D&D 5E Do DM's feel that Sharpshooter & Great Weapon Master overpowered?

[UngeheuerLich]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION], I'm not sure how you managed to quote me, since you are the one person I have on ignore. I was under the impression the ignore feature was a 2-way block. Oh well. But since I cannot see your post (I only know that I got a notification that you quoted me), please stop. I am uninterested in conversing with you. Thank you.

I had exactly the same problem. Either I wasn't quoted anymore or following worked:
When I looked at my quotes history I was curious and clicked on his name. Then I clicked ignore once again because I thought it would unignore him. That was the last time I saw anything from him.

 

[Helldritch]

One thing I've noticed is that clever self and party buffing can definitely make these feats better, but I don't think they're better than intended. The raging GWM barbarian swings with advantage and when he hits, it deals damage like a fireball....but then, only to one target, and it costs a daily use of Rage to get that advantage (and I'm not sure he'd risk it without rage). The sharpshooter has advantage far less often, but when she hits the damage is comparable (a bit less, but she's ranged, so she's gaining defensive ability to do that)....and she's missing a lot more.

5e's mild preference for many critters in a fight and for many fights/day helps bring that curve down to a respectable level. If every attack you make is at advantage (or at +1d4 from a bless or something) in a day, maybe it could seem OP, like a single-target at-will fireball. But, these things are not always easy to come by. And, as I'm sure my party ranger can attest, missing is a real negative pressure. Heck, last session, another party member was like "Maybe don't use Sharpshooter for a round? Because you are having a lot of whiffs?"

That is exactly what is happening at my table. GWM and SS are not used at every single combat. My players are constantly guessing when to throw a fireball, buffs the GWM/SS or simply fight with no spell/potion boosts. Sometimes it will even be two fireball type spells followed by a bless so that GWM/SS can finish the enemies faster.

 

[Corwin]

Anecdotally, I've found a table of players tends to overlook, or outright forget, misses. But they sure remember the hits. Especially when the damage is solid, as tends to be the case when these feats are in use. One GWM barbarian crit, for an insane amount of damage, will instantly cast the feat as suspect in so many people's minds. Nevermind all the near misses the barbarian may have had, because of that -5. Then there's the possibility some of that attack's massive damage may have been overkill and wasted. But that rarely comes up. All people remember is the raw number. The big hit. It stands out. And drowns out any other details. That's hard to overcome with logic and math.

 

[Kryx]

All people remember is the raw number. The big hit. It stands out. And drowns out any other details. That's hard to overcome with logic and math.

The math (DPR) was shown above. And yet here we are with you and others ignoring it in favor of your opinion which is not substantiated by math.

GWM is far more valuable than +2 strength, even without -5/+10 it is still ahead. Even with the misses from -5/+10 it's still far ahead.

Oy.. the dnd community is frustrating sometimes...

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I had exactly the same problem. Either I wasn't quoted anymore or following worked:
When I looked at my quotes history I was curious and clicked on his name. Then I clicked ignore once again because I thought it would unignore him. That was the last time I saw anything from him.

Thanks for the tip. I've had the same problem in the past (I forget exactly when or with whom) but I'll try your workaround next time.

 

[Corwin]

The math (DPR) was shown above. And yet here we are with you and others ignoring it in favor of your opinion which is not substantiated by math.

I think you have it backwards. The math above supports my point. Both this one and my larger opinion that feats need to make you better or they are a waste.

GWM is far more valuable than +2 strength, even without -5/+10 it is still ahead. Even with the misses from -5/+10 it's still far ahead.

"Far," huh? Well, with precise analytics like that, what's there to dispute?

And I question what parameters you are using when you compared it against +2 strength. GWM doesn't increase your attack bonus, strength save, leaping distance, Athletics skill, nor your carrying capacity.

Oy.. the dnd community is frustrating sometimes...

I don't consider this forum "the dnd community." Do you?

 

[Helldritch]

The math (DPR) was shown above. And yet here we are with you and others ignoring it in favor of your opinion which is not substantiated by math.

GWM is far more valuable than +2 strength, even without -5/+10 it is still ahead. Even with the misses from -5/+10 it's still far ahead.

Oy.. the dnd community is frustrating sometimes...

It's just like gambling addicts. Some do not remember the losses, only the gains. Yes the feat is better. But no it is not over powered. Intelligent monsters will use tactics (like front liners dodging) putting the GWM at disadvantage (or simply rolling at normal) while their ranged brethren fires at the big bad swinging fury or the spell casters.

I use dodging a lot with my monsters when they are in numbers. GWM/SS becomes quite less attractive this way. Sometimes I dodge, sometimes I don't (especialy if the big fury is low on hp...).

 

[Kryx]

I'll assume you missed my detailed analysis on page 2 of this thread. I'll quote it all back to you:

Important clarifications:

• GWF, or Great Weapon Fighting, is the fighting style. GWM, or Great Weapon Master, is the feat. It's important to keep these two acronyms separate.
• Spellcasting power is at best tertiary to this discussion. There is a caster/martial divide, though it is much smaller in 5e. However this topic is talking about the power that this feat gives some martial characters. That inceased power isn't really relevant to the topic of the caster/martial divide and to use this feat as a "fix" to that divide is incredibly problematic as it does nothing for many martial builds. At best this strategy would further weaken classes like Monk, Rogue, Ranger, or TWF.

Ok, so with those things out of the way lets consider the actual math:

Math provided on google spreadsheet: DPR of Classes

So for a 5th level barbarian any AC up to AC 18 the Barbarian is better off having taken GWM and using -5/+10. Assuming a barbarian fights an equal distribution of enemies from CR 2 to CR 8 from every officially published WotC book the average enemy's AC will be 14.4. This aligns closely with the DMG's recommendation of 15 AC for a CR 5 enemy. So the AC of an enemy would have to be much higher than average to have a negative impact on this choice.

Using that 14.4 a 5th level GWM Barbarian is averaging 36.7 DPR while a 5th level Barbarian who took 1 strength instead is doing 23.3 DPR. The difference is massive: 57% more damage.
Sure there are cases where a barbarian isn't going to want to use -5/+10, but as you can see in the graph above the Barbarian is still better off taking GWM and not using -5/+10 than taking +1 str.
Let me make that part clear: The cleave part of GWM is better than +1 strength modifier in terms of damage.
So even if we ignore -5/+10, GWM is an incredibly powerful feat. Add in -5/+10 and it's definitely out of the expected range for damage - especially for classes with easy access to advantage like Barbarian, OoV Paladin, Fighter (BM w/ trip).

Does it make martial classes equivalent to casters in versatility? No.
Does it make certain martial classes do far more damage than expected compared to their martial counterparts? Yes.

It's overpowered.

The math is entirely provided on a spreadsheet for you to analyze. It is based on the adventuring day as suggested by the DMG.

But no it is not over powered.

Math has been provided that says otherwise. Opinions unsubstantiated by math have little value in a discussion of balance imo.

 

[Corwin]

*Your* math. Let's keep that straight. Others here have posted math that disagrees with your take.

 

[Kryx]

*Your* math. Let's keep that straight. Others here have posted math that disagrees with your take.

Please link me to the "correct" math. All I have seen is several posts that look at average damage ignoring chance to hit, encounters per day, rages per day, enemy AC distributions, etc, etc.