What makes Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter so good?

[Oofta]

As an aside, if the foe is that far away and looking through a crack, the pc CAN'T see them (imho) so they cant attack them.

You obviously have never played with [name redacted because I still play with the guy].

 

[TwoSix]

As an aside, if the foe is that far away and looking through a crack, the pc CAN'T see them (imho) so they cant attack them.

Even beyond that, SS only lets you ignore half and 3/4 cover. The DM is totally within the rules (and completely justified) to rule that a guy behind a wall with a tiny crack in it is defined as total cover.

 

[Oofta]

Even beyond that, SS only lets you ignore half and 3/4 cover. The DM is totally within the rules (and completely justified) to rule that a guy behind a wall with a tiny crack in it is defined as total cover.

OK ... 600 feet away looking through an arrow slit (3/4 cover), no cover, no penalty. Still silly.

 

[TwoSix]

OK ... 600 feet away looking through an arrow slit (3/4 cover), no cover, no penalty. Still silly.

No argument there. Almost seems pretty worthwhile to get rid of that whole feat, really.

 

[Ovinomancer]

No argument there. Almost seems pretty worthwhile to get rid of that whole feat, really.

Still think the best fix is to put "or" between the benefits. You're sharpshooting to ignore cover OR ignore long range OR make headshots.

 

[guachi]

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.

Doing the math, a fighter of level 1 or 2 (so no archetypes to worry about) with GWM/GWF kills hobgoblins faster than one with TWF/TWF (feat and fighting style). It's close, but the GWM/GWF guy wins. He also beats the dual-wielder in killing goblins.

I'll come up with more specific math shortly.

 

[Krachek]

Math are simple.

For a base damage of 10.

With 50% accuracy. Need a 11. +4 vs AC 15.
0.50 x 10 = 5. With SS 0.25 x 20 = 5. Same damage.

With 75% accuracy. Need a 6. +9 vs AC 15
0.75 x 10 = 7.5 With SS 0.50 x 20 = 10. +2.5 for SS. Still lower than hunter's mark.

With 95% accuracy. Need a 2. +13 vs AC 15.
0.95 x 10 = 9.5 With SS 0.70 x 20 = 14. +4.5 for SS. Better than hunter's mark.

With 115% accuracy. Ex: +18 vs AC 15. Miss only on a 1.
0.95 x 10 = 9.5 With SS 0.95 x 20 = 19. +9.5 for SS.

As soon as your effective bonus beats the target AC by 3 or more, you're having a straight +9.5 bonus to damage roll.
At low level using -5/+10 is not so good unless you hit very low AC. But as your to hit bonus get better your damage bonus increase.
An high level archer with +5 dex, +6 prof, +2 fighting style, +2 magic weapon has a +15 bonus. Vs AC 12 he has the +9.5 bonus to damage roll. With some help (Bless, advantage) he can have the +9.5 bonus to damage roll to AC as high as AC 18.

 

[5ekyu]

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.

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

Sure. But suppose someone posts saying, say, "Ever since my group saw what a GWM fighter can do damage-wise, we're seeing other sorts of fighter archetypes crowded out." What sort of response to that is helpful?

Telling the poster that his/her players are sucky DPR-obsessives doesn't seem, to me, the right way to go. Flagging a range of alternatives - from feat-banning to house-ruling to comparable feats for other fighting styles - isn't the only possible response, but seems healthier.

My response would be "how is it a problem? Those wanting to play characters with GMW will do so. Others who dont wont. It doesnt matter what their reasons are... Right? How are the others being crowded out when everyone makes their own choices?"

If you see other folks chosing to play gwm characters as a problem, tell yourself "i dont get to pick other people's characters."

If you see you choosing to play gwm characters as a problem, tell yourself " i can choose whatever is allowed"

There is no crowding out, just preferences and priorities and choices... Unlesd the game lets others harrass folks over character choices or something like that.

 

[guachi]

Math are simple.

The math's simple for the -5/+10 part. That's been solved years ago. That's not what I'm talking about. The question I'm dealing with is whether TWF/TWF is better than GWF/GWM killing lowly goblins and hobgoblins at level 1 or 2 where you'd never use the -5/+10 part because it's stupid to use it.

 

[5ekyu]

As an aside, if the foe is that far away and looking through a crack, the pc CAN'T see them (imho) so they cant attack them.

Yup. Though if they had reason to think they were there they could shoot at unseen target with disad and...