Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7228391" data-attributes="member: 71699">That puts crossbows on the same footing as bows. Per RAW, you'd have to either use both hands to wield one (e.g. Heavy Crossbow) or keep a hand free to reload while firing. Either way, no weapon or shield in the other hand if you want to make more than one ranged attack.It strikes me that as Hand Crossbow is "light", RAW doesn't but should already support snapping off a shot with one that is loaded, while wielding a weapon or shield in your other hand. No feat should be needed for that. [Edited when I noticed RAW says "melee weapon" in TWF.]I've adjusted the wording to point in that direction. They deal with game basics - weapons, armor, saves and skills - and I believe they should retain their clear purpose of letting characters pick up some of those that are ordinarily inaccessible to them. For that reason I feel they should be kept extremely simple and focused: putting a big constraint on balancing. With that taken into account, some can be considered "trap" feats, so it feels right to sign post them.The reduction in use is major in impact because the -5/+10 isn't egregious until it is triggered more than once a turn. The guiding thought is that high-single-strike damage melee should be part of the game. To assess the impact of a cost, like a bonus action, we should think about who that would make the feat most unappealing to, and if they are the problem? In this case, we might guess that a bonus action cost will make the feat unappealing to Rogues and Monks - who are doing reasonable things with their bonus actions and aren't abusing GWM - while having no impact on Barbarian/Champions, who are doing unreasonable things using just their Extra attacks. If that analysis looks right, I would argue that the "Once per turn" text comes close to nailing it. It's not the only option, but it is simple and preserves the original purpose of the feat. The feat might still overshadow at low levels, which for me is a problem with Variant-Human rather than GWM.All interesting ideas that require more thinking on my side! For me, rerolling damage dice is mostly for AoEs or things that roll a lot of dice. Whereas Sharpshooter I believe is bestowing high single-strike damage to ranged. Which seems like a reasonable piece of design space for it to occupy. The logic seems to be that when we load everything onto one attack, we need that attack to hit! Hence the obviation of cover and disadvantage. Does that help tune any of your thoughts?A character can take +2 Dex and gain AC +1, initiative +1, ranged and finesse attack and damage +1, Dex save +1, and several useful skills +1. With Armorer as written here, a character with an odd physical ability score can do a bit better than that, which I believe is fine because it gives odd scores some value. You know, I agree with you that the feat gives fair value without Smiths' Tools. But isn't it more flavourful with them?</blockquote>

Verification