D&D (2024) Sharp shooter/Great Weapon Mastery

[Charlaquin]

it's again a feat that no one will take.
Even archery style, why would you take +2 attack when you can take +2 dex?

Well you can’t take +2 Dex at 1st level, so…

 

[Charlaquin]

Disadvantage is better than -2 the great majority of the time, especially if a nat 20 is still an automatic hit.

The only time it’s not better is when -2 would change a hit into a miss. Which is also the only time you would use this version of Protection. That’s the point, they made it more narrow, but also made it so that you always know if it will be useful before you have to decide to use it.

 

[Lojaan]

I think they need to choose which feat to put the "shooting an enemy within 5 feet doesn't give disadvantage" benefit into. Currently it is in both SS and CBE which is odd, particularly as CBE only gives that benefits for crossbows, and SS gives it for anything.

Good to see that they have removed the "shoot twice with a single hand crossbow" shenanigans. That always seemed like a cheese interpretation of the rules (even though later they said it was ok bizarrely). Now you need a hand crossbow in each hand and since you ignore the loading property I guess you can magically reload them without using any hands.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I don't get all this complaining about Fighting Style Feats. They're LEVEL ONE feats. You don't take them at Level 4, 8, or 12 instead of an ASI. You take them as part of your Soldier Background, or when your class gives you one for free.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I don't get all this complaining about Fighting Style Feats. They're LEVEL ONE feats. You don't take them at Level 4, 8, or 12 instead of an ASI. You take them as part of your Soldier Background, or when your class gives you one for free.

Yup.

Tempest in a Tenser’s.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

when you have 20 it's too little, too late.
It's about 4th level and having +4 primary mod vs +3 and a feat.

what will rogue sacrifice for FS? +2 dex? now way in hell.
yes, maybe, just maybe as 10th level feat. Even then I doubt it.

Ok I forgot about the prerequisites for Fighting Style.
I was thinking about using the initial background level one feat slot. But that is really only available to fighters, so not really available for rogue/wiz sorry about that.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

OK. With the possible exception of archery style which of them do you think is worth it.

I mean I'm not taking Protective over Sentinel or Great Weapon Fighter over Great Weapon Master for example. I'm not even taking them if the stat point goes to a secondary stat.

Sorry, see my reply to @Howath above, I forgot about the perquisites.

 

[Lojaan]

I think they need to choose which feat to put the "shooting an enemy within 5 feet doesn't give disadvantage" benefit into. Currently it is in both SS and CBE which is odd, particularly as CBE only gives that benefits for crossbows, and SS gives it for anything.

Good to see that they have removed the "shoot twice with a single hand crossbow" shenanigans. That always seemed like a cheese interpretation of the rules (even though later they said it was ok bizarrely). Now you need a hand crossbow in each hand and since you ignore the loading property I guess you can magically reload them without using any hands.

Actually I would change the SS benefit so it doesn't help you shooting at someone within 5 feet, but it DOES allow you to shoot into melee and your target doesn't get the benefit of cover from you trying not to hit your allies. You'd also need to highlight/confirm that shooting at an enemy who is in melee with an ally usually gets half cover. I think this is a rule but have not seen it in play.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't get all this complaining about Fighting Style Feats. They're LEVEL ONE feats. You don't take them at Level 4, 8, or 12 instead of an ASI. You take them as part of your Soldier Background, or when your class gives you one for free.

Yea, there seems to be an unspoken assumption that a feat should be a feat, but that simply isn't true in this new edition. A level 4 feat is simply better than a level 1 feat, and a level 20 feat is much stronger than a level 4 feat. But you're not prohibited from taking a weaker choice if you so desire, just like you can choose to learn a 1st level spell even when you have access to higher level spells.

 

[Amrûnril]

I did miss the "immediately after the attack roll..." part. That's actually significantly better because you'll only trigger it when it's useful. So it's an upgrade from the original. Still don't think the -2 is enough though.

It's still a downgrade from the original if you're dealing with a single attack (possibly also if you're dealing with two or three, I haven't done the math, but presumably it depends on the original hit probability).

There's also an ease of play issue. To know whether it will be useful, you need to know both your ally's AC and the DM's exact to-hit roll. Which certainly can be handled efficiently, but it'll definitely create some back and forth if anyone isn't on top of things, or if a groups's previous habits don't mesh with these new demands.