D&D 5E Current take on GWM/SS

[Celtavian]

Rest of the feats aren't balanced if damage helps you so much at your table. No one is ever going to take Linguist if you don't take language matter. My greataxe fighter will always take Savage Attacker if you nerf GWM. 100%. Every time. Buff Strength to 20 then grab damage feats in order of power.

But when I DM, Linguist and Actor are the most powerful feats. Everyone has Actor, Observant, or Linguist

No one will ever use a sling unless you make bludgeoning damage matter. Removing bows and crossbow, will just make them use axes and javelins.

You can't remove must haves unless there are oo many obstables to worry about. Basic Game theory.

Savage Attacker? That feat is not close to GWM. I'd shrug if you took that feat.

 

[Celtavian]

It seems that the two main options are either to nerf the damage elements of the feats, which runs the risk of making high level casters overpowered; or to introduce new feat options that make other sorts of high-damage martial builds viable.

[MENTION=5834]Celtavian[/MENTION], I believe you've taken the second option in your game - is that right?

The rule I've written is "once per turn per target." Was that the second option?

My problems with the GWF feat during play were notable mostly by the fighter/barbarian's ability to do huge nova damage against enemies that were built to be tough solo encounters (usually legendary creatures) or a strong creature (often non-legendary) with a bunch of weaker creatures. As I illustrated earlier, he took half the hit points of an adult Green Dragon in a single turn leaving only half the hit points of the creature for the rest of the party. This is another factor that is not being discussed is the limited pool of hit points an enemy has to be taken, thus allowing a fighter or barbarian using a feat like GWM or Sharpshooter to accelerate the depletion of that pool in a fashion that allows them to vastly overshadow the damage contributions of the rest of the group. If a creature had a larger number of hit points, the significance of a single nova round would be lessened causing the damage curve to remain a flatter range over time. That is not how monster's are built.

I do not mind the martials using the feats to eliminate multiple enemies. I've found that numerous weaker enemies are usually a larger threat to a PC party. Thus allowing martials to spike damage to eliminate them rapidly does not damage their ability to threaten the PCs because their aggregate hit point pools tend to vastly exceed the hit point pool of a single powerful creature.

At the moment I've decided to run the feats as is and deal with this issue on the backend as a DM boosting AC and hit points in those fights I want to feel more difficult and dangerous. This is one of the main ways I dealt with the Power Attack mechanic in 3E. I want to see if it works in 5E without making encounters too difficult.

To balance the fighting styles I've added a Dueling Master feat which allows a TWF or single-weapon user without a shield to take advantage of the -5/+10 mechanic.

I have a few players that very much like to play martials. They like the thrill of playing a character that uses a weapon to kill their enemies. They also enjoy obtaining a powerful magic weapon like Excalibur or Stormbringer. I'm trying to balance this in a fashion that eases my DM workload, while still allowing my players to enjoy a feat that makes them feel powerful. As most of know, the damage number makes a player feel like their character is powerful. It's gamer psychology to translate a larger number into the fictional world as a more powerful and satisfying character. I don't mind this power being used in the right circumstances such as hacking down hoards of enemies. I find it to difficult to deal with when fighting a singular enemy trying to build the fiction that this single enemy is truly formidable if the players are able to nova on it eliminating the creature in 6 to 18 seconds. It's like imagining Gandalf and the Fellowship making it to Sauron, then hacking him down in an anticlimactic scene in an extremely short fight where no really gets hurt. Who would have enjoyed such an end to an epic tale? This feats often create that ending if the DM doesn't take measures outside the rules to ensure that doesn't happen.

 

[pemerton]

To balance the fighting styles I've added a Dueling Master feat which allows a TWF or single-weapon user without a shield to take advantage of the -5/+10 mechanic.

That was the second option I was referring to.

 

[DaveDash]

The rule I've written is "once per turn per target." Was that the second option?

My problems with the GWF feat during play were notable mostly by the fighter/barbarian's ability to do huge nova damage against enemies that were built to be tough solo encounters (usually legendary creatures) or a strong creature (often non-legendary) with a bunch of weaker creatures. As I illustrated earlier, he took half the hit points of an adult Green Dragon in a single turn leaving only half the hit points of the creature for the rest of the party. This is another factor that is not being discussed is the limited pool of hit points an enemy has to be taken, thus allowing a fighter or barbarian using a feat like GWM or Sharpshooter to accelerate the depletion of that pool in a fashion that allows them to vastly overshadow the damage contributions of the rest of the group. If a creature had a larger number of hit points, the significance of a single nova round would be lessened causing the damage curve to remain a flatter range over time. That is not how monster's are built.

I do not mind the martials using the feats to eliminate multiple enemies. I've found that numerous weaker enemies are usually a larger threat to a PC party. Thus allowing martials to spike damage to eliminate them rapidly does not damage their ability to threaten the PCs because their aggregate hit point pools tend to vastly exceed the hit point pool of a single powerful creature.

At the moment I've decided to run the feats as is and deal with this issue on the backend as a DM boosting AC and hit points in those fights I want to feel more difficult and dangerous. This is one of the main ways I dealt with the Power Attack mechanic in 3E. I want to see if it works in 5E without making encounters too difficult.

To balance the fighting styles I've added a Dueling Master feat which allows a TWF or single-weapon user without a shield to take advantage of the -5/+10 mechanic.

I have a few players that very much like to play martials. They like the thrill of playing a character that uses a weapon to kill their enemies. They also enjoy obtaining a powerful magic weapon like Excalibur or Stormbringer. I'm trying to balance this in a fashion that eases my DM workload, while still allowing my players to enjoy a feat that makes them feel powerful. As most of know, the damage number makes a player feel like their character is powerful. It's gamer psychology to translate a larger number into the fictional world as a more powerful and satisfying character. I don't mind this power being used in the right circumstances such as hacking down hoards of enemies. I find it to difficult to deal with when fighting a singular enemy trying to build the fiction that this single enemy is truly formidable if the players are able to nova on it eliminating the creature in 6 to 18 seconds. It's like imagining Gandalf and the Fellowship making it to Sauron, then hacking him down in an anticlimactic scene in an extremely short fight where no really gets hurt. Who would have enjoyed such an end to an epic tale? This feats often create that ending if the DM doesn't take measures outside the rules to ensure that doesn't happen.

I'm noticing this is a "thing" in general with 5e.

Single creatures by themselves don't really last - not without giving them action economy efficient spells and such like Shield.

Converting 3rd ed content everything is a solo fight against a single tough creature - doesnt work in 5e.

Reading through 5e official modules there are hardly any solo fights.

 

[Coredump]

They can easily.

Do 60% of a damage increase which is perfectly reasonable based on maths, when they already are doing the best damage in the party, easily makes them do more damage than everyone else in the party combined.

I've seen it in 10-15 sessions and the maths proves it conclusively.

Bless benefits multiple party members so it's not like the entire party is standing back doing nothing while the fighter does everything.

The math still does not support you.

They would have to already be doing double average before SS in order to achieve what you are claiming, and that is for a 4 person party.

 

[DaveDash]

The math still does not support you.

They would have to already be doing double average before SS in order to achieve what you are claiming, and that is for a 4 person party.

You have yet to show any maths in this thread.

 

[Hussar]

Shouldn't you play in a stupid fashion choosing less optimal choices lessening your fun to accomplish the goals of the game per Page 2 of the Basic Rules? Your fun is lessened and you get to use your intelligence to make less optimal choices to increase the group's enjoyment, creating a nebulous fun number that balances amongst the group per the Page 2 Basic Rules. So few people have fun designing a highly effective character using the hundreds of other pages of rules and recommendations in the game, so you should focus on Page 2 Basic rules over the hundreds of other pages. It should define all your choices.

So, a group that decides, for example, not to have a cleric or an Eldritch Knigh is "stupid" now? Any choices which don't prioritise DPR are "stupid"? Anyone who plays differently from you is "stupid"?

Do you not get how incredibly limited your point of view is? DPR IS NOT KING. There are other, IMO, far more important decisions to make than DPR when designing a class.

Like I said, you're basically a self fulfilling prophesy. Your group prioritises DPR, therefore DPR must be the most important thing in the game. No, it really isn't.
[MENTION=6786202]DaveDash[/MENTION] brushes off the idea that the cleric contributes nothing to the first round of combat. But, that HAS to be included in any DPR discussion. After all, if the only reason his Eldritch Knight can consistently do 80-100 points of damage is because the Cleric player is willing to ride the pines for one round, how much damage would a group do with EK and SS and a cleric who is actually casting something offensive in the first round? This conversation gets very, very difficult when you are 100% that you are right and ignore any flaws in your own argument.

Look, you guys might be right. I totally get that. My point is that you are stating as facts things that are maybe not as cut and dried as you might think. The DPR analysis does show that a group without Bless, for example, would have far less of a problem with GWF/SS than you are having. Does that mean that that group is "stupid"?

 

[Celtavian]

So, we're back to, "if you don't see a problem it's because you've just never actually played it". It couldn't possibly be that a group uses these feats and doesn't have a problem.

I mean, you call it "minimal work" to bypass the limitations. I say that having your cleric contribute nothing for the first round of half of combats (presuming the fighter goes before the cleric 50% of the time) is more than "minimal work". I'd say that having the cleric spend about half his/her daily slots on blessing someone else is more than "minimal work". I'd say that having your buffing characters ride the pines in combat so they don't lose concentration or spend significant character resources to increase their concentration check is more than "minimal work".

You have to remember, that the problems you are having are, in part, of your own devising. They ARE NOT PROVEN.

You call bless contributing nothing? Really?

The third part of your paragraph has some merit. The first few is a lack of understanding of how powerful bless. I really can't believe you don't see how powerful a +1d4 on attacks and saves is for three members of your party compared to almost anything else in the cleric arsenal. Even at 20th level attack rolls absent magic items are around +11. bless increases your chance to hit by roughly 10 to 40%. It does even more for non-proficient saves. There is very little a cleric can do better than cast bless. The cleric would be casting bless the majority of the time even if GWM and Sharpshooter didn't exist. It's the best group buff in the game.

The hiding is a result of the concentration mechanic. You do realize that even with Resilient: Con and Warcaster it is nearly impossible to make a Concentration save if hit for full damage by a breath weapon? Even an adult does roughly 55 damage. Full damage is a DC 27 Con Save. That is really difficult to make. Once the breath weapon is unleashed, your concentration casters can come out.

 

[Hussar]

I'm noticing this is a "thing" in general with 5e.

Single creatures by themselves don't really last - not without giving them action economy efficient spells and such like Shield.

Converting 3rd ed content everything is a solo fight against a single tough creature - doesnt work in 5e.

Reading through 5e official modules there are hardly any solo fights.

3e really was something of an outlier here since 3e was the only edition to design creatures vs a 4 PC party. In all other editions, you increased difficulty by adding more critters, not by making one critter bigger. I remember once making the mistake of letting my 2e party get in close to a Red Dragon. I expected them to talk. I wanted to have this talking encounter, so, I gave the PC's a way to get close without immediately starting combat.

The players got close, and one Haste spell and some other goodies later, the 8th or 9th level party had splattered an elder wyrm red dragon. :shock: It was a real eye opening moment.

Yeah, 5e doesn't work if you use 3e's monster ratios. The party is going to be able to focus fire too much and obliterate the opposition too easily.

 

[Hussar]

You call bless contributing nothing? Really?

The third part of your paragraph has some merit. The first few is a lack of understanding of how powerful bless. I really can't believe you don't see how powerful a +1d4 on attacks and saves is for three members of your party compared to almost anything else in the cleric arsenal. Even at 20th level attack rolls absent magic items are around +11. bless increases your chance to hit by roughly 10 to 40%. It does even more for non-proficient saves. There is very little a cleric can do better than cast bless. The cleric would be casting bless the majority of the time even if GWM and Sharpshooter didn't exist. It's the best group buff in the game.

The hiding is a result of the concentration mechanic. You do realize that even with Resilient: Con and Warcaster it is nearly impossible to make a Concentration save if hit for full damage by a breath weapon? Even an adult does roughly 55 damage. Full damage is a DC 27 Con Save. That is really difficult to make. Once the breath weapon is unleashed, your concentration casters can come out.

I think you missed an earlier part. If the fighter goes before the cleric in the round (something that should be happening about half the time) then the first round that the cleric casts bless contributes nothing to the combat.