What makes Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter so good?

[abirdcall]

Either? Both?

I imagine ENworld comes up fairly easily on any sort of Google for 5e advice. So it's one important community. It's not the whole of it.

And how many people would you estimate ENWorld reaches this way?

Are you saying that 5e players are already pushing for a highly GM-curated experience and hence driving out wargame-type players?

I'm saying they already aren't wargame players. There is no 'driving out', they're just already there.

I don't agree with this at all. Reading Dragon magazine - including Forum letters, which were the early-mid 80s version of a message board - helped me a lot in learning how to approach RPGs.

That was a different game in a different time.

Don't make 5e complicated, let it be the simple to learn and play game that it is.

 

[BookBarbarian]

The only thing I have done thus far, is amend the flanking rules to limit the ease with which Advantage is gained and which rules assists against a ridiculous high AC.

Do you mean the optional flanking rules form the DMG?

I hate how trivially easy it makes it to get Advantage. So much that I'd never use them as written. I'm curious to see what you've come up with.

 

[guachi]

Again, SS and GWM is only a good solution if you go versus Low AC Mobs a lot, or if you can compensate the to hit malus by Advantage or bless.

No, it isn't. It's as if you've forgotten the other parts of the feat. The free bonus action attack and removing to-hit penalties are extremely useful. GWM is a good solution if there's a creature you can kill this turn or can get a critical hit.

At level 1 you can one-shot a goblin fairly easily with a greatsword with GWF. A raging barbarian (without GWF) always will. A non-raging barbarian will do so 92% of the time on a hit. A fighter or level 2 paladin with GWF and a 16 STR will do so 99.3% of the time. A level 1 or 2 PC will with 16 STR will hit the AC 15 goblin 55% of the time so you get that extra attack 50-55% of the time. Since you have one attack per turn that's a 50-55% damage boost.

So at low levels it's great because you can kill things in one round/one hit and get the extra attack. At higher levels you have lots of tools at your disposal to overcome the -5 part of the -5/+10 and the extra attack is just gravy.

 

[Oofta]

So at low levels it's great because you can kill things in one round/one hit and get the extra attack. At higher levels you have lots of tools at your disposal to overcome the -5 part of the -5/+10 and the extra attack is just gravy.

The non-GWM fighter could also use those same tools to increase their hit and damage potential. Two weapon fighters would probably mow down the goblins at 1st level just about as quickly, while always getting a bonus attack and have a better chance of taking out that hobgoblin that shows up with their 18 AC.

Nobody is arguing that GWM is a bad feat. But there is a lot of hyperbole and exaggeration about how overpowered it is and that all other build pale in comparison to the overwhelming might of the all-powerful GWM. That if you play a fighter, the only viable options are GWM and SS and every other build is for losers. That DMs with PCs that have those feats can't set up encounters that can be a challenge.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I have found both those feats OP and have as yet to act on it. OP in a sense that any other fighter-build appears to fall short. I have not done calculations myself - I trust the far better mathematicians here on Enworld. Thankfully I'm only dealing with GWM and not SS (that character retired). But the GWM is a 10th level BM who has a high AC and has dipped into wizard and uses the Shield spell. The sorcerer often Hastes him so he is well-optimised in combat.

Both feats in my opinion require a rethink.

EDIT: The only thing I have done thus far, is amend the flanking rules to limit the ease with which Advantage is gained and which rules assists against a ridiculous high AC.

Ok. That is something and I can feel with you. Just something to think about: Is it really overpowered or just good use of resources and feels maybe stronger as it is.
Some things to remember:
Reaction used for shield means no OA
Is he protected vs spells that might render him stunned or paralyzed.
Is the sorcerer protected vs attacks that break his concentration which leaves the fighter disabled for a turn? Yes he is partially because the standard DC 10 is easily done. Paralizing the sorcerer should work fine though.
What spells could the sorcerer have used instead of granting the fighter an extra attack.
What maneuver could the fighter have used instead of precision attack.
How much damage would the fighter do without the feat. 30 instead of 20 is less impressive than 20 vs 10.

So. Everything together: good use of resources and team play or just killing the fun?

 

[TwoSix]

Nobody is arguing that GWM is a bad feat. But there is a lot of hyperbole and exaggeration about how overpowered it is and that all other build pale in comparison to the overwhelming might of the all-powerful GWM. That if you play a fighter, the only viable options are GWM and SS and every other build is for losers.

The actual most problematic build is the CE/SS build. It's like a dual-wield build combined with GWM, except more accurate and works out to 120 feet.

That DMs with PCs that have those feats can't set up encounters that can be a challenge.

That isn't really the argument. The argument is that the damage of these builds makes using the CR system less reliable, and that the encounters presented in published adventures might be easier than anticipated.

 

[Oofta]

The actual most problematic build is the CE/SS build. It's like a dual-wield build combined with GWM, except more accurate and works out to 120 feet.

I would argue that most people don't do CE/SS correctly. Based on official errata, you need a free hand to load a crossbow. So if you are walking around with two loaded hand crossbows (really?) then the first round you can fire both.

After the first round? Unless you're playing a Thri-Kreen where do you get the extra hand? If the DM's OK with it you could always have the bandolier of loaded hand crossbows, ignore the free hand rule or automatically/magically reloading weapons. But that's going to depend on campaign and style.

But it is one of the sillier builds out there. I don't ban them, but in real life a hand crossbow is a toy, not a real weapon.

That isn't really the argument. The argument is that the damage of these builds makes using the CR system less reliable, and that the encounters presented in published adventures might be easier than anticipated.

I've DMed for different groups and I had to have different difficulty multipliers for each group. Neither had GWM or SS, used same basic assumptions for ability scores (point buy), received roughly the same rewards etc.

The DM always has to adjust for their group and they always have in every edition.

 

[TwoSix]

I would argue that most people don't do CE/SS correctly. Based on official errata, you need a free hand to load a crossbow. So if you are walking around with two loaded hand crossbows (really?) then the first round you can fire both.

After the first round? Unless you're playing a Thri-Kreen where do you get the extra hand? If the DM's OK with it you could always have the bandolier of loaded hand crossbows, ignore the free hand rule or automatically/magically reloading weapons. But that's going to depend on campaign and style.

But it is one of the sillier builds out there. I don't ban them, but in real life a hand crossbow is a toy, not a real weapon.

Why would you use two hand crossbows? You use one. Since CE lets you ignore the loading property, you can fire it exactly like you fire any ranged weapon. And using the hand crossbow counts as the Attack option that triggers the bonus action hand crossbow attack.

Sage Advice compendium here for clarification.

 

[Oofta]

Why would you use two hand crossbows? You use one. Since CE lets you ignore the loading property, you can fire it exactly like you fire any ranged weapon. And using the hand crossbow counts as the Attack option that triggers the bonus action hand crossbow attack.

Sage Advice compendium here for clarification.

I stand corrected. Sage Advice is perfectly ok with this stupidity, but a shield master can't choose when to use their bonus attack because it's too cheesy.

I'd just ban this in a home game. It's dumb for a weapon that shouldn't be anything other than a toy or perhaps a poison delivery device.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Bless requires someone uses and maintains his concentration Slot.

True, but if they were going to cast that spell anyway, then the added cost associated with your ability is zero. Bless is a great spell regardless, and one of the go-to actions for any cleric who doesn't have something better to do at the start of a fight.

A single hit and a botched Constitution save can end a casters bless.

Not necessarily true, since it's possible to have a Con save bonus high enough that most concentration checks are automatic.