am playing a SS Ranger with 16 dex and i got a cleric in the group and my DM uses a wide range of armor classes for the Mobs and i tell you on many occasions i left the -5 +10 Switch at off because i was worried to not get a single hit on an average mob.

 

[FrogReaver]

Why do all the posts concerned with GWM and sharpshooter asume that PCs with this feat always hit despite the -5 which is MORE than the whole +2 to +6 prof Bonus !!!!!!!!!!!!!

That means in other words your Level 20 Char asuming he has the same attack stat would be worse than your Level 1 Char !!!!!!!

The Argument always goes: you always have some means of bless or Advantage or yadda yadda.

For me it seems that the DMs of the People demanding a nerf on GWM / SS have a favored Monster: a giant slug stuck in a pit for AC 8 and Advantage .

Really do your clerics never get hit to get rid of their concentration? Do your GWM and SS Players use fudged dice?

I am playing a SS Ranger with 16 dex and i got a cleric in the group and my DM uses a wide range of armor classes for the Mobs and i tell you on many occasions i left the -5 +10 Switch at off because i was worried to not get a single hit on an average mob.

Archery style gives +2. The battleMaster precision attack maneuver effectively gives about +3 attack over a whole adventuring day (assuming 2 short rests). That means you hit just as often as a sword and shield fighter and get +10 damage.

SS isn't nearly as good on a ranger.

 

[hejtmane]

Depends, if you're going the Half-Orc Champion route, THF is appealing. I agree however that for Battlemaster GWM-users, Defense is the more favoured choice.


TWF isn't fixed by nerfing GWM: it needs its own fix. The DW feat for a start should be made worth an ASI instead of half of one: mechanically, that really is a trap feat.
SnB is better than GWM in play. That said, it's easy to make a mediocre SnB character that will be overshadowed by the GWM character. The right choices for GWM are more obvious is the problem there.
THF is not a good pick, but it is an appealing one. It seems harmless to me. Not too much of a trap, occasionally shines.

Overall aside from TWF which mechanically sucks (that's the technical term of course), the fighting styles are reasonable, until we mix in RAW CEx and SS...

I helped out TWF a lot I took away the bonus action part and made it an extra attack once per turn with the off hand weapon much like Colossus slayer in Rangers. That is my House rule and two weapon fighting has played out better as of the result

 

[FrogReaver]

I helped out TWF a lot I took away the bonus action part and made it an extra attack once per turn with the off hand weapon much like Colossus slayer in Rangers. That is my House rule and two weapon fighting has played out better as of the result

Probably is a bit too good for rangers now?

 

[hejtmane]

Probably is a bit too good for rangers now?

No one really has played a ranger had a twf fighter pally high level and he got extra radiant damage per strike still not bad but i allow feats so it evens out even tested a twf fighter/kensi monk with getting his bonus attack still and nothing ground breaking (was an NPC i controlled)

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[clearstream]

Archery style gives +2. The battleMaster precision attack maneuver effectively gives about +3 attack over a whole adventuring day (assuming 2 short rests). That means you hit just as often as a sword and shield fighter and get +10 damage.

SS isn't nearly as good on a ranger.

It's at least as good up to 10th level, with Hunters Mark +1d6 to compensate for the absence of Precision.

Only at 11th level, when they get their additional EA, does Fighter pull ahead. For most characters that will mean they were better as a Ranger for most of their career. Even for a character that eventually reaches 20th level, they will have been better as a Ranger for 50% of their career (going by PHB and DMG guidelines).

I'm not saying you are wrong so much as drawing attention to a factor that can be overlooked in this sort of abstract analysis.