D&D 5E (2014) Great Weapon Master: how about -5 AC instead of -5 to hit?

[Quartz]

I've just been watching a Matt Easton video about poleaxes and he makes the point that if you make a power blow you leave yourself open. Especially if you miss. In D&D terms this would be equivalent to giving opponents Advantage or -5 AC. I think in this case that -5 AC is much more game-friendly as Advantage against someone with an AC of 20+ isn't so hot and it allows Advantage and Disadvantage on top. And the Shield spell. Has anyone experimented with this?

 

[Professor Murder]

How long would it last? Next attack? That could be a reasonable trade. An entire round? One would be foolish to take it.

 

[Lojaan]

I like this much better than taking a penalty to hit.

 

[jgsugden]

This is very easy to manipulate. Think about a Barbarian that already is giving advantage to enemies with reckless attack, and relies upon damage resistance rather than enemies missing. Also, if you kill the enemy on your turn and then make it hard for another ememy to attack there is effectively no penalty.

The feat is actually not broken as is - there are a lot of perceptions of it needing to be fixed, but it really doesn't.

 

[Quartz]

How long would it last?

Good question. What would you suggest?

Next attack?

Do you mean next Attack Action? Because a level 5 fighter can take their second attack immediately.

How about having it last a duration based on initiative count? Say 10 points of initiative count or initiative count 20 of the next round, whichever comes earlier?

This is very easy to manipulate.

As is the current situation.

Think about a Barbarian

I disagree. This would make the Barbarian have to deal with absorbing even more damage. And don't forget that a Barbarian can have proficiency in heavy armour either by feat or by multiclassing. That raging barbarian can be rocking an AC of 20 or even more, which significantly diminishes the effect of enemy attacks having Advantage.

 

[Professor Murder]

Good question. What would you suggest?



Do you mean next Attack Action? Because a level 5 fighter can take their second attack immediately.

Both questions are answered together. I mean the next attack the feat user is subject to. As in, the next time they are attacked, they are at -5 AC. I would also likely rule that using this feat multiple times in a turn would result in "stacks." So if the character had 3 attacks and used this feat 3 times, the next 3 times they are attacked, their AC is -5.

How about having it last a duration based on initiative count? Say 10 points of initiative count or initiative count 20 of the next round, whichever comes earlier?

Jasus no. Why would you want that much more bookkeeping?

 

[Quartz]

Both questions are answered together. I mean the next attack the feat user is subject to.

I see. I think that may be a little too weak but it does have the benefit of KISS. So it's a good start.

 

[Professor Murder]

Just keep in mind that a -5 to AC is much more punishing than an attacker having advantage, due to the fact that they can then get advantage from another source, while multiple cases of gaining advantage do nothing, and a single thing granting disadvantage negates all advantage.

 

[dave2008]

I've just been watching a Matt Easton video about poleaxes and he makes the point that if you make a power blow you leave yourself open. Especially if you miss. In D&D terms this would be equivalent to giving opponents Advantage or -5 AC. I think in this case that -5 AC is much more game-friendly as Advantage against someone with an AC of 20+ isn't so hot and it allows Advantage and Disadvantage on top. And the Shield spell. Has anyone experimented with this?

I could see this apply to heavy reach weapons, mauls, and maybe big-ass axes, but not really great swords. Great swords are not much bigger or longer than long swords really.

Though I do like the idea and I would make the AC penalty last until the start of your next turn.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I've just been watching a Matt Easton video about poleaxes and he makes the point that if you make a power blow you leave yourself open. Especially if you miss. In D&D terms this would be equivalent to giving opponents Advantage or -5 AC. I think in this case that -5 AC is much more game-friendly as Advantage against someone with an AC of 20+ isn't so hot and it allows Advantage and Disadvantage on top. And the Shield spell. Has anyone experimented with this?

As first I thought maybe this would be ok, but on further thought I would have to not allow it or encourage making the change.

The reason main reason is hitting is already pretty easy in 5E IME. Without the -5 to the attack roll, the +10 to damage would be too tempting to pass by.

And as others mention, if you do hit (which you probably will), with the extra damage the target is likely defeated when you try it, meaning you risk no retaliation in many instances.

If I did allow this, the penalty to AC would have to last until the start of your next turn. That is the only way it has enough weight to it to balance out the +10 to damage IMO.