Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Master and Why They Are Broken 101.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AaronOfBarbaria" data-source="post: 6925392" data-attributes="member: 6701872"><p>Again, no it doesn't. The penalty is always there unless you are also targeting an AC that you would only miss on a 1 normally, and would only miss on less than 5 numbers higher while taking the penalty - to phrase that clearly, unless you only miss on a natural 1 normally, and only miss on a natural 1-5 when taking the penalty, it is <em>still a -5 penalty both in name and in effect.</em></p><p></p><p> Again, you are phrasing something in such a way as to make it an untrue statement even if what you are meaning to convey were the truth.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I absolutely can say "working as intended" even though extra damage from other sources is less prone to amplified effect through teamwork.</p><p></p><p>I can do so because I can see that teamwork as being intended to make each option put into it more powerful - because that's how to encourage teamwork; you make it actually <em>work</em> and be <em>worth something</em>.</p><p></p><p>If you miss more often and deal more damage when you hit, you have to first deal all of the damage you would have dealt when hitting more often before you start getting into the territory of dealing <em>more</em> than you otherwise would have.</p><p></p><p>So let's go ahead and put some numbers to your claim here and see if it holds true as you have chosen to phrase it: 40% of attacks with the feat benefit hit vs. 100% of attacks without it, that means that the attacks with the benefit of the feat have to do 2.5 times the amount of damage in order to match, and more than that to pull ahead - so the +10 damage from the feat needs to be greater than 1.5 times the base damage of an attack. Which means the base damage of an attack has to be lower than 6.6 (repeating).</p><p></p><p>Which is not the case with any two-handed weapon I'm aware of unless the character in question has a +1 or lower strength modifier (since two-handed weapons have 1d10, 1d12, or 2d6 damage).</p><p></p><p>So your claim is shown as being factually inaccurate - so we can't reasonably use it to determine how we feel about whatever the actual case of the feat's performance is.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AaronOfBarbaria, post: 6925392, member: 6701872"] Again, no it doesn't. The penalty is always there unless you are also targeting an AC that you would only miss on a 1 normally, and would only miss on less than 5 numbers higher while taking the penalty - to phrase that clearly, unless you only miss on a natural 1 normally, and only miss on a natural 1-5 when taking the penalty, it is [I]still a -5 penalty both in name and in effect.[/I] Again, you are phrasing something in such a way as to make it an untrue statement even if what you are meaning to convey were the truth. I absolutely can say "working as intended" even though extra damage from other sources is less prone to amplified effect through teamwork. I can do so because I can see that teamwork as being intended to make each option put into it more powerful - because that's how to encourage teamwork; you make it actually [I]work[/I] and be [I]worth something[/I]. If you miss more often and deal more damage when you hit, you have to first deal all of the damage you would have dealt when hitting more often before you start getting into the territory of dealing [I]more[/I] than you otherwise would have. So let's go ahead and put some numbers to your claim here and see if it holds true as you have chosen to phrase it: 40% of attacks with the feat benefit hit vs. 100% of attacks without it, that means that the attacks with the benefit of the feat have to do 2.5 times the amount of damage in order to match, and more than that to pull ahead - so the +10 damage from the feat needs to be greater than 1.5 times the base damage of an attack. Which means the base damage of an attack has to be lower than 6.6 (repeating). Which is not the case with any two-handed weapon I'm aware of unless the character in question has a +1 or lower strength modifier (since two-handed weapons have 1d10, 1d12, or 2d6 damage). So your claim is shown as being factually inaccurate - so we can't reasonably use it to determine how we feel about whatever the actual case of the feat's performance is. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Master and Why They Are Broken 101.
Top