D&D 5E (2014) [5e] Modification of -5/+10 Feats

[Geeknamese]

If you nerf GWM/SS to once per turn (I don't like once per round), -5/+10 isn't enough to make the feat viable, worth taking or even thematic. Explaining narratively why it could only be used once per turn is easy, you're shoring up all your strength for the one swing or for SS, your carefully aiming to try to hit a significantly small vital area in the middle of the Combat fray.

But once a turn for +10 damage? Seems kind of trivial for a feat ability especially at higher levels where +10 damage is piddly. If it's going to be once per turn, it should be something like -10 for a critical hit. The barbarian taking a massive swing to lop an enemy's head off or the sharpshooter making a called shot aiming at an eye would fit the narrative.

It would force you to work with your team to set up a better shot, get creative to earn Advantage from the DM or shoot, it would actually make something like the True Strike cantrip more useful (you spend a round casting a spell to take the perfect shot).

Once a turn, for possible +10 damage is meh.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World

 

[Tormyr]

It appears that the formulae don't show in view-only mode. There we go. A greater than was accidentally a greater than or equal.
The damage numbers were also completely off, I have no idea what I was thinking at the time.

Everything should be fixed now, but that still puts -5/+10 ahead of -Prof/+2*Prof at low levels.

But is .3 damage on a hit enough at low levels enough of a difference to have bothered tweaking the feat in the first place? The level 1 GWM does .3 damage per hit better than the 2*prof damage against an "average" CR 1 creature (AC 13).

Looking at average DPR, which takes into account critical hits and the chance of a bonus attack:

*snip*

So the 2 * Proficiency Damage is within 1-2 DPR of regular great weapon master except in certain scenarios where it is 5-10 DPR better. I don't think it actually does what you want it to do (be just a little worse than GWM).

EDIT: Look a couple posts down for a better layout and comparison of more options.

 

[FrogReaver]

It appears that the formulae don't show in view-only mode. There we go. A greater than was accidentally a greater than or equal.
The damage numbers were also completely off, I have no idea what I was thinking at the time.

Everything should be fixed now, but that still puts -5/+10 ahead of -Prof/+2*Prof at low levels.

The reason we consider the -2/+4 a buff is because it's a boost that can be used against nearly all AC's without drawback. Looking at a level 5 archer with the sharpshooter feat and 16 dex, the -1/+2 and -2/+4 and -3/+6 are all better than ordinary shooting up to and including 20 ac. Otherwise there are certain AC's the -5/+10 is better against and certain Ac's the -2/+4 are better against.

 

[FrogReaver]

But is .3 damage on a hit enough at low levels enough of a difference to have bothered tweaking the feat in the first place? The level 1 GWM does .3 damage per hit better than the 2*prof damage against an "average" CR 1 creature (AC 13).

Looking at average DPR, which takes into account critical hits and the chance of a bonus attack:
Against creatures of "average" CR (the CR matches the PC level) (1st number at level 1/ 2nd number at level 20):
Standard Fighter: 6.85 / 32.60
Standard GWM: 9.46 / 38.92
2*Prof Damage: 9.33 / 37.45

Against average CR with Advantage
Standard Fighter: 9.46 / 44.85
Standard GWM: 16.14 / 64.67
2*Prof Damage: 14.87 / 65.33

Against CR 1 regardless of PC level
Standard Fighter: 6.85 / 47.00
Standard GWM: 9.46 / 74.75
2*Prof Damage: 9.33 / 79.75

Against CR 1 with Advantage (best possible scenario)
Standard Fighter: 9.46 / 50.61
Standard GWM: 16.14 / 97.41
2*Prof Damage: 14.87 / 108.71

Against CR 20 regardless of PC level:
Standard Fighter: 3.85 / 32.60
Standard GWM: 2.56 / 38.92
2*Prof Damage: 4.08 / 37.45

So the 2 * Proficiency Damage is within 1-2 DPR of regular great weapon master except in certain scenarios where it is 5-10 DPR better. I don't think it actually does what you want it to do (be just a little worse than GWM).

You can't just look at a single AC in 5e and draw any realistic conclusions IMO

 

[Tormyr]

Cleanest solution for SS & GWM I've seen is adding "once per round" to the -5/+10 part. Then it can be a decent bonus like a feat shoudl give without being overwhelming on multi-attack characters, and it makes them interesting for single attack characters as well.

The highlight of this is that, like -Prof/+Prof Damage option, after you get a second attack, it can only be used against inferior foes or when you have advantage.

Another way to make things work for the PC but not be open to piling on the bonuses would be to treat the +10 damage like sneak attack. You do not have to take a -to hit ever, but you only get the +10 on your first hit in the turn. It gives a bigger bonus in regular conditions, but it does not scale with additional attacks as much.

DPR for level 1 PCs:
Fighter: 6.85
Champion: 6.85
GWM Fighter: 9.71
GWM Champion: 9.71
GWM Fighter No 10: 7.82
GWM Fighter ProfDmg: 7.94
GWM Fighter 2*ProfDmg: 9.33
GWM 1 / Turn: 9.5
GWM 10 on first hit: 14.95

DPR for level 1 PCs with advantage:
Fighter: 9.46
Champion: 9.46
GWM Fighter: 17.23
GWM Champion: 17.23
GWM Fighter No10: 11.55
GWM Fighter ProfDmg: 12.63
GWM Fighter 2*ProfDmg: 14.87
GWM 1 / Turn: 16.2
GWM 10 on first hit:21.49

DPR for level 20 PCs:
Fighter: 32.6
Champion: 35.4
GWM Fighter: 39.2
GWM Champion: 45.08
GWM Fighter No10: 34.83
GWM Fighter ProfDmg: 28.3
GWM Fighter 2*ProfDmg: 37.45
Keira no GWM: 57.58
Keira w/ GWM: 73.94
GWM 1 / Turn: 28.34
GWM 10 on first hit: 44.90

DPR for level 20 PCs with advantage:
Fighter: 44.85
Champion: 49.89
GWM Fighter: 66.35
GWM Champion: 78.28
GWM Fighter No10: 49.95
GWM Fighter ProfDmg: 49.33
GWM Fighter 2*ProfDmg: 65.33
Keira no GWM: 73.66
Keira w/ GWM: 118.13
GWM 1 / Turn: 47.98
GWM 10 on first hit:60.26

DPR for level 20 PCs against CR 1 enemies:
Fighter: 47
Champion: 49.8
GWM Fighter: 78.75
GWM Champion: 82.25
GWM Fighter No10: 56.73
GWM Fighter ProfDmg: 58.38
GWM Fighter 2*ProfDmg: 79.75
Keira no GWM: 67.06
Keira w/ GWM: 118.43
GWM 1 / Turn: 56.2
GWM 10 on first hit: 68.38

DPR for level 20 PCs against CR 1 enemies with advantage:
Fighter 50.61
Champion 55.65
GWM Fighter 103.51
GWM Champion 109.81
GWM Fighter No10 63.26
GWM Fighter ProfDmg 82.39
GWM Fighter 2*ProfDmg: 108.71
Keira no GWM 76.03
Keira w/ GWM 146.33
GWM 1 / Turn: 70.06
GWM 10 on first hit: 73.26

To the OP, I will say that I have never had an issue with GWM as it is. Keira was a PC in my campaign, and her level 20 DPR is posted. During dangerous times, the wizard would cast foresight on her, giving her advantage on every attack. Even then, the damage was manageable. Sometimes she cleaved through waves of enemies, and sometimes the Advantage from foresight was neutralized.

 

[Tormyr]

You can't just look at a single AC in 5e and draw any realistic conclusions IMO

That is why the other options are in there as well. CR 1 creatures have a suggested AC in the DMG of 13, and CR 20 creatures have a suggested AC of 19. GWM falls apart when used against higher CR creatures (with higher AC) than the PC level. The unmodified level 1 and Level 20 examples are going against the "average" CR (with an "appropriate AC). At that point, the power attack being used every turn is just slightly better. Obviously there are all sorts of AC ratings for creatures of the same CR, but looking at specific AC values is not the important part. The important part is looking at the range where GWM is viable and what it does in that range.

After the average CR example that establishes a point where GWM is slightly better than not having it, the example that pits level 20 PCs against CR 1 foes is one type of ideal scenario. The advantage the level 20 GWM fighter has over the level 20 fighter increases from 5 DPR to 27 DPR by shifting the target AC from 19 (CR 20) to 13 (CR 1).

The average CR enemies with Advantage is another kind of ideal scenario. In this one GWM is worth another 20 DPR to the level 20 fighter.

The CR 1 with Advantage is essentially as good as it gets. At this point the level 20 fighter gains 47 DPR with GWM.

You do not need to look at every AC for every level. You only need to look at the range from where GWM is just viable to the point where the PC only misses on a natural 1.

 

[Wulffolk]

Two other possibilities:
1- As mentioned in my original post, reduce the feats to a 1 for 1 exchange. -5 to hit gains +5 to damage.
2- Change the feats to give disadvantage on attack rolls in exchange for doing maximum damage. No bonuses to worry about.

 

[Yunru]

But is .3 damage on a hit enough at low levels enough of a difference to have bothered tweaking the feat in the first place?

Yes, because the average is nearly the same because it hits more, but when it hits the impact is reduced. At low levels +10 means you have a high chance of one-shoting whatever you hit, which is problematic if you can counteract the -5. +4 however, is likely to take a chunk of their health, but it's not going to kill them in one hit (at least, as often).

 

[CapnZapp]

Actually that'd make the feat pretty crap. It'd be a lesser Polearm Master with all the non-BAA stuff replaced by +1 Strength, thrilling.

-Prof/+2Prof is a perfectly serviceable tweak, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Note how those telling you it's a buff to the feat also aren't presenting any evidence for that claim.

I don't pretend to say it wouldn't be a significant nerf.

But the feat needs a significant nerf, since it is significantly overpowered in the hands of a player who knows what he or she is doing.

Whether it's too much is a different discussion. It certainly is not a good argument for keeping it as is.

---

-Prof/+2Prof changes nothing about the feat at high levels, where is it as its most abusable. At level 20, it even gets more overpowered!

And at the lowest levels, where you have the most difficulties overcoming the -5, the reduction to -2 is a godsend.

Yunru's claim is patently false. There has been several threads that use false or incomplete math, perhaps he's thinking of those. But no, I am sure I have personally shown him exactly why the feat is too good, and exactly how you go about abusing it.

For those new to the concept, in short: build a Dex/Con Battlemaster Fighter Sharpshooter Crossbow Expert using effectively twin 120-ft range shortswords (yes, I mean that literally, and can back it up with excruciating detail if needs be) to deal 1d6+15 damage (not counting magic) against enemies with as high AC as ~18 (which pretty much is every non-epic foe) at mid to high levels, attacking always with advantage (easily attained through party tactics), negating most misses with Precision Attack superiority dice. Add Lucky or Halfling and the window for straight misses shrink to almost only rolling 2's during nova rounds (the probability of rolling a 2 is close to one in four hundred, by the way).

This build utterly outclasses any martial build that doesn't use -5/+10 feats, since it outputs massively more offensive, without sacrificing significant defense or other utility, since it's still a sturdy fighter build.

Meaning it ruins the fun in variety, since you no longer can choose "regular" builds with a clear conscience - there simply is nothing that can excuse abstaining from +40 bonus damage per round. This means many cool weapon stances and combos fall by the wayside.

It also completely destroys the game's ability to function given standard encounters and monsters.

The feat absolutely positively needs to go. That's not an opinion, it's fact. Don't let anyone that haven't stress-tested the game at high levels tell you differently.

Just think of the featless game. It works MUCH better, and with a HUGE variety of builds*.
*) Sure, the EB Sorlock needs to be addressed in either case, but let us consider that as a separate discussion.

So the suggestion to remove this feat does not lead to some kind of fringe or exotic game. Unless you can claim the featless game is even more broken. Which it isn't.

The feat needs to go, at least if you have players who knows their way around a D&D charbuild.

-Prof/+2Prof changes nothing about this.

 

[Yunru]

Yunru's claim is patently false. There has been several threads that use false or incomplete math, perhaps he's thinking of those. But no, I am sure I have personally shown him exactly why the feat is too good, and exactly how you go about abusing it.

No you have not. You have provided no hard facts, no maths to back up your claim and you resort to personal attacks. Your staff is broken good sir.