GWM/Sharpshooter Change?

[Jeebs]

Has anyone else considered changing the power attack mechanic (-5 to hit/+10 to damage) to relying on Proficiency? Basically it would start at -2/+4 and scale up to -6/+12.

Is the extra damage at level 17+ not mitigated by the extra -1? Would it help smooth out the power spikes at lower levels? Or does it somehow just make the feat more attractive?

[Easy_Lee]

Has anyone else considered changing the power attack mechanic (-5 to hit/+10 to damage) to relying on Proficiency? Basically it would start at -2/+4 and scale up to -6/+12.

Is the extra damage at level 17+ not mitigated by the extra -1? Would it help smooth out the power spikes at lower levels? Or does it somehow just make the feat more attractive?

The whole -1 hit = +2 damage seems odd, to me. Against most monsters in the PHB, - 1 hit represents a much larger drop in DPR than 2 damage.

However, if you're okay with that dilemma, then your version is balanced just fine. It limits potential abuse for low level players to combine it with Portent or Lucky.

[Zman]

Yes they have and it has been mathed out extensively and is just as problematic.

Either getting rid of the -5/+10 attack and replacing it as a half feat works. I suggest limiting them to only a single Power Attack per turn, this really helps curb the ridiculous power the feats bring to the table. I also change Sharpshooter to only doubling short range, and downgrading cover one step.

[Kryx]

Making it scale delays the problem which does help ad most games don't go that late in level.

I am one of those that recommend removing the -5/+10. Others like zman limit it to once a round (imo still problematic). Many others claim it's perfectly fine (though mathematically it is the best option so for internal balance sake it's not fine).

Play with what you think is most balanced/fun/whatever criteria.

[James warden]

Great post.

[Fflewddur Fflam]

i suggest limiting them to only a single power attack per turn, this really helps curb the ridiculous power the feats bring to the table.

this.............

[Easy_Lee]

Honestly, I think the feat could have been a lot simpler: disadvantage on the attack roll, advantage on the damage roll. That means roll damage die twice and take the higher number, just like with a D20.

Has anyone suggested that before? Seems obvious, in hindsight.

[Zman]

Honestly, I think the feat could have been a lot simpler: disadvantage on the attack roll, advantage on the damage roll. That means roll damage die twice and take the higher number, just like with a D20.

Has anyone suggested that before? Seems obvious, in hindsight.

My initial reaction is that it isn't worth it. Disadvantage is often equivalent to a -5 to hit, but having advantage on damage is nowhere near worth it. If memory serves me rolling 2d12 and picking the highest is effectively +2 Damage on average. So, -5 to hit for +2 Damage, is not even close to worth it. Probably a touch more considering you make critting extremely unlikely.

[Goober4473]

I limit it to once per turn and also to +5 damage until level 5.

[MrFahrenheit]

Honestly, I think the feat could have been a lot simpler: disadvantage on the attack roll, advantage on the damage roll. That means roll damage die twice and take the higher number, just like with a D20.

Has anyone suggested that before? Seems obvious, in hindsight.

I don't think I'll change GWM in my game, but FWIW, I let my players roll hp each new level in their single or primary class with advantage. As a bonus, if they roll double max, they get auto max the next level too. Since new hp are one-and-done rolls, it gives the player more reassurance, even if they ultimately roll poorly on both dice.

[djreynolds]

What does a champion fighter have?

He has no spells, no smiting, nothing. A warlock and bladesinger can both add casting stats to damage at levels 12 and 14. A barbarian can recklessly attack and has damage resistance and rage damage. A paladin can smite and has improved divine smite at level 11. A rogue is adding 6d6 at level 11.

A fighter and ranger really needs GWM or sharpshooter to stay relevant.

If I find there is a problem, I just up the challenge rating of the monsters. I even give some monsters AC boosts or armor even.

A solution I found, and works well in the AL with standard array, are prerequisites for feats. Like you need a 20 in strength to use GWM, and a 20 in dex to use sharpshooter. That means at the earliest a fighter is getting these feats at level 8. This could.... might work for you.

[Zman]

What does a champion fighter have?

He has no spells, no smiting, nothing. A warlock and bladesinger can both add casting stats to damage at levels 12 and 14. A barbarian can recklessly attack and has damage resistance and rage damage. A paladin can smite and has improved divine smite at level 11. A rogue is adding 6d6 at level 11.

A fighter and ranger really needs GWM or sharpshooter to stay relevant.

If I find there is a problem, I just up the challenge rating of the monsters. I even give some monsters AC boosts or armor even.

A solution I found, and works well in the AL with standard array, are prerequisites for feats. Like you need a 20 in strength to use GWM, and a 20 in dex to use sharpshooter. That means at the earliest a fighter is getting these feats at level 8. This could.... might work for you.

Firstly, they have Action Surge and Extra Attack(2) and Extra Attack(3). Action Suge acts as a damage spike like Smiting does and the additional attacks increases at will damage similar to improved smite. Damage is comparable actually. Barbarian is tricker as Rage is not a short term damage spike, and function like a moderate term increase in damage and reduction in incoming damage. Reckless is an still a considerable damage increase, but comes at increased incoming damage. They are definitely in the same ballpark here. But....

You say that Fighter needs GWM to keep up with a Paladin and Barbarian, well the fighter does benefit more from GWM than a Paladin, but the BArbarian with Reckless benefits to a much larger degree. So, that idea just doesn't hold water. And this doesn't account for the huge problem that GWM,mSharpshooter, and PAM are significant damage increases for certain fighting styles, but feats don't exist for other styles. It is why I have toned them down with a single power attack, and have added a few more style feats so any style can step up to the plate and there are many more viable styles.

[Jeebs]

Making it scale delays the problem which does help ad most games don't go that late in level.

I am one of those that recommend removing the -5/+10. Others like zman limit it to once a round (imo still problematic). Many others claim it's perfectly fine (though mathematically it is the best option so for internal balance sake it's not fine).

Play with what you think is most balanced/fun/whatever criteria.

I've also thought about letting all martial attacks take advantage of the power attack mechanic. Everyone has access to -5/+10 (or -2/+4, or whatever) from the get-go, assuming they're not making a spell attack. Then everyone who regularly attacks with weapons has access to the best option you mentioned.

GWM and Sharpshooter would become half feats, keeping the cleave/cover mechanics, but replacing -5/+10 with +1 STR and +1 DEX respectively.

Would that help to overcome the disparity in power levels between martials and help them to compete with casters once level 6 spells are introduced? I'm sure there's a good chance you're basically just cranking up the power level of your game, to the point that you might as well use the Heroic Fantasy rest variants, but I'm just curious about how to make the mechanic more "fair."

I know it's a lot of damage to give out for free, but personally I've been a little bored with how high monster HP has gotten in the HotDQ campaign I'm DMing. We've just reached level 7.

[Easy_Lee]

What does a champion fighter have?

The main advantage of champion is that the class still works at near 100% no matter how long the adventuring day goes on. If you want a champion to shine, throw your players through a gauntlet. By the time everyone else has used their spell slots and resources, the champion will still be going strong.

[Kryx]

Would that help to overcome the disparity in power levels between martials and help them to compete with casters once level 6 spells are introduced?
Adding more at-will damage will do nothing to offset any martial/caster balance as that unbalance isn't based on damage, but versatility.


Regarding martial balance:
Making it available to everyone doesn't solve it. The issue with these abilities is they can be overcome via class features like advantage from Barbarian or paladin oath of enmity.
So those options still remain the best options by far and that, imo, is the issue.

[Easy_Lee]

Adding more at-will damage will do nothing to offset any martial/caster balance as that unbalance isn't based on damage, but versatility.


Regarding martial balance:
Making it available to everyone doesn't solve it. The issue with these abilities is they can be overcome via class features like advantage from Barbarian or paladin oath of enmity.
So those options still remain the best options by far and that, imo, is the issue.

I think the real issue is the balance between weapon types. All martial classes can use either a crossbow with Sharpshooter or a great weapon with GWM. However, that means anyone who doesn't do these things is losing out on damage anytime the feature would be useful. Which is not all the time, but is some of the time.

When compared with other damage feats, such as Charger, Savage Attacker, or Dual Wielder, it's clear that there's some disparity.

[Kogrean]

What I've implemented in a recent game is taking -5/+10 out of GWM and SS and replaced them with +1 str and +1 dex respectively, so still pretty nice feats. I've also allowed -5/+10 to be used on one attack roll per round, regardless of weapon or spell. I also allow a character to use it until it hits if a character has more than one attack roll in a turn. For example, fighter 11 may use -5/+10 on the first attack roll and if that hits other attacks are resolved as normal. If the fighter misses with that first attack, -5/+10 can be attempted on the next attack. If it misses as well, the third attack can try it. I find that this adds a bit more decision making to classes that generally just attack each turn (champion fighter, blastlock, etc.). This has allowed more internal balance as there is no "optimal" weapon. I have a character that wanted to use a scimitar for the flavor and now he can have his flavor and damage, instead of needing to choose between the two.

[djreynolds]

Firstly, they have Action Surge and Extra Attack(2) and Extra Attack(3). Action Suge acts as a damage spike like Smiting does and the additional attacks increases at will damage similar to improved smite. Damage is comparable actually. Barbarian is tricker as Rage is not a short term damage spike, and function like a moderate term increase in damage and reduction in incoming damage. Reckless is an still a considerable damage increase, but comes at increased incoming damage. They are definitely in the same ballpark here. But....

You say that Fighter needs GWM to keep up with a Paladin and Barbarian, well the fighter does benefit more from GWM than a Paladin, but the BArbarian with Reckless benefits to a much larger degree. So, that idea just doesn't hold water. And this doesn't account for the huge problem that GWM,mSharpshooter, and PAM are significant damage increases for certain fighting styles, but feats don't exist for other styles. It is why I have toned them down with a single power attack, and have added a few more style feats so any style can step up to the plate and there are many more viable styles.

I hear you and you sound right. And I like the idea of once per turn like sneak attack, that seems fair.

But I've played a champion... I rolled like 16 critical hits from 3rd to 11th level.

But look at paladin at level 11 he adds extra damage from improved divine smite to every attack. So with a long sword he is doing 1d8+1d8 and then 1d8+1d8, a fighter at 11 with a long sword is doing 1d8+1d8+1d8.

A paladin can smite when he chooses to, action surge isn't a guarantee its just more attacks.

Rage is half damage, so its like double hit points. Yes a good DM can make you pay for recklessly attacking, but you may have already killed your opponent and gotten the bonus action from GWM and killed his buddy

Humbly for me, GWM let me keep up with the paladin.

I think the issue for me, is many monsters just end up having more hit points but the AC stays put.

[Zman]

I hear you and you sound right. And I like the idea of once per turn like sneak attack, that seems fair.

But I've played a champion... I rolled like 16 critical hits from 3rd to 11th level.

But look at paladin at level 11 he adds extra damage from improved divine smite to every attack. So with a long sword he is doing 1d8+1d8 and then 1d8+1d8, a fighter at 11 with a long sword is doing 1d8+1d8+1d8.

A paladin can smite when he chooses to, action surge isn't a guarantee its just more attacks.

Rage is half damage, so its like double hit points. Yes a good DM can make you pay for recklessly attacking, but you may have already killed your opponent and gotten the bonus action from GWM and killed his buddy

Humbly for me, GWM let me keep up with the paladin.

I think the issue for me, is many monsters just end up having more hit points but the AC stays put.

Dueling
Paladin was 4d8+14
Fighter was 2d8+21

Which is a slight bonus for the Paladin, but it isn't that big. As a Champion the Fighter Crots more and has +1 AC to boot. Awefully close.

And if you were a Battlemaster with Teip GWM would seem so ungodly powerful.

[djreynolds]

Dueling
Paladin was 4d8+14
Fighter was 2d8+21

Which is a slight bonus for the Paladin, but it isn't that big. As a Champion the Fighter Crots more and has +1 AC to boot. Awefully close.

And if you were a Battlemaster with Teip GWM would seem so ungodly powerful.

Can't ignore the math, and I'm open towards the conversation, for or against.


You've said once a turn works,

but how something more chaotic.

What if you had to roll a 1d6 and that is what you took off your roll to hit,

and you had to roll a 1d10 and take that damage

[NNescio]

Can't ignore the math, and I'm open towards the conversation, for or against.


You've said once a turn works,

but how something more chaotic.

What if you had to roll a 1d6 and that is what you took off your roll to hit,

and you had to roll a 1d10 and take that damage

Too much rolling.

[Cybren]

Can't ignore the math, and I'm open towards the conversation, for or against.


You've said once a turn works,

but how something more chaotic.

What if you had to roll a 1d6 and that is what you took off your roll to hit,

and you had to roll a 1d10 and take that damage
-3.5 for +5.5 isn't a great deal.

Honestly I don't buy the idea that these feats are problematic. Asserting that they deal lots of damage: sure, that's observable. Asserting that they deal "too much" damage is entirely subjective.

[Zman]

Can't ignore the math, and I'm open towards the conversation, for or against.


You've said once a turn works,

but how something more chaotic.

What if you had to roll a 1d6 and that is what you took off your roll to hit,

and you had to roll a 1d10 and take that damage

It's a lot of rolling but is "better". I wouldn't say that is the answer. Once a turn is much much better. Keys doesn't like that it is still unbalanced for that roll and wants to get rid of it completely. But I focus on better, not perfect. The city or kill bonus attack is worth a feat in itself.


-3.5 for +5.5 isn't a great deal.

Honestly I don't buy the idea that these feats are problematic. Asserting that they deal lots of damage: sure, that's observable. Asserting that they deal "too much" damage is entirely subjective.

How much is an ASI worth? How much damage do they add? How a usable are they for certain builds? What options do other fighting styles to keep up? Etc. they are too much because they are a whole new level of damage output and only are accessible to s few fighting styles and the other styles are left in the dust.

[Cybren]

How much is an ASI worth?
Variable by class. You can't quantify some arbitrary "utility quotient" and it's disingenuous to argue you can.


How much damage do they add?

Not all character options have to care about damage, and in a game with feats I would want a "good at damage" feat to improve your damage more than an ASI, because ASIs improve lots of things besides damage.


How a usable are they for certain builds? What options do other fighting styles to keep up?

They're useful. Again, defining some "usefulness variable" is impossible. Are you saying Great Weapon Master is better than Polearm Master? Shield Master? Alert? Lucky?


Etc. they are too much because they are a whole new level of damage output and only are accessible to s few fighting styles and the other styles are left in the dust.

so what?

[djreynolds]

To be honest, I haven't come across a real issue. But our table is full of novices, so my opinion is skewed.

Our ranger does pack a punch, but kudos for him. And he did it with a 16 in dex from 1st through 8th level, archery style is powerful, no doubt.

Now for me shield master for a S&B is fantastic. A must have.

Archery is well archery.

And GWM does work even with S&B, at least the crit and kill portion doesn't require a heavy weapon.

I would like to see a little more for versatile weapons, I have thought about allowing the duelist bonus no matter what for versatile weapons. Anything to simulate Aragon with a longsword and even Gimli with a battle axe

I think sometimes multiclassing can unbalance things, its nice for my hill dwarf cleric to use a war hammer. An elf wizard can have short sword instead of staff and finesse it and grab a longbow.

In fact, an elf wizard was a standard because of the longbow, it was huge to have that asset. Cantrips have ruined the old elf wizard with a longbow.

Question, just how much does the shield's AC bonus convey statistically speaking for survival. A barbarian can get away with it because of rage's damage reduction.

[Zman]

Variable by class. You can't quantify some arbitrary "utility quotient" and it's disingenuous to argue you can.

Not all character options have to care about damage, and in a game with feats I would want a "good at damage" feat to improve your damage more than an ASI, because ASIs improve lots of things besides damage.

They're useful. Again, defining some "usefulness variable" is impossible. Are you saying Great Weapon Master is better than Polearm Master? Shield Master? Alert? Lucky?


so what?

Yes, an ASI is more than just damage. But, Str is mostly affecting damage and the bit beyond that give us reference for valuing feats, I meant +1 Athletics, +1 Str Save, and a better lifting capacity aren't huge and the +1 to Hit and +1 Damage are the primary benefit of the Str ASI. Combat feats are limited in scope and therefore can be balanced writhing their respective scopes comparatively. When dealing with combat feats we can balance within against each other writhing their overal combat damage paradigm. Balancing against no combat feats is not the starting point as it is too subjective, start writhing the sphere of combat, balance them, then compare other feats to them. That is the systematic way about it.

Don't call me disengenuous when you are employing logical phalaropes to argue I can't balance combat feats in relation to other combat feats by continually injecting no combat feats and their subjective worthy into the conversation. I don't need an efficiency quotient, but we can narrow our scope to combat balance and balance the combat feats within that paradigm. The other feats then should be compared to established worth feats and will require a much more subjective artful approach as they are difficult or nigh impossible to quantify. "Well Lucky?" Is not a useful not valid argument against "Savage Attacker vs GWM".

[Zman]

To be honest, I haven't come across a real issue. But our table is full of novices, so my opinion is skewed.

Our ranger does pack a punch, but kudos for him. And he did it with a 16 in dex from 1st through 8th level, archery style is powerful, no doubt.

Now for me shield master for a S&B is fantastic. A must have.

Archery is well archery.

And GWM does work even with S&B, at least the crit and kill portion doesn't require a heavy weapon.

I would like to see a little more for versatile weapons, I have thought about allowing the duelist bonus no matter what for versatile weapons. Anything to simulate Aragon with a longsword and even Gimli with a battle axe

I think sometimes multiclassing can unbalance things, its nice for my hill dwarf cleric to use a war hammer. An elf wizard can have short sword instead of staff and finesse it and grab a longbow.

In fact, an elf wizard was a standard because of the longbow, it was huge to have that asset. Cantrips have ruined the old elf wizard with a longbow.

Question, just how much does the shield's AC bonus convey statistically speaking for survival. A barbarian can get away with it because of rage's damage reduction.

A table of novices can hide it, but a Reckless GWM barbarian in a party with a Savage Attacker Fighter with a Longsword would be apparent.

Archery style is great, with Dharpshooter it's devastating.

Shield Master is an outstanding feat and isn't that far behind GWM etc in powe, but has fewer times where it blows up the game.

Versatile weapons didn't get any love, I made Fueling softest them and added a feat called Dueling Master, check it out.

Multiclassing makes balance harder for sure, and those racial features we're nice. To be fair, that elf with a longbow wasn't good beyond 5th level, haha.

A Shields AC? Well it's roughly a 50% chance of being hit and a Shield reduces that to 40%, to that's a 20% increase in survivabikity against AC dependent attacks.