D&D General The Sharpshooter feat and multiple attacks

[Corinnguard]

If you are playing a Ranger with the Sharpshooter feat and you gain the Extra Attack feature at 5th level, can you use the power attack feature of this feat (-5 to hit, +10 to damage) for both attacks or just one of your attacks? The feat in the PHB doesn't say one way or the other.

 

[Oofta]

If you are playing a Ranger with the Sharpshooter feat and you gain the Extra Attack feature at 5th level, can you use the power attack feature of this feat (-5 to hit, +10 to damage) for both attacks or just one of your attacks? The feat in the PHB doesn't say one way or the other.

I've never seen anyone said you could not. There's no implied limitation in the text "Before you make an attack with a ranged weapon that you are proficient with, you can choose to take a -5 penalty to the attack roll. If the attack hits, you add +10 to the attack's damage." Every attack is resolved individually, it specifies "make an attack" not "take an attack action".

 

[Quickleaf]

Yep, Oofta has the right of it.

Sharpshooter is the one feat I may house rule when I next run 5e. Long ranged attacks have a lot of benefits in 5e already, but that feat just breaks down all the limitations of ranged attacks – no long range penalty, no cover penalty, and a bunch more damage at the cost of what effectively becomes -3 to attack (as most PCs I've seen who take Sharpshooter also take the Archery fighting style for +2 to hit with ranged weapons).

A lot of people propose a universal fix to Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter (minus proficiency bonus to attack for x2 proficiency bonus to damage). But for me that misses the mark. Yeah, it's a lot of damage at levels 1 and 2, but over the course of play and leveling up, Sharpshooter becomes more disruptive not because of the damage alone but because of how the damage and bypassing cover/ranged penalties stack.

What I'm considering is: You can only use one of the Sharpshooter feat’s benefits on each attack, chosen before you roll to hit. For example, if you are aiming to bypass cover, you cannot deal extra damage or ignore range penalties in the same shot. I think this preserves what's cool about the feat without making ranged attack builds as dominant, and maps to the narrative better: "I'm firing in a high arc to clear the field and hit the back of the hobgoblin army (Long Shot)" vs "I'm taking careful aim to thread my arrow between the gap in the trees to hit the troll (Bypass 1/2 or 3/4 Cover)" vs "I'm drawing back with all my strength on the bowstring and unleashing my shot (Sacrifice Attack for Damage)."

 

[Oofta]

Yep, Oofta has the right of it.

Sharpshooter is the one feat I may house rule when I next run 5e. Long ranged attacks have a lot of benefits in 5e already, but that feat just breaks down all the limitations of ranged attacks – no long range penalty, no cover penalty, and a bunch more damage at the cost of what effectively becomes -3 to attack (as most PCs I've seen who take Sharpshooter also take the Archery fighting style for +2 to hit with ranged weapons).

A lot of people propose a universal fix to Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter (minus proficiency bonus to attack for x2 proficiency bonus to damage). But for me that misses the mark. Yeah, it's a lot of damage at levels 1 and 2, but over the course of play and leveling up, Sharpshooter becomes more disruptive not because of the damage alone but because of how the damage and bypassing cover/ranged penalties stack.

What I'm considering is: You can only use one of the Sharpshooter feat’s benefits on each attack, chosen before you roll to hit. For example, if you are aiming to bypass cover, you cannot deal extra damage or ignore range penalties in the same shot. I think this preserves what's cool about the feat without making ranged attack builds as dominant, and maps to the narrative better: "I'm firing in a high arc to clear the field and hit the back of the hobgoblin army (Long Shot)" vs "I'm taking careful aim to thread my arrow between the gap in the trees to hit the troll (Bypass 1/2 or 3/4 Cover)" vs "I'm drawing back with all my strength on the bowstring and unleashing my shot (Sacrifice Attack for Damage)."

I agree that ss is a broken feat, far more broken than great weapon master IMHO. Part of that is using volley range for the range of longbow targeting anything spec target.

Doesn't change the rule though, even if in my home game I do something similar.

 

[jgsugden]

Sharpshooter has been a big player in 2 near TPKs when I have been DMing. In both instances, the archer was essentially useless at the start of combat ... and having a PC effectively do nothing in combat for a round or two in a difficult combat can make a huge difference.

While sharshooter increases your average damage against foes with typical ACs, it also increases the odds that you'll totally miss the enemy on multiple back to back attacks at the start of combat. In both instances where the archer was just missing, the enemy had an AC high enough that Sharpshooter wasn't adding that much damage on average in theory - but with the extra unlucky misses it was devastaingly bad for the group when the PCs just flat out missed so much.

If you hit 70% of the time without Sharpshooter (requires a 7), you only hit 45% of the time with it (requires a 12). You'll have a 2.7% chance of having three misses in a row without Sharpshooter, and a 16.6% chance of having three misses in a row with it. That goes from once in 37 combats to once in 6 combats. You may not have 37 challengeing combats in a campaign - but you might have several challenging combats where you miss those first three attacks in a campaign .... and if you do have that unlucky streak that happens once in 37 tries, it wouldn't just be missing 3 attacks ... it would be missing the first 6 if you're using Sharshooter and having that decreased chances to hit.

Sharpshooter is often evaluated only by the damage per round or damage per attack impact - but people drastically underestimate the risks that it introduces.

 

[Corinnguard]

With regards to taking that -5 penalty for Sharpshooter, it doesn't take much to overcome it. My current character is a 4th-level Bugbear Ranger (Gloom Stalker) with an 18 DEX, the Archery Fighting Style and a +1 Longbow (that was a gift to him by Mielikki). So he has a +9 bonus (+4 DEX modifier plus his proficiency of +2 plus another +2 from his Fighting Style) plus his +1 Longbow) to hit someone with a ranged attack.

I am planning on giving him the Sharpshooter feat when he reaches 8th level. His ranged attack by then will be a +10, so he can take the penalty and still have a +5 chance to hit someone. And by 8th level, he can make three attacks (thanks to Extra Attack and Dread Ambusher) if he makes a ranged attack in the first turn of combat. Oofta is right, Sharpshooter is seriously broken.

Does anyone know what the 1 D&D version of this feat looks like? I have heard that it was nerfed.

 

[James Gasik]

Generally when using Sharpshooter or GWM, a little bit of party optimization goes a long way. If you can get advantage granted to you by an ally*, that almost completely negates the penalty, and a spell like Bless cuts it in half.

*Or find a way to generate it yourself. Things were more ridiculous when Kobolds had Pack Tactics, lol.

 

[Flights of Fancy]

I have heard that it was nerfed.

It should be nerfed as it is much too good. We allow the feat, but you can only apply one of its benefits to an attack. You can ignore cover, not have disadvantage at long range, OR accept the -5 attack for +10 damage.

Most often we see it being used on targets already in melee, so the cover bonus applies. You can get rid of it OR get the big damage boost, not both. With a +2 to AC for cover, this increases the -5 attack to effectively a -7.

This also makes getting advantage still a great way to override much of that penalty, but not nearly as much.

 

[Corinnguard]

A5e has a feat similar to Sharpshooter called Dead Eye.

DEADEYE​

Prerequisite: 8th level or higher

Your natural talent or skill makes you lethal with a ranged weapon.

• You gain proficiency with the Farshot Stance and Ricochet maneuvers, and do not have to spend exertion to activate them.
• Cover does not grant your targets an AC bonus when you make attacks against them with a ranged weapon.
• Before making an attack with a ranged weapon you are proficient with, you may choose to forgo your proficiency bonus on the attack roll, applying twice your proficiency bonus to damage instead.

So instead of adding +3 to hit, you are adding +6 to damage instead. You can probably use this feat in multiple attacks as well, but with a much lower damage per round than 5e's Sharpshooter could dole out.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Does anyone know what the 1 D&D version of this feat looks like? I have heard that it was nerfed.

The -5/+10 mechanic was eliminated entirely, but I wouldn't call it nerfed. I think it's still probably the best single feat in the game.

SHARPSHOOTER
4th-Level Feat
Prerequisite: Proficiency with Any Martial Weapon
Repeatable: No
You can make shots that others find impossible, granting you the following benefits:
Ability Score Increase. Increase your Dexterity score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
Bypass Cover. Your Ranged Attacks with Weapons ignore Half Cover and Three-Quarters Cover.
Firing in Melee. Being within 5 feet of an enemy doesn’t impose Disadvantage on your ranged Attack Rolls with Weapons.
Long Shots. Attacking at Long Range doesn’t impose Disadvantage on your ranged Attack Rolls with Weapons.

So it basically eliminates all drawbacks of using a ranged weapon, with the exception of consuming ammunition. And it now boosts Dex. But you have to wait until level 4 to get it.

Personally, as written I think it's probably a level 8 or 12 feat.

 

[Clint_L]

In my games, super long range attacks aren't much of a factor. Cover can be, though usually the ranged attacker just chooses a target that isn't in cover. So this feat really comes down to the -5/+10 option.

This is not as powerful as many people think. Let's say you would normally hit a target on an 11+, doing 8.5 damage (4.5+4), or 4.25 average damage per attack. If you opted for the extra damage from sharpshooter, you hit on a 16+, doing 18.5 (4.5+4+10) damage, or...about 4.6 damage per attack. Of course, the initial AC of the target has a huge impact on the value of the feat; basically it is much stronger against low AC targets, and much weaker against high AC ones, as you would expect. As pointed out, it also makes your damage output much less predictable.

Also, it is often taken by rogues, which makes the -5 to the attack roll even riskier since the +10 bonus has to be weighed against the risk of losing your sneak attack damage on those attacks.

Right now, choosing to use the +5/-10 option is not an automatic choice. Players forego it all the time, for good reasons. I like abilities that force players to make choices.

 

[Zardnaar]

In my games, super long range attacks aren't much of a factor. Cover can be, though usually the ranged attacker just chooses a target that isn't in cover. So this feat really comes down to the -5/+10 option.

This is not as powerful as many people think. Let's say you would normally hit a target on an 11+, doing 8.5 damage (4.5+4), or 4.25 average damage per attack. If you opted for the extra damage from sharpshooter, you hit on a 16+, doing 18.5 (4.5+4+10) damage, or...about 4.6 damage per attack. Of course, the initial AC of the target has a huge impact on the value of the feat; basically it is much stronger against low AC targets, and much weaker against high AC ones, as you would expect. As pointed out, it also makes your damage output much less predictable.

Also, it is often taken by rogues, which makes the -5 to the attack roll even riskier since the +10 bonus has to be weighed against the risk of losing your sneak attack damage on those attacks.

Right now, choosing to use the +5/-10 option is not an automatic choice. Players forego it all the time, for good reasons. I like abilities that force players to make choices.

It's bad on rogues as they only get 1 attack anyway.

Exception woukd be CBE.

I called this feat broken
in 2014.

 

[Clint_L]

It's not great for Rangers, either, because every time you can add extra damage to your attack (e.g. Hunter's Mark) it devalues Sharpshooter.

Same example: 11+ to hit normally. Ranger using Hunter's mark does 6 average damage per attack. Using sharpshooter, that becomes 5.5. So you really have to pick your moments, such as when you have advantage or you target is very soft.

 

[Zardnaar]

It's not great for Rangers, either, because every time you can add extra damage to your attack (e.g. Hunter's Mark) it devalues Sharpshooter.

Same example: 11+ to hit normally. Ranger using Hunter's mark does 6 average damage per attack. Using sharpshooter, that becomes 5.5. So you really have to pick your moments, such as when you have advantage or you target is very soft.

I've seen it rock on rangers. Hunters and gloomstalkers. Hunters mark can be obsolete in certain scenarios.

 

[Corinnguard]

It's not great for Rangers, either, because every time you can add extra damage to your attack (e.g. Hunter's Mark) it devalues Sharpshooter.

Same story when you try to add the Bugbear's Surprise attack (Monsters of the Multiverse version) and/or the Favored Foe option then?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Sharpshooter has been a big player in 2 near TPKs when I have been DMing. In both instances, the archer was essentially useless at the start of combat ... and having a PC effectively do nothing in combat for a round or two in a difficult combat can make a huge difference.

While sharshooter increases your average damage against foes with typical ACs, it also increases the odds that you'll totally miss the enemy on multiple back to back attacks at the start of combat. In both instances where the archer was just missing, the enemy had an AC high enough that Sharpshooter wasn't adding that much damage on average in theory - but with the extra unlucky misses it was devastaingly bad for the group when the PCs just flat out missed so much.

If you hit 70% of the time without Sharpshooter (requires a 7), you only hit 45% of the time with it (requires a 12). You'll have a 2.7% chance of having three misses in a row without Sharpshooter, and a 16.6% chance of having three misses in a row with it. That goes from once in 37 combats to once in 6 combats. You may not have 37 challengeing combats in a campaign - but you might have several challenging combats where you miss those first three attacks in a campaign .... and if you do have that unlucky streak that happens once in 37 tries, it wouldn't just be missing 3 attacks ... it would be missing the first 6 if you're using Sharshooter and having that decreased chances to hit.

Sharpshooter is often evaluated only by the damage per round or damage per attack impact - but people drastically underestimate the risks that it introduces.

Depends on whether those attacks would have killed a significant number of the opponents in the first three rounds.
However, bear in mind that if you're up against high-AC opponents, you can just not use the power attack option.

In my games, super long range attacks aren't much of a factor. Cover can be, though usually the ranged attacker just chooses a target that isn't in cover. So this feat really comes down to the -5/+10 option.

This is not as powerful as many people think. Let's say you would normally hit a target on an 11+, doing 8.5 damage (4.5+4), or 4.25 average damage per attack. If you opted for the extra damage from sharpshooter, you hit on a 16+, doing 18.5 (4.5+4+10) damage, or...about 4.6 damage per attack. Of course, the initial AC of the target has a huge impact on the value of the feat; basically it is much stronger against low AC targets, and much weaker against high AC ones, as you would expect. As pointed out, it also makes your damage output much less predictable.

Also, it is often taken by rogues, which makes the -5 to the attack roll even riskier since the +10 bonus has to be weighed against the risk of losing your sneak attack damage on those attacks.

Right now, choosing to use the +5/-10 option is not an automatic choice. Players forego it all the time, for good reasons. I like abilities that force players to make choices.

Needing 11+ to hit at base for most characters using Sharpshooter is unusually high AC as far as I know. Against that high an AC, most would just stick with the other benefits of the feat.

Have to admit, I've never seen it taken by a Rogue however.

 

[Oofta]

Depends on whether those attacks would have killed a significant number of the opponents in the first three rounds.
However, bear in mind that if you're up against high-AC opponents, you can just not use the power attack option.




Needing 11+ to hit at base for most characters using Sharpshooter is unusually high AC as far as I know. Against that high an AC, most would just stick with the other benefits of the feat.

Have to admit, I've never seen it taken by a Rogue however.

I've seen it taken by a rogue for the no cover benefit and extra range.

The average AC by CR is: <5 = 13; 5-10 = 15; 11-16 = 17; >16 = 19. I know a lot of people will claim that average AC is 14, but that's only because there are so many low level monsters in the book. Taking the -5 is quite good if you know it's a low AC monster, but risky with considerable variance at most levels. You can "counteract" the penalty by getting bonuses, but unless your to-hit number is so high you only miss on a 1, I question the value.

On the other hand, the PC that can hit a target peeking through an arrow slit two football fields away with no penalty just annoys me conceptually.

 

[Andras]

I had it with a ranger, but generally I only used it if I had advantage on the attack. The risk of doing no damage was too high to use it regularly. I was also a Druid multiclass and used higher casts of Summon Bestial Spirit extensively for extra attacks and damage. That was the single most effective damage enhancement that character had.

 

[Quartz]

Has anyone tried it with thrown weapons? Say a Machete-like character?

 

[Oofta]

Has anyone tried it with thrown weapons? Say a Machete-like character?

Sharpshooter may not be technically legal with thrown weapons. Thrown weapons are not considered "ranged weapon attacks", they're "ranged attack with a melee weapon" depending on whom you ask. I think it's way too finicky but ask your DM.

I checked sage advice and it doesn't address it, but there is this:

Does the Archery fighting style work with a melee weapon that you throw?​

No, the Archery feature benefits ranged weapons. A melee weapon, such as a dagger or handaxe, is still a melee weapon when you make a ranged attack with it.​

​

For what it's worth, I would allow it in my home game.