Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ezo" data-source="post: 9372141" data-attributes="member: 7037866">Yes, spellsniper is worse than sharpshooter, but the goal (for me) isn't to try to make all the feats "equal" but to give ASIs to the ones that actually need them. IMO, spellsniper doesn't. I think most people would agree sharpshooter is one of the most powerful and useful feats for ranged weapon attackers.The range boost is a bit better for spellsniper when if you consider that without it, attacking beyond the "normal range" for the spell is impossible!. There is no, "Yes, you can cast firebolt at 180 feet but with disadvantage." You just can't do it, period. With spellsniper, not only is it possible, but you don't have disadvantage.Compair that to a shortbow. Yes, you CAN use a shortbow against a target at 180 feet, but with disadvantage. Sharpshooter simply removes the disadvantage, the chance was already there.In that sense, IMO, spellsniper is a bit more powerful because it makes something that wasn't feasible actually possible.Now, is an extra cantrip worth it? Maybe, but probably not. I guess it depends. While the -5/+10 feature for sharpshooter is nice, I've seen a lot of time when the extra -5 attack modifier resulted in complete misses. It is a net-zero feature IMO, or practically so. Of course, when you build for it and can get optimal situations, it can be very powerful certainly!Since an ASI represents "half a feat", I don't feel spellsniper falls that much short to warrant getting one. If it did, and you could increase your spellcasting ability modifier (a reasonable suggestion), it becomes nearly a must have feat for any D&D game which has a reasonable amount of combat. You'd be getting:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Double all spell attack ranges.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A new attack cantrip.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Ignoring attacking into melee since no cover bonus.</li> </ul>- Increase your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma by 1, to a maximum of 20.Honestly, what spellcaster wouldn't grab that by 8th level?? Adding an ASI would make it too good IMO.Skill Expert never should have been released as it was, it makes Prodigy a non-issue choice. Who would exchange an ASI for a tool and language proficiency? Very few IMO.But, you can't give Prodigy an ASI because, as you know, it would make it better than Skill Expert. When you couple the fact that Skill Expert has no race prerequisite, and you can choose ANY ASI, not one related to the skill or expertise you choose (a HUGE mistake in design for Skill Expert IMO!), yeah Prodigy is obsolete 99% of the time.It is just a weird balancing act. Would Prodigy with an ASI be too much? Probably not. But then you wouldn't need Skill Expert...If I wanted to rewrite feats, I would just revamp them all. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I see this as a "critical feat" IMO for those who take it. While natural 1's are (thankfully) rare, having near infinite uses when you want them is strong. But, like spellsniper, if you give this a +1 DEX, it is too useful for most halflings not to take it in many cases IMO. Perhaps CHA +1 or CON +1 would be ok IMO. Both of those have fewer feats that grant ASIs.Good feedback. In all, I just can't view spellsniper as weak enough to warrant an ASI. Prodigy is a weird issue due to Skill Expert being too good IMO with an ASI. I could easily see giving Bountiful Luck a "choose Constitution or Charisma", however.</blockquote>

Verification