D&D 5E Another attempt at fixing the -5 / +10 issue

Quartz · Jun 22, 2019

Quartz said:
Maybe 'Apply Disadvantage and add 10 to the result' might be better?

On further thought, while it mitigates really good results, that's far too good on average.

FrogReaver · Jun 22, 2019

Xeviat said:
You're proposing separating -5/+10 out into it's own feat, which means TWFing characters could pick it up.

Not me, the OP.

I said I don't think TWFing should have access to -5/+10. So I wouldn't like your change.

The OP's change - but, even then - Coming into a thread to simply say, "I don't think you should do this so I wouldn't like the change" without offering any reasoning as to why is dangerously close to the thread crapping.

By the way, I happen to be on your side - that TWF shouldn't get a -5/+10 feat (at least without some other substantial changes). I think it would be to imbalanced in tier1/tier2 as the TWF could get the ASI and a single feat to do what the PWM GWF does with 2.

Xeviat · Jun 22, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Not me, the OP.

The OP's change - but, even then - Coming into a thread to simply say, "I don't think you should do this so I wouldn't like the change" without offering any reasoning as to why is dangerously close to the thread crapping.

By the way, I happen to be on your side - that TWF shouldn't get a -5/+10 feat (at least without some other substantial changes). I think it would be to imbalanced in tier1/tier2 as the TWF could get the ASI and a single feat to do what the PWM GWF does with 2.

Not meaning to crap, and I apologize for coming off that way.

My reasoning is two-fold. First, an extra chance to add +10 damage feels like it's too powerful in the hands of someone with a bonus action attack; this is why I don't like it combined with Crossbow Expert and Polearm Mastery (I consider polearm mastery to be turning a polearm into a double weapon in 3E terms, but that's not something 5E really has). Second, I feel like it's not fitting of the other fighting styles. Yes, you could justify it with a dagger or rapier or something in the same way Sharp Shooter is justified (going for small, vulnerable targets), but I don't feel like it fits the theme of these attacks.

I also feel like a -5 penalty isn't as much of a penalty to the damage of smaller weapons as it is to bigger weapons. Now, the damage difference between a GWFing empowered Greatsword with +5 Str (13.33) isn't that much different than a Duelist empowered Rapier with +5 Dex (11.5), but it's about the feel moreso than balance at this point.

Dausuul · Jun 23, 2019

I don't see why you need anything beyond this:

Quartz said:
Great Weapon Master & Sharpshooter: remove the -5 / +10 and give +1 to Str & Dex respectively.

That solves the -5/+10 issue rather conclusively, by getting rid of it. What's the point of adding all this other stuff to bring it back? What makes it so important to have the -5/+10 option in the game? It isn't as if it's flavorful or exciting or tactically interesting; it's just a couple of flat modifiers to rolls you'd be making anyway.

Quartz · Jun 23, 2019

Dausuul said:
I don't see why you need anything beyond this:

That solves the -5/+10 issue rather conclusively, by getting rid of it. What's the point of adding all this other stuff to bring it back? What makes it so important to have the -5/+10 option in the game? It isn't as if it's flavorful or exciting or tactically interesting; it's just a couple of flat modifiers to rolls you'd be making anyway.

Well yes, but a lot of people seem to like the -5 / +10 mechanism.

Dausuul · Jun 23, 2019

Quartz said:
Well yes, but a lot of people seem to like the -5 / +10 mechanism.

Sure they do. OP mechanics are always popular. The question is, how many people would still like it if it weren't OP? Say it was -5/+5 instead of -5/+10 - useful against low-AC foes such as zombies and beasts, but not much of an option outside of that - would anyone still like it? Or would it be a couple of boring flat modifiers with not much to recommend them?

ccs · Jun 23, 2019

Quartz said:
No, I decide to solve it by breaking it out into separate feats which the GM can allow or ban at their discretion.

Thanks. Now instead of considering wether to allow 2 feats, I have to consider 3+ feats.... :erm:

FrogReaver · Jun 23, 2019

Dausuul said:
Sure they do. OP mechanics are always popular. The question is, how many people would still like it if it weren't OP? Say it was -5/+5 instead of -5/+10 - useful against low-AC foes such as zombies and beasts, but not much of an option outside of that - would anyone still like it? Or would it be a couple of boring flat modifiers with not much to recommend them?

Nope, then we would just complain about haste on rogues. It really doesn't matter what's in the game, there will always be a strongest option to complain about. The larger issue of -5/+10 for many of us is that from a mechanical perspective it invalidates TWF and Sword and Shield Styles.

TwoSix · Jun 23, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Nope, then we would just complain about haste on rogues. It really doesn't matter what's in the game, there will always be a strongest option to complain about. The larger issue of -5/+10 for many of us is that from a mechanical perspective it invalidates TWF and Sword and Shield Styles.

Not to mention it would make sorlocks the best damage option in the game with no obvious competitor, and I don't think anyone wants that.

TwoSix · Jun 23, 2019

Dausuul said:
That solves the -5/+10 issue rather conclusively, by getting rid of it. What's the point of adding all this other stuff to bring it back? What makes it so important to have the -5/+10 option in the game? It isn't as if it's flavorful or exciting or tactically interesting; it's just a couple of flat modifiers to rolls you'd be making anyway.

You're definitely underselling the joy of telling the DM you just did 28 points of damage; no, that wasn't a crit; no, my turn isn't over, that was just my first attack.