I don't like Sharpshooter and GWM

[Ruslan]

Not because they are unbalanced as such, but because they are swingy. A couple of lucky hits with +10 damage, and the PCs easily win an encounter that was supposed to be tough. Then, the DM overcompensates by making the next encounter even tougher, and guess what, that's where the PCs luck runs out. Also, I don't get having to take a -5 penalty to attack to aim a solid hit. You take -5 to attack because ... you aim really well? Because you are a Sharpshooter? The flavor is off. Finally, the +10 damage does not scale with levels, being 'overwhelming overkill' on level 1 and 'I took -5 to hit for that????' on level 20.

So, here are my design goals:

1. Still keep a useful damage boost
2. Without being swingy and overpowered when luck is on your side
3. Scales with levels
4. No penalty, just boost

Resolution:
1. The third benefit of Sharpshooter reads: "When you hit and deal damage with a ranged weapon you are proficient with, and the attack roll exceeded the target's Armor Class by at least 5, deal additional damage equal to your proficiency bonus."

2. The second benefit of Great Weapon Master applies the same to Heavy melee weapons.

That's it. No need to take the -5 ever, but when you do a particularly good job of hitting, you get a damage boost that starts at +2 and scales into +6.

If this makes the feats too weak, I am open to the idea of making them half-feats (Sharpshooter: +1 Dex, GWM: +1 Str). Let me know what you think.

[Isaire]

If I didn't have another way to get a bonus attack, I'd probably take GWM for the bonus attack anyway (i.e. totem barbarian) even if I never planned to use the bonus attack. I guess I don't use the power attack option because I'm an optimizer at a table of non-optimizers, so don't want to overshadow anyone too much, and agree the base version is pretty swingy, so if anything the new version of the feat is more appealing to me. Goes well with advantage.

One question is, is it a pain to keep track of whether the hit was 5 or more above AC. If the DM is fine with it, could work quite well.

[Ruslan]

One question is, is it a pain to keep track of whether the hit was 5 or more above AC. If the DM is fine with it, could work quite well.
Good question. I'd say, not too much pain. If I (as a DM) forget, the player usually reminds me: "hey, did I hit by 5 or more?". Usually this is resolved in less than 10 seconds per hit, and thus less than 60 seconds are added to the whole encounter.

I doesn't slow the game any more than the agonizing decision "should I or should I not take -5 now?"

[jas61292]

I have never liked these two feats, and while my concerns are more about balance than yours, I also do completely are that they are overly swingy and, in the case of sharpshooter, bad flavor.

Now, looking at your versions here, it definitely is a step in the right direction. Instead of it being a huge all or nothing, its a moderate and useful damage boost that still encourages you to get a better to-hit value. Furthermore, I do like that it is passive. No longer will you have players trying to work out enemy AC and then calculate whether its worth it to take a shot with the feat, and anything that encourages people to think less about math and more about what their character would do is a good thing in my mind.

That said, I do feel like there are still some flaws. Its not particularly powerful, which is fine, as the feats both have other useful abilities, but the basis on AC like this just feels weird, cause it is extra information the DM would be forced to tell the players, which leads back to them thinking about numbers and math, which I don't like. Honestly, I don't know exactly how I would do it better, but I definitely feel this can still be improved. That said, this would be much better than they are now.

[Vogonjeltz]

It's -5 because the character is swinging harder, necessarily sacrificing accuracy for power.

Also, the -5 makes it only useful against a specific spectrum of ACs.

[Ruslan]

It's -5 because the character is swinging harder, necessarily sacrificing accuracy for power.I can somewhat buy this for GWM, but not for Sharpshooter.


Also, the -5 makes it only useful against a specific spectrum of ACs.Which means the player has to metagame and play guess-the-AC. To me, this is another strike against the feats in their current form.

[Larpus]

I dunno, it feels kind of underwhelming compared to other such feats like Polearm Master or Sentinel.

Also, that +5 above enemy AC...at level one that means you can only ever hope to make it work on enemies with 17- AC (and that 17's on a crit) and even with +6 you'd need a 19 to hit AC 20.

Sure, you're not going all or nothing with a -5, but you'll still only benefit from the feat as if you had that -5.

Personally I'd do something like on a roll of 17+, if it's a hit, add your proficiency bonus (maybe double) to your damage.

Less math involved and procs more often.

[Sicarius Victis]

A couple of lucky hits with +10 damage, and the PCs easily win an encounter that was supposed to be tough. Then, the DM overcompensates by making the next encounter even tougher, and guess what, that's where the PCs luck runs out.

Well, since probability doesn't work that way at all, the player is safe there.


Also, I don't get having to take a -5 penalty to attack to aim a solid hit. You take -5 to attack because ... you aim really well? Because you are a Sharpshooter? The flavor is off.

It's referred to as a "called shot". Imagine trying to shoot someone in the chest with a longbow, as that's the target of most ranged attacks. Now imagine trying to shoot the same person in the head. A lot harder to hit them the second time, nay?


Finally, the +10 damage does not scale with levels, being 'overwhelming overkill' on level 1 and 'I took -5 to hit for that????' on level 20.

The classes that should get the most use out of it are Barbarian, Paladin. Ranger, and Fighter. All of them get at least one Extra Attack (besides Revised Beastmaster). Fighter and Ranger can get enough attacks per round to make the bonus damage add up quite well, and Barbarian and Paladin need the bonus damage less than the others at just about any level anyways.

[Vogonjeltz]

I can somewhat buy this for GWM, but not for Sharpshooter.

Which means the player has to metagame and play guess-the-AC. To me, this is another strike against the feats in their current form.

I mean, it's a fairly simple equation; 5x value of a normal hit (damage lost) must be less than value of 10xremaining numbers of hits
(so if you deal 10 damage per hit normally, you have to be able to hit on at least 6 numbers while using these power attacks to make it worth using

That a player has to figure out what the right time to use the ability is where player skill comes into it, and that's a reasonable thing; no different than knowing when the best time is to use other features.

[Sception]

Instead of "when you beat the target AC by X", how about "when you have advantage on the attack roll, and both d20 results would have scored a hit"?

[Ruslan]

Instead of "when you beat the target AC by X", how about "when you have advantage on the attack roll, and both d20 results would have scored a hit"?
I think you're on to something here. This looks good in principle, I'm just afraid it will benefit the barbarian (the self-advantage-granting class) a lot while being far less useful to anyone else.

[Ruslan]

I mean, it's a fairly simple equation; 5x value of a normal hit (damage lost) must be less than value of 10xremaining numbers of hits
(so if you deal 10 damage per hit normally, you have to be able to hit on at least 6 numbers while using these power attacks to make it worth using

That a player has to figure out what the right time to use the ability is where player skill comes into it, and that's a reasonable thing; no different than knowing when the best time is to use other features.
I am not arguing that:
1. The math is doable.
2. The guess-the-AC minigame could be both challenging and enjoyable, if you have the right players.

What I'm saying is, I am not the right DM, nor do I have the right players, to enjoy the guess-the-AC minigame. It has it's value, just not to me and the like-minded people I play with. Agree to disagree?

[coredump]

Its odd, I disagree with almost all of your premises.... I like the negative, I think it scales just fine, etc etc

But.. ignoring all of that.... I think your new feat is pretty workable. I think its a bit more 'boring' since it removes a decision from the player....but that may not be a big deal.

[Talionis]

It's referred to as a "called shot". Imagine trying to shoot someone in the chest with a longbow, as that's the target of most ranged attacks. Now imagine trying to shoot the same person in the head. A lot harder to hit them the second time, nay?
.
Thank You.

While they mechanically work the same the fluff on the two feats are totally the opposite. GWM you are swinging wildly and are stronger and can hit harder but have less control and may miss.

For Sharpshooter, you are trying to hit vital organs or head shots so if you hit you do more damage but you are no longer aiming just to hit the target and may miss because you are aiming for a head or heel.

There is nothing wrong with the fluff.

Do the feats make combat more swingy? Yes and no. You shouldn't take the feats if you hav no way to increase your accuracy. In that sense the feats can be traps for silly PCs. DMs may need to be aware of the AC of creatures or reduce the ACs of creatures to make the feats work the way they should and increasing hit points to offset.

You may need to pair the feats with spells from casters.

You can always omit individual feats from the game but we find them fine in our games and I appreciate that they work with many weapon types not just clubs and quarterstaffs, or "pole arms".

There are so few feats and it would be more nice to have more that allowed for more combat choices in weapons and tactics.

[clash]

What if instead of the 5 over you worked it off advantage. IE when you attack with advantage and both rolls would have hit you can deal additional damage equal to your proficiency modifier

[Sicarius Victis]

What if instead of the 5 over you worked it off advantage. IE when you attack with advantage and both rolls would have hit you can deal additional damage equal to your proficiency modifier

You mean the thing that was already mentioned and discussed?

[Sception]

I think you're on to something here. This looks good in principle, I'm just afraid it will benefit the barbarian (the self-advantage-granting class) a lot while being far less useful to anyone else.

I meant more for sharpshooter in particular. Ie, if you're in a situation where you can take advantage of careful aim (ie, you got advantage), then you can potentially score a more serious hit.

Honestly, for GWM I'm ok with the hit penalty. Wild, heavy swinging makes aesthetic sense to me for heavy melee weapons.

[Kane0]

My table just turns them into half feats, taling away the -5/+10 and adding +1 str or dex. Works a treat

[RumoCrytuf]

Not because they are unbalanced as such, but because they are swingy. A couple of lucky hits with +10 damage, and the PCs easily win an encounter that was supposed to be tough. Then, the DM overcompensates by making the next encounter even tougher, and guess what, that's where the PCs luck runs out. Also, I don't get having to take a -5 penalty to attack to aim a solid hit. You take -5 to attack because ... you aim really well? Because you are a Sharpshooter? The flavor is off. Finally, the +10 damage does not scale with levels, being 'overwhelming overkill' on level 1 and 'I took -5 to hit for that????' on level 20.

So, here are my design goals:

1. Still keep a useful damage boost
2. Without being swingy and overpowered when luck is on your side
3. Scales with levels
4. No penalty, just boost

Resolution:
1. The third benefit of Sharpshooter reads: "When you hit and deal damage with a ranged weapon you are proficient with, and the attack roll exceeded the target's Armor Class by at least 5, deal additional damage equal to your proficiency bonus."

2. The second benefit of Great Weapon Master applies the same to Heavy melee weapons.

That's it. No need to take the -5 ever, but when you do a particularly good job of hitting, you get a damage boost that starts at +2 and scales into +6.

If this makes the feats too weak, I am open to the idea of making them half-feats (Sharpshooter: +1 Dex, GWM: +1 Str). Let me know what you think.


The way I like to justify this is a player has to roll extremely high (hence their skill with this attack) and if they succeed, they deal extra damage because of how perfect that attack was. D&D combat runs on dice and modifiers, so as OP and swingy as GWM and Sharpshooter can be, it's because that player has trained hard and become skilled.

[Hawkstar]

I can somewhat buy this for GWM, but not for Sharpshooter.Boom Headshot!

By not aiming at the center of mass to instead aim at the head, even slighter deviations up or to the side can leave the bolt or arrow whizzing harmlessly over the shoulder (Same angle at the center of mass would be a shoulder, arm, or chest hit), or over the head completely (A lower shot would have been an upper chest wound or Boom Headshot!), or both (A lower shot would have hit the shoulder)

[djreynolds]

Fighters in this 5E are on the weaker side without these 2 feats, especially a single classed fighter.

I have played with and without feats and multiclassing and no multiclassing, trust me when I say a single classed fighter without feats needs help

There are no guides out there for fighter/warlock or fighter/sorcerer or even fighter/mages... there are only advice on 2 level dips or getting out after 11th level.

The fighter get 2 extra ASI and get them early, by 14th level the have 5, the other classes get their 4th at 16th

Why?

They have weak saves, only con. And even with indomitable and resilient there is a good chance they still fail wisdom or charisma saves anyhow.

Fighters need these feats to stay relevant, they do not have rage which is basically half damage from 2nd level. They do not get a post hit smite. They do not get sneak attack. They do not get a scaling cantrips.

Second wind is 1d10 + level, its not even 10, its 1d10

SD are okay but you do not get much, and you have to advocate short resting, which your party may not want to do.

If you are playing a fighter, you need shield master, GWM, or SS to relevant...... and then PAM or sentinel and resilient

If fighters and ranger are blowing out opponents with these feats, good for them. As soon as they face something with a wisdom or con save of 19+, they are out of commission.

As soon as they face something with a high AC, they will not be using GWM/SS much or they will miss.

[coredump]

Here is my question. Just how much 'extra' damage do you think the -5/+10 really provides on a per-attack basis? My guess is most people are grossly overestimating its effectiveness.

Example: Level 8 fighter, 20 Str, +1 glaive, GWF, GWM attacking AC 16
With -5/+10: 10.2 hp/attack
Without -5/+10: 8.7 hp/attack. So this feature that everyone is so concerned about it adding 1.5 hp of damage per attack.

[Vogonjeltz]

I am not arguing that:
1. The math is doable.
2. The guess-the-AC minigame could be both challenging and enjoyable, if you have the right players.

What I'm saying is, I am not the right DM, nor do I have the right players, to enjoy the guess-the-AC minigame. It has it's value, just not to me and the like-minded people I play with. Agree to disagree?

Ok, but why would the players take it then? If they don't enjoy using it I mean.

If you don't want to allow feats as DM, they are already only an optional rule, so you could just tell the players to use ASI as is normal.

[Matticusrex]

Fighters in this 5E are on the weaker side without these 2 feats, especially a single classed fighter.

I have played with and without feats and multiclassing and no multiclassing, trust me when I say a single classed fighter without feats needs help

There are no guides out there for fighter/warlock or fighter/sorcerer or even fighter/mages... there are only advice on 2 level dips or getting out after 11th level.

The fighter get 2 extra ASI and get them early, by 14th level the have 5, the other classes get their 4th at 16th

Why?

They have weak saves, only con. And even with indomitable and resilient there is a good chance they still fail wisdom or charisma saves anyhow.

Fighters need these feats to stay relevant, they do not have rage which is basically half damage from 2nd level. They do not get a post hit smite. They do not get sneak attack. They do not get a scaling cantrips.

Second wind is 1d10 + level, its not even 10, its 1d10

SD are okay but you do not get much, and you have to advocate short resting, which your party may not want to do.

If you are playing a fighter, you need shield master, GWM, or SS to relevant...... and then PAM or sentinel and resilient

If fighters and ranger are blowing out opponents with these feats, good for them. As soon as they face something with a wisdom or con save of 19+, they are out of commission.

As soon as they face something with a high AC, they will not be using GWM/SS much or they will miss.

Completely agree, With the introduction of the revised ranger, Fighters are bottom of the barrel for power.People like to talk about their high dpr when their potential dpr is incredibly low for how easy it is to shut them down. GWM, SS, and PAM are the the only feats that allow for a martial to catch up to a caster and even then a feat-less caster is amazing. I always cringe when I see people wanting to nerf these feats without giving martials anything else. No, an extra +1 stat on a half feat is not good, its trash. Go balance spell-casting before you screw with the lower end of power. You think being a DM is hard with these feats? Trying DMing a group full of optimized tanky druids and clerics getting paired with a paladin and wizard. You will wish you had that fighter back as your boss gets overrun by animated coins or gets permanently paralyzed as the paladin crits all his divine smites.

[StoicLeaf]

I think the problem might be that people consider these feats mandatory whereas casters are good to go out of the box.

The only thing I'm sorta on the fence about is that you pretty much always want to be using it, even against something with ac18.
Perhaps I should math it a bit more and see where it's a judgement call but a level 9 ranger/fighter/mix against a ac18 target is always better off taking a -5 shot than not.

[jas61292]

Boom Headshot!

By not aiming at the center of mass to instead aim at the head, even slighter deviations up or to the side can leave the bolt or arrow whizzing harmlessly over the shoulder (Same angle at the center of mass would be a shoulder, arm, or chest hit), or over the head completely (A lower shot would have been an upper chest wound or Boom Headshot!), or both (A lower shot would have hit the shoulder)

The obvious problem is that headshots are only really a thing in video games. In real life you always want to aim for the body, both because accuracy, and its because headshots being more damaging is not a real thing. Your chest has tons of vital organs, and less natural protection. You aim for the heart, knowing that if you miss, you could still get a lung or something.

I'm not experienced with this stuff in real life, but I have read enough on this to know the video game mentality is nothing reflective of reality.

[Pex]

Instead of "when you beat the target AC by X", how about "when you have advantage on the attack roll, and both d20 results would have scored a hit"?


I think you're on to something here. This looks good in principle, I'm just afraid it will benefit the barbarian (the self-advantage-granting class) a lot while being far less useful to anyone else.

I'd call it a feature. It would encourage tactics. Help action to attack becomes more valuable. Faerie Fire spell becomes more valuable. The Barbarian is still suffering Advantage to opponent's attacks.

[Sicarius Victis]

both because accuracy,

Thus, -5 to hit.


and its because headshots being more damaging is not a real thing.

Well, head is often less armoured than body, as well as having thinner bodily defenses (a skull is typically thinner than a rib, for example). In addition, putting an arrow into somebody's eye or even brain can be quite effective, and often could incapacitate or kill faster than an arrow to the lung, or even occasionally to the heart. They still have to bleed out, after all, while if they lose part of their brain that on its own could be enough to incapacitate immediately

[StoicLeaf]

The obvious problem is that headshots are only really a thing in video games. In real life you always want to aim for the body, both because accuracy, and its because headshots being more damaging is not a real thing. Your chest has tons of vital organs, and less natural protection. You aim for the heart, knowing that if you miss, you could still get a lung or something.

I'm not experienced with this stuff in real life, but I have read enough on this to know the video game mentality is nothing reflective of reality.

From a cursory glance at military forums shooting at heads is a thing but it isn't really that prevalent. Everyone is taught to shoot center of mass.
I suppose it depends on what sort of game you're going for. If you want to be legolas that can shoot arrows at spots where there isn't any armor you're going to have to accept creative liberties.

I suppose if you wanted to keep it realistic you could always argue that the -5 is from overdrawing the bow past what you can comfortably hold it at.
More power behind the arrow, less accurate due to muscle fatigue/not being strong enough.

[Fishyninja]

I suppose if you wanted to keep it realistic you could always argue that the -5 is from overdrawing the bow past what you can comfortably hold it at.
More power behind the arrow, less accurate due to muscle fatigue/not being strong enough.

I get your point here however I feel the +10 damage os harder to explain here, if a regular attack is another to ladge an arrow into flesh and cause damage, could you argue they an extra inch or two of draw could account for that much extra damage?

[MrStabby]

I'm on the side of this being a bad move.

It turns it from being an active, interesting choice into being a passive ability that entails no choice at all. Whilst casters are always choosing between a menu of spells, the types of character that would make the best use of this don't really get anywhere near as many choices to make.

On the other hand, congrats to the OP for managing to open a GWM and PAM thread on a decent enough premise - that they are too swingy at lower levels.

I think scaling off proficiency could fix this - keep it the same but change extra damage to double proficiency. It helps somewhat negate the low level advantage of variant human somewhat. +12 damage at high levels does keep things like fighters just a little more attractive.

That said, I think that unlike 3rd edition damage per attack doesn't scale that much, though classes like the rogue and Paladin are exceptions. Fighters get more attacks whilst the attack stat bonus is capped at +5. Rangers can pick up abilities like volley or horde breaker, feats grant bonus action and reaction attacks. Furthermore there is no expectation of high level magic items with +6 to damage and so on. +10 damage at high levels is still very relevant simply because you can get more attacks more easily at higher levels.

[CaptainSarathai]

Finally, the +10 damage does not scale with levels, being 'overwhelming overkill' on level 1 and 'I took -5 to hit for that????' on level 20
But it does scale. Fighters and Barbs get extra attacks. Everyone else gets extra bonuses or sources/uses of advantages or accuracy boosts to get more use from the feature.



The classes that should get the most use out of it are Barbarian, Paladin. Ranger, and Fighter. All of them get at least one Extra Attack (besides Revised Beastmaster). Fighter and Ranger can get enough attacks per round to make the bonus damage add up quite well, and Barbarian and Paladin need the bonus damage less than the others at just about any level anyways.
Agreed. It's worth noting that the Paladin and Rogue have the least use, when Smiting or throwing SAs. The higher your Non-Feat damage is, the less you want to risk missing with the -5 from the Feat.


I think you're on to something here. This looks good in principle, I'm just afraid it will benefit the barbarian (the self-advantage-granting class) a lot while being far less useful to anyone else.
The original feat actually already heavily favors the Barbarian, as the the easy advantage roughly equates to a +5 on Attack rolls. So they cancel out and the Barb gets +10 damage, in exchange for giving up Advantage on himself.


My table just turns them into half feats, taling away the -5/+10 and adding +1 str or dex. Works a treat
If you can't stomach the damage boosts, this is by far the best way to handle these feats. Just understand that it puts the Martials behind your caster classes.

[Vogonjeltz]

I get your point here however I feel the +10 damage os harder to explain here, if a regular attack is another to ladge an arrow into flesh and cause damage, could you argue they an extra inch or two of draw could account for that much extra damage?

Hit points aren't meat, so it could just represent shooting the arrows with more force (thus, moving faster) requiring more exertion to dodge, or impacting the armor with more force (tiring the target more), burning up more luck to have avoided, etcetera

[MeeposFire]

From a cursory glance at military forums shooting at heads is a thing but it isn't really that prevalent. Everyone is taught to shoot center of mass.
I suppose it depends on what sort of game you're going for. If you want to be legolas that can shoot arrows at spots where there isn't any armor you're going to have to accept creative liberties.

I suppose if you wanted to keep it realistic you could always argue that the -5 is from overdrawing the bow past what you can comfortably hold it at.
More power behind the arrow, less accurate due to muscle fatigue/not being strong enough.

One thing to remember with military folks is that they are talking about experiences with military weapons of the past 100+ years and those weapons are in many cases (most probably) designed to down somebody (not just kill but at least knock them out of fighting) in one shot regardless of where you hit. This makes aiming for the largest part of the target a very good idea. If you are using a weapon that lacks stopping power being more discerining on where you shoot can become more important but since that is less effective overall than jsut making the weapon potent enough to just drop an enemy that is the way most modern military weapons go.


Since the one shot and your down is not the direction is not the way most games want to go (outside of fluff of course one can say that since hits in D&D and other games that use abstract HP can be anything including physical damage you can claim that you did "hit" only once and it was that last hit but that is not what I am talking about) we do not really see that well represented in game and tactics do not tend to be built in that way.



Oddly the RulesCyclopedia version of D&D actually has a mechanic similar to this. In that version you have an optional rule to get bonus damage against targets that have really poor AC and you roll really well at certain attack values (in 5e terms if they have a really low AC you get additional damage for rolling high and the numbers get better as you get higher prof). Never used this rule but it did exist.

[djreynolds]

All right. How about this

GWM/ss with proficiency bonus instead of the flat -5/+10. You lose your proficiency bonus with the strike but double it as damage, ends up at 17th level -6/+12, but it scales so at lower levels its easier to hit with it... but the damage isn't so high.

So at 4th level it would be -2/+4
5th level -3/+6
9th level -4/+8
13th level -5/+10
17th level -6/+12

How's that, a scaling GWM and even SS

[StoicLeaf]

All right. How about this

GWM/ss with proficiency bonus instead of the flat -5/+10. You lose your proficiency bonus with the strike but double it as damage, ends up at 17th level -6/+12, but it scales so at lower levels its easier to hit with it... but the damage isn't so high.

So at 4th level it would be -2/+4
5th level -3/+6
9th level -4/+8
13th level -5/+10
17th level -6/+12

How's that, a scaling GWM and even SS

I'm trying to hate it but can't find a reason to.
It even fluffs well.

I suppose the only (minor) counterpoint I could bring is that perhaps it's swingy nature (particularly at low levels) makes sense fluff-wise; a level 1 ranger isn't going to be making impossible shots. Get to level 9 where the fighting style and prof bonus basically override the -5 part, and it fits; the ranger is now a force to be reckoned with and really, really good with his bow.

Your feat change would fit well in games where even level 1 PCs are considering super special snowflakes, destined for greatness.

[djreynolds]

I'm trying to hate it but can't find a reason to.
It even fluffs well.

I suppose the only (minor) counterpoint I could bring is that perhaps it's swingy nature (particularly at low levels) makes sense fluff-wise; a level 1 ranger isn't going to be making impossible shots. Get to level 9 where the fighting style and prof bonus basically override the -5 part, and it fits; the ranger is now a force to be reckoned with and really, really good with his bow.

Your feat change would fit well in games where even level 1 PCs are considering super special snowflakes, destined for greatness.

Yeah, it doesn't suck... thank you, that made my day

[BeefGood]

The various fluff rationales for -5/+10, like pulling the arrow back farther than normal, so arrow wiggles a little more but goes faster, make sense to me. They make so much sense that I think, why should these require feats? EVeryone's capable of swinging a sword harder but a little wilder. Everyone's capable of pulling the arrow back farther than normal, or of going for the head rather than the body. So, they should be standard attack options for every character. Call it the Kill Shot option: Before the attack roll, you can choose -5 to hit / +10 damage.
A Feat would be an ability to deal more damage without taking the attack role penalty.

[Eragon123]

The various fluff rationales for -5/+10, like pulling the arrow back farther than normal, so arrow wiggles a little more but goes faster, make sense to me.

The archer in me cringed. Consistent form is very fundamental in archery.


... going for the head rather than the body.

This is what I've interpreted it as.
Aiming under arm for the armpit or faceshots or any similar gaps is how I've interpreted the added difficulty.

[ApplePen]

Why not just make it "you may attack without your proficiency bonus to hit in order to gain double your proficiency bonus to damage"?

Basically the same thing but less swingy at low level and better scaling at high.

[Crusher]

All right. How about this

GWM/ss with proficiency bonus instead of the flat -5/+10. You lose your proficiency bonus with the strike but double it as damage, ends up at 17th level -6/+12, but it scales so at lower levels its easier to hit with it... but the damage isn't so high.

So at 4th level it would be -2/+4
5th level -3/+6
9th level -4/+8
13th level -5/+10
17th level -6/+12

How's that, a scaling GWM and even SS

Thats exactly how I handle them when I DM.

[Lombra]

I don't know if somebody already said that, but I'd fluff the -5 to hit of sharpshooter as you aiming at a critical spot of the target which is difficult to hit, like the neck or the spaces between armor plates, if you miss that precise spot you then hit the armor or whiff the target.

Edit:yep it was said, my bad.

[exodus_dragon]

I have read the majority of posts and it seems that you all have forgotten that sharp shooter also removes range penalties ...and ignores up to 3/4 cover these will essentially add many more penalties to the attack....sharp shooter is giving a flat penalty but a significant boost in capability.....3/4 cover gives +5 bonus to the target...if it is out of range you also disadvantage...I think sharpshooter is amazing as is...seems like most are not reading the entire ability and what penalties would be assiciated without the feat....

[Malifice]

Thus, -5 to hit.



Well, head is often less armoured than body, as well as having thinner bodily defenses (a skull is typically thinner than a rib, for example). In addition, putting an arrow into somebody's eye or even brain can be quite effective, and often could incapacitate or kill faster than an arrow to the lung, or even occasionally to the heart. They still have to bleed out, after all, while if they lose part of their brain that on its own could be enough to incapacitate immediately

You've got the rub of it.

A trained shooter shoots for the centre of seen body mass. An elite shooter shoots for the head.

A bullet in the head and you go down straight away. A bullet in the chest takes time to drop you. At the very least a second or two during which time your target can shoot you back. A 9 mm round through the skull and you aint shooting anyone back.

Also bullet-proof vests are really effective and common these days.

[Desamir]

Nothing to add, I just wanted to plug the GWM/SS handbook in my signature for those who are wondering how to win the "math minigame," as it was christened. :smallsmile:

[Fishyninja]

Nothing to add, I just wanted to plug the GWM/SS handbook in my signature for those who are wondering how to win the "math minigame," as it was christened. :smallsmile:

Just had a quick butchers at your sig. Would this work with SS? I'm assume so as it has that +10/-5 mechanic? I ask as I have a Ranger with a Musket and I was thinking of this feat soley for the no disadvantge, ignoring some cover aspects etc. I was not too worried about the extra damage, but if there is a way to calculate it might be interesting to do some research on.

[Breashios]

You've got the rub of it.

A trained shooter shoots for the centre of seen body mass. An elite shooter shoots for the head.

A bullet in the head and you go down straight away. A bullet in the chest takes time to drop you. At the very least a second or two during which time your target can shoot you back. A 9 mm round through the skull and you aint shooting anyone back.

Also bullet-proof vests are really effective and common these days.

Not that I am disagreeing with the whole -5/+10 thing, but as the caliber of the round drops, the more likely it will not penetrate the skull or will ride the skull's surface and exit without major damage, so a gut shot, or one that gets into the chest cavity is going to be more deadly, though the target might be more capable of continuing the fight in the meantime. There are plenty of documented cases where a head shot did not stop the target.

And while I understand history and the real world do not equal fantasy and a game's reality, arrows I would have to say are even less effective when hitting the head. Historical examples abound of warriors continuing to fight after being hit in the head (even with an arrow sticking out of their eye in two cases I am aware of). Add a properly constructed helm and only an eye shot is going to count for anything, unless a concussion occurs (and they black out). Historically a shot in the leg did more to limit an enemy's ability to continue the fight, at least when they had to close with you.

Personal experience tells me that if I hit a deer in the head with an arrow, he's just gonna have a scar (50 lb. pull). I need to hit him somewhere between the neck and the belly, preferably in the chest to get the quickest kill. The same shot that glances off the head will break or slide past a rib. If the deer started wearing full plate, I think I'd change heads and still try for the chest.

[Fishyninja]

Not that I am disagreeing with the whole -5/+10 thing, but as the caliber of the round drops, the more likely it will not penetrate the skull or will ride the skull's surface and exit without major damage,

I would argue this for two reasons mainly so long as the round is continuing at a suitable velocity it still has the potential to penetrate (it is commonly known that fast projectiles with a smaller surface area are better at armour penetration). Also I would guess the round skimming off the skull is extremely rare. I cannot say as I have never been in combat but the few bodies I have seen with GSW's there was not too much maneurvering of the bullet over bone. A few rib deflections but thats it.

In regards to Arrows in the eye, the only person I can think of is King Harlod. Who were you thinking of? Generally interested by this one.

[Breashios]

I have read the majority of posts and it seems that you all have forgotten that sharp shooter also removes range penalties ...and ignores up to 3/4 cover these will essentially add many more penalties to the attack....sharp shooter is giving a flat penalty but a significant boost in capability.....3/4 cover gives +5 bonus to the target...if it is out of range you also disadvantage...I think sharpshooter is amazing as is...seems like most are not reading the entire ability and what penalties would be assiciated without the feat....

This is the reason when I am DM, I don't particularly love this feat. My bad guys can not effectively use the tactic of shooting from cover. I start out that way for realism (my bad guys don't know the ranger is going to take them out one or two each round), but eventually every battle devolves into rushing the party or just running away when they realize they are far outclassed. Can't say though that the party is bored by their overwhelming advantages.

[coredump]

If the deer started wearing full plate, I think I'd change heads and still try for the chest.

You do what'cha need to do... but if I see a deer in full plate, I am picking a different target. Probably in a different state.

[Breashios]

I would argue this for two reasons mainly so long as the round is continuing at a suitable velocity it still has the potential to penetrate (it is commonly known that fast projectiles with a smaller surface area are better at armour penetration). Also I would guess the round skimming off the skull is extremely rare. I cannot say as I have never been in combat but the few bodies I have seen with GSW's there was not too much maneurvering of the bullet over bone. A few rib deflections but thats it.

In regards to Arrows in the eye, the only person I can think of is King Harlod. Who were you thinking of? Generally interested by this one.

The other one was one of the crusading generals. I can't remember his name right now. Died when he lost his second eye in a later battle (I think a while after that battle also). You can probably google about that. I believe there are a couple more from the Alexandrian/Roman eras, but I did not count those because I am fuzzy on the particulars now. I was a bit of a student of history in years past. There were also a couple of German officers in WWII that had lost an eye in WWI, but I am unclear as to whether those were gunshot wounds or shrapnel (of which there were many).

[Fishyninja]

I was a bit of a student of history in years past.

Ah cool, I used to be a Forensic Scientist, Ballistic Engineer now.

If you like History, look up Figthing (Mad) Jack Churchill. British Soldier in WWII. Confirmed kill with a bow and you can spot him in this photo, he's the Officer carrying the broadsword....while storming the beaches......in WWII.

http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/Jack-Churchill-Training-Exercise.jpg

[Desamir]

Just had a quick butchers at your sig. Would this work with SS? I'm assume so as it has that +10/-5 mechanic? I ask as I have a Ranger with a Musket and I was thinking of this feat soley for the no disadvantge, ignoring some cover aspects etc. I was not too worried about the extra damage, but if there is a way to calculate it might be interesting to do some research on.

Yep, it works with SS, and since most characters with SS also have excellent accuracy from the archery fighting style, they're likely to -5/+10 a majority of the time.

[Fishyninja]

Yep, it works with SS, and since most characters with SS also have excellent accuracy from the archery fighting style, they're likely to -5/+10 a majority of the time.

Hmmm *ponders* Let me go back to your thread and read up on it more. I'll test it this sunday in a couple of test battles after the session and get back to you

[Edgerunner]

Ah cool, I used to be a Forensic Scientist, Ballistic Engineer now.

If you like History, look up Figthing (Mad) Jack Churchill. British Soldier in WWII. Confirmed kill with a bow and you can spot him in this photo, he's the Officer carrying the broadsword....while storming the beaches......in WWII.

http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/Jack-Churchill-Training-Exercise.jpg

HAH! I remember Mad Jack.
"Any officer who goes into action without his sword is improperly dressed."

[Fishyninja]

HAH! I remember Mad Jack.
"Any officer who goes into action without his sword is improperly dressed."

Also the man, whom when asked to join the S.A.S and was told of the high chance of death replied with "Splendid, sounds like a jolly good time!"

[Angelmaker]

All right. How about this

GWM/ss with proficiency bonus instead of the flat -5/+10. You lose your proficiency bonus with the strike but double it as damage, ends up at 17th level -6/+12, but it scales so at lower levels its easier to hit with it... but the damage isn't so high.

So at 4th level it would be -2/+4
5th level -3/+6
9th level -4/+8
13th level -5/+10
17th level -6/+12

How's that, a scaling GWM and even SS

Higher level monsters usually having higher ac means the feat gets worse the more you level up. Unless you include an option for the player to chose how much to hit he can sacrifice for bonus damage, this change doesn't change much and makes it marginally worse for high level play.

The best fix i've seen suggested so far imho is a flat proficiency bonus to damage. I have never seen it in olay though, so it may ultimately nit be as good as it sounds in my head. Martials need all the help they can get. Just taking a look at the cleric and druid in my group...

[djreynolds]

Higher level monsters usually having higher ac means the feat gets worse the more you level up. Unless you include an option for the player to chose how much to hit he can sacrifice for bonus damage, this change doesn't change much and makes it marginally worse for high level play.

The best fix i've seen suggested so far imho is a flat proficiency bonus to damage. I have never seen it in olay though, so it may ultimately nit be as good as it sounds in my head. Martials need all the help they can get. Just taking a look at the cleric and druid in my group...

Well a ranger probably has +11 to +13 to hit at level 17. So -6 +13 gives you a +7 to hit. Not including any other goodies, like a magic bow.

But I like your idea ----- you can decrease your proficiency bonus for more damage, for every 1 point of proficiency double that for damage.

So at 4th level it would be -2/+4
5th level -3/+6
9th level -4/+8
13th level -5/+10
17th level -6/+12

So at 17th level you could use any variation of this, where at 9th you could only use 3.

[StoicLeaf]

Nothing to add, I just wanted to plug the GWM/SS handbook in my signature for those who are wondering how to win the "math minigame," as it was christened. :smallsmile:

Ok so I did the math and your formula seems off.
It's missing a term?

edit:
scratch that, After re-re-reviewing your instructions I noticed that you'd slipped what I thought was a missing term into another term! :smallcool: