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

[Tormyr]

Early level DMG guidelines for creating a monster and assigning it a CR are junk.

In this case, the level of perceived quality (good or bad) of the CR guidelines to design creatures does not matter.

At AC 13 (CR 1) a level 1 fighter in normal circumstances enjoys a small bump from GWM which continues on a steady progression all the way to level 20 PCs getting a small bump when attacking AC 19 (CR 20) creatures. A regular PC fighter would also usually have a +11 to hit bonus. This also conveniently fits in with the level 20 PC attacking AC 13 (CR 1) creatures so that it only misses on a natural 1 since rolling a 2 would hit AC 13 with its +11 bonus. That, along with with checking advantage, allows a check of all the various solutions to GWM from "average" enemies (low return) to conditions where a PC hits 91%-99.75% of the time (advantage against AC 13 CR 1). Going lower than AC 13 does not change things much after that.

So we get a range of values pertaining to situations from "average" to "optimal" to compare the various solutions against a base version of a PC and one that has GWM. The actual results seen by a PC will be somewhere between the endpoints.

 

[hejtmane]

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.

I am running a campaign and they have hit 16th level and I am still waiting for them to dominate everything I throw at them in fact the easiest fight they had was not because of the damage by the GWM or a sharpshooter the issue is been casters Hold Monster,force cage, feeble mind talk about reducing things to trivialized nothing. Everyone whines about the damage of the GWM but ignore that magic users are still way more over powered at high levels. Lets not even talk about 9th levels spells like Meteor Swarm and yes I know how much damage it does because I used it against my NPS's on a custom Villain PC. I see 40d6 in a 40ft radius is ok but heaven forbid if a GWM pumps out some damage.

Like I have said had the GWM polearm build in my game non issue even had a player help the guy out on the boss by using his action to give help action to give advantage that round and used his action surge and did not break anything. What ever people keep throwing out how broken it is because of the math blah blah but I have yet to see it break my campaign even at high levels. In fact Chain Lighting has been the bigger headache.

I keep seeing all these complaints I am guessing people just think the Casters should be the only powerful people in the game and the meat shields need to be while meat shields only.

 

[FrogReaver]

In this case, the level of perceived quality (good or bad) of the CR guidelines to design creatures does not matter.

At AC 13 (CR 1) a level 1 fighter in normal circumstances enjoys a small bump from GWM which continues on a steady progression all the way to level 20 PCs getting a small bump when attacking AC 19 (CR 20) creatures. A regular PC fighter would also usually have a +11 to hit bonus. This also conveniently fits in with the level 20 PC attacking AC 13 (CR 1) creatures so that it only misses on a natural 1 since rolling a 2 would hit AC 13 with its +11 bonus. That, along with with checking advantage, allows a check of all the various solutions to GWM from "average" enemies (low return) to conditions where a PC hits 91%-99.75% of the time (advantage against AC 13 CR 1). Going lower than AC 13 does not change things much after that.

So we get a range of values pertaining to situations from "average" to "optimal" to compare the various solutions against a base version of a PC and one that has GWM. The actual results seen by a PC will be somewhere between the endpoints.

Well it does matter since you based your whole theory on AC 13 at CR1 being important. AC 15 at cr 1 is just as likely depending on campaign. Even higher AC's happen with much greater frequency. To even try to base anything on a single AC value is plain naïve.

 

[FrogReaver]

I am running a campaign and they have hit 16th level and I am still waiting for them to dominate everything I throw at them in fact the easiest fight they had was not because of the damage by the GWM or a sharpshooter the issue is been casters Hold Monster,force cage, feeble mind talk about reducing things to trivialized nothing. Everyone whines about the damage of the GWM but ignore that magic users are still way more over powered at high levels. Lets not even talk about 9th levels spells like Meteor Swarm and yes I know how much damage it does because I used it against my NPS's on a custom Villain PC. I see 40d6 in a 40ft radius is ok but heaven forbid if a GWM pumps out some damage.

Like I have said had the GWM polearm build in my game non issue even had a player help the guy out on the boss by using his action to give help action to give advantage that round and used his action surge and did not break anything. What ever people keep throwing out how broken it is because of the math blah blah but I have yet to see it break my campaign even at high levels. In fact Chain Lighting has been the bigger headache.

I keep seeing all these complaints I am guessing people just think the Casters should be the only powerful people in the game and the meat shields need to be while meat shields only.

Right. Because obviously that we think the -5/+10 feats are overpowered must mean we think Casters must be the only powerful people in the game....

Seriously have you heard yourself?

 

[hejtmane]

Right. Because obviously that we think the -5/+10 feats are overpowered must mean we think Casters must be the only powerful people in the game....

Seriously have you heard yourself?

That's what i see; the same thing posted over and over again it is always about the same feats. So really you tell me why do we have the same discussions​ every other month about the same optional feats. Yet how many discussions do we have about spell caters and how over powered they can be at higher levels. Oh that is right because that is ok because it has always been that way in D&D. I am the one that is crazy but go ahead and point out all these discussions about the over powered casters that exist.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[FrogReaver]

Intelligent use of precision attack will generally give around a +3 bonus to hit. Unless you are factoring that in or a barbarians reckless attack etc. then you are not really making a "fair" comparison.

I personally like looking at level 5-6 since that is when a character get's his extra attacks. At level 5 an archer fighter that took sharpshooter at level 4 instead of the dex boost will have: +8 attack, 7.5 damage. Precision for him will have the same effect on chance to hit as Precision for a power attack archer. Let's see what happens

If I could make you a table I would. I can't so instead I'll let you do the math. I'll also let you do the math on my take that precision attack is at least +3 to attack when used smartly.

Anyways this is what percent higher damage the shartshooter does on AC 11 to AC 20 at level 5
16 dex + sharpshooter + precision
18 dex + precision

(vs AC 11) 0.50
(vs AC 12) 0.47
(vs AC 13) 0.44
(vs AC 14) 0.41
(vs AC 15) 0.37
(vs AC 16) 0.33
(vs AC 17) 0.29
(vs AC 18) 0.24
(vs AC 19) 0.18
(vs AC 20) 0.11

Against lower AC character's you are doing about 40% more damage than a fighter that instead took +2 dex. Against a higher AC monster you are still doing 20% more damage than the guy that took +2 dex.

 

[Tormyr]

Well it does matter since you based your whole theory on AC 13 at CR1 being important. AC 15 at cr 1 is just as likely depending on campaign. Even higher AC's happen with much greater frequency. To even try to base anything on a single AC value is plain naïve.

The CR 1 is noise. The AC 13 is signal. Even then, the number is mainly used because it is convenient for calculation purposes. If AC 15 was instead used for the CR 1, the damage drops by 1 damage per available attack at low levels for PCs without a strong GWM to 2 damage per available attack (i.e. 5) for level 20 fighters with a strong version of GWM for a total of 10 less damage. This is true against with or without advantage for low and level PCs.

Those kinds of changes are small and still fit with the narrative that any bonus from GWM (that still actually provides a bonus) is going to fit somewhere in the ranges shown on page 3, between a couple extra points of damage and the boost gained by being able to score a hit on a 2 and having advantage.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's what i see posted the smart thing over and over again it is always about the same feat. So really you tell me why do we have the same discussions​ every other month about to great that are optional. Yet how many discussions do we have about spell caters and how over powered they can be at higher levels. Oh that is right because that is ok because it has always been that way in D&D. I am the one that is crazy but go ahead and point out all these discussions about the over powered caters that exist.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

I could care less about high levels. I care about level 3-14. That's the general range most people spend most of their time in. Caster's are not over powered in the 3-14 tier. Full caster's do have a lot more out of combat ability than non casters and some nice aoe crowd control or aoe blasting. But when it comes to combat even without the -5/+10 feats, fighters and Paladins and even Barbarians generally do about twice as much damage as casters at will and can spike single target damage generally for as much or more than the casters highest level spell is capable of causing.

 

[FrogReaver]

The CR 1 is noise. The AC 13 is signal. Even then, the number is mainly used because it is convenient for calculation purposes. If AC 15 was instead used for the CR 1, the damage drops by 1 damage per available attack at low levels for PCs without a strong GWM to 2 damage per available attack (i.e. 5) for level 20 fighters with a strong version of GWM for a total of 10 less damage. This is true against with or without advantage for low and level PCs.

Those kinds of changes are small and still fit with the narrative that any bonus from GWM (that still actually provides a bonus) is going to fit somewhere in the ranges shown on page 3, between a couple extra points of damage and the boost gained by being able to score a hit on a 2 and having advantage.

2 points of Effective Damage per Attack is a big deal though. A very big deal. When most characters deal less than 10 Effective damage per attack then +2 to that is a big deal. Could be 20-40% of a difference in damage.

 

[Wulffolk]

I would like to thank everybody for the precise mathematical calculations and the continued "yes, it's beoken" and "no, it's not" statements. I think we can agree that once people pick a side in a polarized discussion like this that they are rarely swayed by opposing opinions.

What I am more interested in is brain-storming possible solutions for those that consider these feats to be a problem. I have presented a few ideas, only one has received much feedback because people seem to dislike it. Any thoughts on my other suggestions? Or does anybody else have any constructive ideas or suggestions?