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

[Chaosmancer]

Well, fortunately you can pretend it has been removed from the game!

Yes, I know. However, this pesky thing called "a public playtest" makes me think I could instead try and get them to change their minds instead of pretending like nothing wrong.

I know, crazy, giving feedback that might change the rules.

One tweak would be to only allow it turn a failure into a success once per day per character. So that you don't have to worry about "wasting it" on a -4 miss; you can spam it until it succeeds.

And/or add it to the "resets on initiative" list. Although that's a little odd because it's not so much a combat ability. Still, could work.

However, I suspect they'll actually try another solution entirely, just because tracking "who has had it today?" will turn out to be a nuisance.

I hope it is some other solution. The initiative reset seems decent, but I would worry about games that have low combat. This is a skill spell, it should be shine in non-combat days.

But, honestly, what is wrong with just making it a reaction cantrip, and allowing it to otherwise work like it did before? At-will, you can just do this whenever someone fails a skill check. Why is this bad? I fully get the annoyance of it being used before every single skill check, but after a failure? That seems to be perfectly fine. So why is that not a good solution?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Yes, I know. However, this pesky thing called "a public playtest" makes me think I could instead try and get them to change their minds instead of pretending like nothing wrong.

I know, crazy, giving feedback that might change the rules.

No, feedback is fine. And your feedback makes sense. But you seem...really wound up about this.

But, honestly, what is wrong with just making it a reaction cantrip, and allowing it to otherwise work like it did before? At-will, you can just do this whenever someone fails a skill check. Why is this bad? I fully get the annoyance of it being used before every single skill check, but after a failure? That seems to be perfectly fine. So why is that not a good solution?

In that case they may as well just give everybody +2.5 across the board, because the only thing limiting its use now is that sometimes people forget to cast it. If it's a reaction after a failure, with no limitations, then every party will make sure somebody has it, and it will always get used on any failure of 4 or less. Guidance is already considered too "mandatory"; your design would push that even higher.

I don't know what the constraint should be, but I'd like to see something.

 

[tetrasodium]

Sorry, I don't see how the skill system being "compressed" has anything to do with it.

Sure, you may possibly get 5 chances to use an at-will ability. That is IF each player has a relevant skill and IF it gets rolled and IF they fail by less than 4.

The skills that multiple characters have tend to be skills that rolled as group checks, like perception or stealth. And group checks are even worse, because if one person fails... well, either you need to use it because otherwise everyone fails, or it doesn't make a difference because SOMEONE succeeded and that's all that matters.

And this does nothing to address players not wanting the spell cast on them so they don't "waste it".
Does nothing to address the tracking issue.
Does nothing to address the low roll issue of not wanting to risk wasting it on a gamble.

Frankly, if this is what people want from the spell, why not just make it a first level spell and be done with it? What is the point of a cantrip that has limited uses per day?

There used to be like 36 skills (I'm eyeballing it), 5e has a mere 18 & more than a couple of those are incredibly niche while a handful are must have skills. That works great in a small group of 2-3 players but breaks down in larger groups. The result of that compressed skill list is that almost any important skill check is certain to have multiple characters with the skill in a large group even if there was no effort to coordinate between players. "I cast guidance" combines with "I'm proficient too"

The PHB or DMG having a secondary skill list that splits the skills into a wider array of choices would be a great large group aiding optional/variant rule for 5.5.
.

 

[Lojaan]

Wow. People are actually getting fired up about guidance!? Whoo boy.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

And group checks are even worse, because if one person fails... well, either you need to use it because otherwise everyone fails

Actually, over half the group has to fail for a group check to fail.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Wow. People are actually getting fired up about guidance!? Whoo boy.

Yeah... A cantrip that's still one of the best cantrips, and people are just upset that it's no longer 24/7 spammable... At least I understand the annoyance over having to track it, but that applies to everything now, starting from prof/day racial abilities.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No, feedback is fine. And your feedback makes sense. But you seem...really wound up about this.

It has been a rough week, and this change does irritate me. I guess it could be because it seems like such an unnecessary change, but it just absolutely kneecaps the most common support actions I've seen.

In that case they may as well just give everybody +2.5 across the board, because the only thing limiting its use now is that sometimes people forget to cast it. If it's a reaction after a failure, with no limitations, then every party will make sure somebody has it, and it will always get used on any failure of 4 or less. Guidance is already considered too "mandatory"; your design would push that even higher.

I don't know what the constraint should be, but I'd like to see something.

And Range, or being in a social situation. See, this is one of the things that making it a reaction really helps with. Before, you could cast it on the rogue, and the the rogue heads up ahead and ends up using it later. Now, you can't do that, the person casting it has to be nearby. You could even limit the range, and have the caster need to be within 15 ft, that is a major limitation for a lot of skill checks.

I also don't think it is "too mandatory" right now. People find it useful, and it is one of the more powerful cantrips, but it isn't like there aren't other cantrips that can't be taken.

 

[Bill Zebub]

It has been a rough week, and this change does irritate me. I guess it could be because it seems like such an unnecessary change, but it just absolutely kneecaps the most common support actions I've seen.



And Range, or being in a social situation. See, this is one of the things that making it a reaction really helps with. Before, you could cast it on the rogue, and the the rogue heads up ahead and ends up using it later. Now, you can't do that, the person casting it has to be nearby. You could even limit the range, and have the caster need to be within 15 ft, that is a major limitation for a lot of skill checks.

I thought of range. But that means that players, at least some of them, will always be announcing they are within 15’, instead of announcing “I cast guidance.”

I get your points, but I also think guidance is a problem now, and the solution is tricky.

I also don't think it is "too mandatory" right now. People find it useful, and it is one of the more powerful cantrips, but it isn't like there aren't other cantrips that can't be taken.

That’s true. Right now it’s only “partly mandatory” because…I suspect…everybody is so tired of it being cast all the frickin time they’d they rather just not have the bonus.

Making it a reaction would, I think, change that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Actually, over half the group has to fail for a group check to fail.

Actually, that depends on the DM. Because trust me, many many many DMs have "group stealth" that means that everyone has to pass of the group is spotted.

Yeah... A cantrip that's still one of the best cantrips, and people are just upset that it's no longer 24/7 spammable... At least I understand the annoyance over having to track it, but that applies to everything now, starting from prof/day racial abilities.

See, this is what I don't get. How is "once day, maybe turn a failed skill check into a success, if the caster is in range" still one of the best cantrips, compared to the many many incredibly good cantrips? Even if we discount combat cantrips (which make up a good chunk of all cantrips) you have a massive list of powerful cantrips to choose from.

Guidance was very very good, I know, but now? Now it is so anemic I'm just not sure it is worth taking. Maybe it is a lack of people taking skills in games I've seen, but you generally have (per adventuring day) one or two people in the party making the vast majority of skill checks. And they do that because they are the best at those skills, which means they will still do that even without guidance.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I thought of range. But that means that players, at least some of them, will always be announcing they are within 15’, instead of announcing “I cast guidance.”

I get your points, but I also think guidance is a problem now, and the solution is tricky.



That’s true. Right now it’s only “partly mandatory” because…I suspect…everybody is so tired of it being cast all the frickin time they’d they rather just not have the bonus.

Making it a reaction would, I think, change that.

I guess, here is the question

The party is exploring an old ruin, with traps and such. No monsters, no combat. It is a pure skill crawl and exploration. Is it really a problem if they can cast Guidance any time they fail to try and succeed?

Guidance, Bardic inspiration, and the Help action (which notably was also nerfed) are the only things you can do to aid another person in a skill check. It is the only participation some people have with the adventure in question, so are we running into a problem to allow them to do it? And if we are, is the solution "nerf it until it isn't a problem" or is the solution to try and make other options for them to utilize?