When do you take the sharpshooter feat?

[nickl_2000]

True, but then it would still be SS@8 wouldn't it :P?

I guess I assumed it was a longbow cause op said archer, but its true that some may use archer to signify ranged martial.

I would definitely build around CBE from the beginning. VHuman or Custom Lineage with that feat at level 1. It makes such a huge difference early on.

[Rukelnikov]

I would definitely build around CBE from the beginning. VHuman or Custom Lineage with that feat at level 1. It makes such a huge difference early on.

Yeah, its too much of a difference IMO, maybe VHuman and CL should only have a single +1 attribute, that way maybe they wouldn't feel that much better than most of the other options (I still consider races with flying speed at lvl 1 to be better, but I think those are more often banned than not)

[nickl_2000]

Yeah, its too much of a difference IMO, maybe VHuman and CL should only have a single +1 attribute, that way maybe they wouldn't feel that much better than most of the other options (I still consider races with flying speed at lvl 1 to be better, but I think those are more often banned than not)

They are at my table, that is for sure.

[quindraco]

There has been a lot of interesting information here. A few (okay, a lot of extra information) things to add in.

• I'm playing a Wildhunt Shifter, so no feats at level 1 at all.
• The rest of the party right now is a Hobgoblin Wizard and a Battlesmith Warforged Artificer although we may be getting a 4th depending on if he wants to play Eberron
• Depending on the Intelligence of enemy, they will use cover
• We use the cover rules for people being in the way of the shot and this comes up often
• Advantage has been sparse so far, but I foresee it increasing over time. Bless and Guiding Bolt don't get cast
• Our group doesn't tend to use familiars in combat because they get killed instantly
• I don't have proficiency in stealth for character reasons, and the artificer has disadvantage on stealth checks.
• I am not planning on taking XBE. Other ASIs will likely be Piercer, Telekinetic (wis), +2 Dex, and either Resilient Wis of Skill Expert (Wis)
• I have no idea if/when I will pick up a magic weapon or magic arrows, there are no magic shops. That being said, I have gotten silver arrows as loot, so there seems to be a decent chance of it.
• We haven't had a single encounter at long range yet, but there have been a lot of chase battles and kiting battles.
• Artificer is using Magic Stone as his ranged, Wizard is using Acid Splash/Heavy Crossbow
• I have the archery fighting style, because an archer without it doesn't make a lot of sense.

I would be taking piercer, sharpshooter, and +2 dex as my first 3 ASIs in some order.

Doesn't Eberron have firearms? That would make Gunner better than Piercer for you.

Assuming you're shooting an AC 15 target at level 5, with Hunter's Mark as your bonus action, and you're choosing the damage as your swarm effect, here are your DPRs, assuming Piercer's re-roll mechanic is worth 2.177 damage on a hunter's mark longbow (this is accurate provided you don't crit - if you do crit, because you can roll all 4 dice and pick which one to re-roll, it's worth slightly more, which means the net effect is worth slightly more, given that you crit 5% of the time):

Piercer, No Cover: 24.57219
Piercer, Half Cover: 21.83157
+2 Dex, No Cover: 22.08125
+2 Dex, Half Cover: 19.47125
SS, Any Cover: 22.14125
Gunner, No Cover: 25.28125
Gunner, Cover: 22.27125

Note that I screwed up my math in my earlier post, because I forgot Swarmkeeper swarm damage doesn't crit. Math above correctly prevents swarm damage from critting. Piercer also doesn't apply to swarm damage, so I don't have to worry about ignoring that for the math above.

Note also that Gunner is deceptively good, because in addition to letting you shoot a 1d12 weapon while being a half-feat, it lets you shoot without suffering disadvantage from an adjacent hostile.

Oh, and final note, being Dex 17 is why the two half-feats look so good; after you take either of them, the other one gains synergy (Piercer is better on a d12 weapon) but loses +1 to hit and damage, so their relative prominence to +2 Dex changes.

[Dork_Forge]

(this is accurate provided you don't crit - if you do crit, because you can roll all 4 dice and pick which one to re-roll, it's worth slightly more, which means the net effect is worth slightly more, given that you crit 5% of the time)

With Hunter's Mark you'd roll five dice with Piercer, since its crit ability is an additional damage die, being able to reroll whichever of the five you want.

[nickl_2000]

Doesn't Eberron have firearms? That would make Gunner better than Piercer for you.

SNIP

Based on this in the player rules

What rules sources are legal for the Oracle of War
campaign?
Currently, the following sources are legal for the campaign:
• Player’s Handbook
• Xanathar’s Guide to Everything
• Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything
• Eberron: Rising from the Last War
• Volo’s Guide to Monsters
• Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes

Other resources may be opened by campaign documentation
such as Adventure Records or special event certs.



Since the DMG isn't in the listing of legal rule sources and rules for firearms aren't mentioned anywhere in Xanathar's or Tasha's I would guess that it's a no.

[quindraco]

With Hunter's Mark you'd roll five dice with Piercer, since its crit ability is an additional damage die, being able to reroll whichever of the five you want.

Yes, correct.

[Dork_Forge]

Yes, correct.

...so is the math for Piercer correct considering crits?

[quindraco]

Based on this in the player rules

What rules sources are legal for the Oracle of War
campaign?
Currently, the following sources are legal for the campaign:
• Player’s Handbook
• Xanathar’s Guide to Everything
• Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything
• Eberron: Rising from the Last War
• Volo’s Guide to Monsters
• Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes

Other resources may be opened by campaign documentation
such as Adventure Records or special event certs.



Since the DMG isn't in the listing of legal rule sources and rules for firearms aren't mentioned anywhere in Xanathar's or Tasha's I would guess that it's a no.

I have no idea how AL works in general or that campaign specifically, but if you can't, you can't. I'd ask your GM, if possible. Both TCOE and ERLW mention them as optional rules, but I'm vaguely aware AL attempts to standardize tables across multiple GMs, so it would make sense for there to be a definitive answer outside of your GM's control.

[nickl_2000]

I have no idea how AL works in general or that campaign specifically, but if you can't, you can't. I'd ask your GM, if possible. Both TCOE and ERLW mention them as optional rules, but I'm vaguely aware AL attempts to standardize tables across multiple GMs, so it would make sense for there to be a definitive answer outside of your GM's control.

Yup, I will check to see if it's possible. Having the options of Firearms does open some things up and makes for another interesting choice.

[quindraco]

...so is the math for Piercer correct considering crits?

I already said I didn't account for crits back when I did it. Since you're interested, I'll do it - I didn't already since the math is a lot of work and difficult to extend to other numbers of dice with other amounts of sides. Back in a few.

[Dork_Forge]

I already said I didn't account for crits back when I did it. Since you're interested, I'll do it - I didn't already since the math is a lot of work and difficult to extend to other numbers of dice with other amounts of sides. Back in a few.

I don't expect you to spend your own time doing the calculation, I just wanted clarity on the numbers you posted. You said you weren't taking into account the effect of crits on the reroll, but the bumber of dice was off and there was no indication whether or not the additional die was factored at all.

For what it's worth if you choose to use that kind of DPR calculation, you're massively selling a feat like Piercer short if you don't factor in a 3rd of it vs something that doesn't get better on crits (SS).

Personally I rather do average damage and to hit numbers separately, it's usually more representative and is easier to see my self defined break point for power attacks (will i miss more than I hit by more than 5%? skip)

[quindraco]

I don't expect you to spend your own time doing the calculation, I just wanted clarity on the numbers you posted. You said you weren't taking into account the effect of crits on the reroll, but the bumber of dice was off and there was no indication whether or not the additional die was factored at all.

For what it's worth if you choose to use that kind of DPR calculation, you're massively selling a feat like Piercer short if you don't factor in a 3rd of it vs something that doesn't get better on crits (SS).

Personally I rather do average damage and to hit numbers separately, it's usually more representative and is easier to see my self defined break point for power attacks (will i miss more than I hit by more than 5%? skip)

If you do them separately, it becomes impossible to reason about abilities like brutal critical, much less Piercer (which is brutal critical and the re-roll ability).

For our use-case here, Piercer normally adds 2.177 damage the first time you hit, on average. If that hit were always a crit, it would instead add 3.339. The net result is that it adds, the first time you hit, 2.235 damage, rather than 2.177, due to the 5% chance you have to crit.

Redone:

Piercer, No Cover: 24.62656
Piercer, Half Cover: 21.88246
+2 Dex, No Cover: 22.08125
+2 Dex, Half Cover: 19.47125
SS, Any Cover: 22.14125
Gunner, No Cover: 25.28125
Gunner, Cover: 22.27125

As expected, the difference was so insignificant that the sorted order of the values above did not change.

[Dork_Forge]

If you do them separately, it becomes impossible to reason about abilities like brutal critical, much less Piercer (which is brutal critical and the re-roll ability).

For our use-case here, Piercer normally adds 2.177 damage the first time you hit, on average. If that hit were always a crit, it would instead add 3.339. The net result is that it adds, the first time you hit, 2.235 damage, rather than 2.177, due to the 5% chance you have to crit.

Redone:

Piercer, No Cover: 24.62656
Piercer, Half Cover: 21.88246
+2 Dex, No Cover: 22.08125
+2 Dex, Half Cover: 19.47125
SS, Any Cover: 22.14125
Gunner, No Cover: 25.28125
Gunner, Cover: 22.27125

As expected, the difference was so insignificant that the sorted order of the values above did not change.

It's not impossible to reason about those things, you just discuss them isntead of trying to cram them into an equation that frankly isn't going to paint an accurate picture of that ability. In your example the additional die w/ reroll amounts to an additional 3.339... yet it's adding a d8 which averages at 4.5 without any reroll considerations. These kinds of calculations are not to my taste and this kind of misrepresentation is why.

And why did all of the numbers come down because you factored in crits for piercer?

[Rukelnikov]

If you do them separately, it becomes impossible to reason about abilities like brutal critical, much less Piercer (which is brutal critical and the re-roll ability).

For our use-case here, Piercer normally adds 2.177 damage the first time you hit, on average. If that hit were always a crit, it would instead add 3.339. The net result is that it adds, the first time you hit, 2.235 damage, rather than 2.177, due to the 5% chance you have to crit.

Redone:

Piercer, No Cover: 24.62656
Piercer, Half Cover: 21.88246
+2 Dex, No Cover: 22.08125
+2 Dex, Half Cover: 19.47125
SS, Any Cover: 22.14125
Gunner, No Cover: 25.28125
Gunner, Cover: 22.27125

As expected, the difference was so insignificant that the sorted order of the values above did not change.

I didn't check those numbers, but assuming they are correct, as long as you shoot without cover more than ~7.5% of your shots (2 every 27), piercer yields more white room DPR

Spoiler: Math

Show

p * 24.6 + (1 - p) * 21.9 > 22.1

p * 24.6 + 21.9 - p * 21.9 > 22.1

p (24.6 - 21.9) > 22.1 - 21.9

p > 2/27 ~ 0.075

[Evaar]

Doesn't Eberron have firearms?

No, it does not. DMs may rule otherwise, but canonically Eberron has not developed gunpowder because they have arcane magic already filling the needs that would be addressed with gunpowder. There's not much need to invent a gun when you already have mass produced wands of Firebolt and a division of your army specifically trained to use those wands.

[quindraco]

No, it does not. DMs may rule otherwise, but canonically Eberron has not developed gunpowder because they have arcane magic already filling the needs that would be addressed with gunpowder. There's not much need to invent a gun when you already have mass produced wands of Firebolt and a division of your army specifically trained to use those wands.

Well, you'd need more than that - a wand of firebolt is worse than a heavy crossbow even before you examine how much it costs - but yeah, if you can somehow get the price of magic items down enough, that would completely obviate any need for a 1d12 weapon.

[Dork_Forge]

Well, you'd need more than that - a wand of firebolt is worse than a heavy crossbow even before you examine how much it costs - but yeah, if you can somehow get the price of magic items down enough, that would completely obviate any need for a 1d12 weapon.

It's magical damage and will likely have a fixed to hit, whereas a Heavy Crossbow is mundane damage and relies on the skill of the user.

[MaxWilson]

Well, you'd need more than that - a wand of firebolt is worse than a heavy crossbow even before you examine how much it costs - but yeah, if you can somehow get the price of magic items down enough, that would completely obviate any need for a 1d12 weapon.

My understanding of history is that guns outcompeted longbows and crossbows on economics, not battlefield effectiveness. Gonnes were cheaper than heavy crossbows and gunners were much, much easier to get and train than competent longbowmen.

Given how pathetically bad AND expensive 5E's DMG firearms are, I don't see them ever taking off, although 5E smokepowder does have a handful of demolition and assassination uses, unrelated to firearms.

[Pex]

My understanding of history is that guns outcompeted longbows and crossbows on economics, not battlefield effectiveness. Gonnes were cheaper than heavy crossbows and gunners were much, much easier to get and train than competent longbowmen.

Given how pathetically bad AND expensive 5E's DMG firearms are, I don't see them ever taking off, although 5E smokepowder does have a handful of demolition and assassination uses, unrelated to firearms.

In my opinion, firearms aren't popular in D&D because they don't fit medieval fantasy. Firearms are deliberately made inefficient in the rules to discourage common use. However, there is a niche market for it, so they won't go away. Spelljammer and Eberron have their fans, accepting the possibility it's precisely because they're not medieval fantasy. Play the same thing often enough, Something Different has its appeal.

No disparagement against Spelljammer or Eberron intended.

[Chugger]

I've seen a lot of players get very frustrated trying to use SS or GWM without some plan to mitigate that -5 to hit penalty. They miss too often, even on so-so armor classes. But if a player has an effective plan to mitigate that -5, you can make SS work very well at level 3 - even level 1 (but you're not va hu, so let's say lvl 4 then).

The main ways to mitigate: get advantage, be battlemaster in a campaign w/ plenty of short rests or few combats per gaming day (like almost all AL) and use Precision to convert misses into hits, get someone to buff you w/ bless (bless + F.S. Archery mostly erases the -5 penalty), and stuff like that.

Somewhere in GitP is an algorithm where you can plug in your numbers and get a sense of when using SS makes sense mathematically and when it doesn't - by AC of monster. Maybe someone who knows where that lives can post a link (a google search could find it, too).

SS is great at low levels on things like zombies or oozes - and many beasts, that have low ACs.

Anyway, one more dex won't really matter that much, so waiting til lvl 8 may not be so good. I'd take it at lvl 4 but also make sure you work on a plan to mitigate that -5 to hit. Are you a gloomstalker - can u get adv that way (often)? Can you get someone to bless u often? Can u get someone to cast Faerie Fire?

[Chugger]

My understanding of history is that guns outcompeted longbows and crossbows on economics, not battlefield effectiveness. Gonnes were cheaper than heavy crossbows and gunners were much, much easier to get and train than competent longbowmen.

Given how pathetically bad AND expensive 5E's DMG firearms are, I don't see them ever taking off, although 5E smokepowder does have a handful of demolition and assassination uses, unrelated to firearms.

At risk of hijacking, the English had to mass archers to make longbows effective against the best armor of the late medieval period - arrows had trouble penetrating plate - but with 10's of thousands shot per minute, the "lucky arrow" phenomenon became real (arrows also downed horses, which couldn't be as well protected - and went through weaker areas of plate). Once guns got a little development, they had an easier time penetrating plate. And you're right: a longbowman required a "lifetime" of training - it was hard to get people to dedicate all that time and effort - and arrows were expensive compared to lead balls to make - and so on (so yes, economics was a big factor). Some plate could resist some early firearm shots, but after a point it pretty much could not. Ben Franklin felt that longbow were a better choice than muskets for the Continental Army in the Rev War - and he was right, except the colonists needed to have started the training process years earlier! And they needed a ton of artisans to make arrow - whereas anyone could melt lead on a campfire (pretty much) and pour it into a mold.

[Gignere]

I’m hoping 5e comes out with a “Powder Mage” subclass. I would totally play one big fan of the series.

[Chronos]

As a general rule of thumb, I'd say that most characters have one feat that they should prioritize getting as soon as possible (either as a variant human, or at level 4), then max out their main ability score, and then get other feats or secondary abilities. What that one prioritized feat is, of course, varies from character to character, but Sharpshooter is one that can often be it.

When I built my ranger, I mathed it out that, starting at level 6, he was better off using the +5/-10 on any enemy with a 19 or lower AC... which is almost everything. That was with a shortbow (he was a gnome), so slightly lower than normal damage there, but did assume both Hunter's Mark (+1d6) and Colossus Slayer (+1d8). The threshold was slightly lower against favored enemies (I was using the UA variant that gets Favored Enemy instead of Favored Conversation Partner), or slightly larger if I had a source of advantage.

Oh, and someone mentioned upthread that buffs from teammates can heavily favor Sharpshooting. In my case, I was partied with (among others) a war cleric, which made it absolutely amazing: Against a high-priority target, I could use Sharpshooter at will and still pretty much guarantee a hit if I needed it (note that this possibility was not accounted for in my calculations).

[nickl_2000]

I've seen a lot of players get very frustrated trying to use SS or GWM without some plan to mitigate that -5 to hit penalty. They miss too often, even on so-so armor classes. But if a player has an effective plan to mitigate that -5, you can make SS work very well at level 3 - even level 1 (but you're not va hu, so let's say lvl 4 then).

The main ways to mitigate: get advantage, be battlemaster in a campaign w/ plenty of short rests or few combats per gaming day (like almost all AL) and use Precision to convert misses into hits, get someone to buff you w/ bless (bless + F.S. Archery mostly erases the -5 penalty), and stuff like that.

Somewhere in GitP is an algorithm where you can plug in your numbers and get a sense of when using SS makes sense mathematically and when it doesn't - by AC of monster. Maybe someone who knows where that lives can post a link (a google search could find it, too).

SS is great at low levels on things like zombies or oozes - and many beasts, that have low ACs.

Anyway, one more dex won't really matter that much, so waiting til lvl 8 may not be so good. I'd take it at lvl 4 but also make sure you work on a plan to mitigate that -5 to hit. Are you a gloomstalker - can u get adv that way (often)? Can you get someone to bless u often? Can u get someone to cast Faerie Fire?

In the long run, I'm actually debating taking some levels in Monk. With Tasha's optional features you get focused aim at level 5, giving a substantial bonus in the to hit chances. That will make a huge difference in the to hit percentage (especially since you choose after you see the roll). Add onto that Ki fueled attack and any time you use Focused Aim you can make a bonus action attack with your Bow Dedicated weapon.

Then you have better movement, subclass features (likely shadow monk), catching arrows, and bonus action dodge.

[Eriol]

In the long run, I'm actually debating taking some levels in Monk. With Tasha's optional features you get focused aim at level 5, giving a substantial bonus in the to hit chances. That will make a huge difference in the to hit percentage (especially since you choose after you see the roll). Add onto that Ki fueled attack and any time you use Focused Aim you can make a bonus action attack with your Bow Dedicated weapon.

Then you have better movement, subclass features (likely shadow monk), catching arrows, and bonus action dodge.

Monk will work, but Ki is a limited resource. I would check out Rogue, as you get Steady Aim at 3rd, which is similar to Focused Aim (not the same, but similar). Notably, you also get Cunning Action for Disengage, which again is different than dodge, but still good for a ranged to get out of the area of issues. Plus Sneak Attack of course. And you get all that by 3rd level, not 5th.

They are two different classes, with different benefits and drawbacks, but remember the rogue stuff is limited by action economy, whereas the monk stuff is (mostly) limited by Ki.

[Kane0]

I’m hoping 5e comes out with a “Powder Mage” subclass. I would totally play one big fan of the series.

Not familiar, but sounds like a gun mage of some sort? Like a wizard or cross-class version of the UA Gunsmith Artificer?

[Dork_Forge]

Not familiar, but sounds like a gun mage of some sort? Like a wizard or cross-class version of the UA Gunsmith Artificer?

It's a fantastic book series where one of the kinds of mage is a powder mage, they can use their mind to burn gunpowder and direct its energy (bend bullets like in Wanted, put gunpowder energy behind sword swings) and can ingest gunpowder like a powerful stimulant.

I highly recommend the series.

[Gignere]

Not familiar, but sounds like a gun mage of some sort? Like a wizard or cross-class version of the UA Gunsmith Artificer?

Sorta but they are more physical, the powder mage gets stronger/faster and heal faster by snorting gun powder. They can ignite gun powder at a distance and direct the blast. Make the bullets shoot faster, some can even shoot bullets without the gun, they can change the direction of the bullet and one of the main characters can even shoot two bullets out a musket at once using his power. However they don’t have any flashy magic.

If it got ported into 5e it would likely be a fighter subclass, something akin to the arcane archer or eldritch knight but using guns and bayonets.

[Dork_Forge]

Monk will work, but Ki is a limited resource. I would check out Rogue, as you get Steady Aim at 3rd, which is similar to Focused Aim (not the same, but similar). Notably, you also get Cunning Action for Disengage, which again is different than dodge, but still good for a ranged to get out of the area of issues. Plus Sneak Attack of course. And you get all that by 3rd level, not 5th.

They are two different classes, with different benefits and drawbacks, but remember the rogue stuff is limited by action economy, whereas the monk stuff is (mostly) limited by Ki.

It isn't this clear cut, Steady Aim means you can't move at all for the entire turn and advantage can be wasted. The Monk ability is a fixed bonus that requires no action economy and triggers on a miss the risk of waste is very slim.
On top that you get the Monk core features and subclass:

-Very likely to get a better than light armor AC

-Ability to melee competently without having to draw a weapon

-Movement boost to keep at range

-Kensei gives at will +1d4 to each shot, which is a pretty nice damage bump