DM Thomas Christy has hosted as many online D&D games for strangers as anyone.
When compared to other character types focused on dealing damage, sharpshooters overshadow other characters. Fifth edition suffers from an absurd feat. Old editions suffered cracks at the foundation. In any other edition of D&D, a feat as overpowered as Sharpshooter would not even rate on a list of the system’s flaws. What makes sharpshooters the worst thing in D&D?īefore I explain, understand that by labeling sharpshooters as the worst, I’m aiming a backhanded compliment at the strength of the edition. Fifth edition drops the spell Protection from Normal Missiles, a spell that dates to the original little, brown books. My exhibit C further proves the D&D designers’ brazen favoritism toward ranged attackers.
Crossbow experts get one every damn turn. On the occasional critical hit, great weapon masters get an extra attack. Sure, a hand crossbow averages a point less damage than, say, a longbow, but when each hit still deals 13-15 points of fixed damage, the damage die is just gravy.
Plus, by using a hand crossbow, the feat allows an additional attack. Crossbow Expert nullifies the biggest weakness of ranged attackers-the disadvantage of attacking with an adjacent foe. Sharpshooter rates as the strongest feat in the game, but the Crossbow Expert feat multiplies the power. Great weapon fighters get no such boost to accuracy.Īlso, great weapon masters must stand in harm’s way.Īlso, great weapon masters usually must move to attack and to switch targets-so inefficient. In practice, sharpshooters gain 10 damage for a mere -3 attack penalty. But rangers and fighters-the classes most likely to take Sharpshooter-can also opt for the Archery fighting style, which grants a +2 bonus to attack rolls with ranged weapons. Both feats let characters exchange -5 to hit for +10 damage. Compare Sharpshooter to its melee counterpart, Great Weapon Master. Remember backstabbing? Now it rates as a strategy for players seeking the roleplaying challenge of playing an inferior character.Įxhibit B: The Sharpshooter feat offers more proof that D&D’s design favors ranged attackers. But archers benefit from adjacent allies too. If that edge only applied to melee rogues, then the game would offer different but comparable boosts to archers and backstabbers. Melee rogues almost never get to attack while hidden, but at least backstabbers can sneak attack without advantage when an ally stands next to a target. Why else would the game’s design so often reward ranged attackers with extra benefits that surpass anything melee combatants get?Įxhibit A: Ranged rogues can hide and then pop up to attack from hiding, gaining advantage and a sneak attack.
With these feats, melee attacks no longer endanger you because you inflict such massive damage that by the time a foe reaches you, it’s dead.ĭ&D’s designers seem to think ranged and melee attacks represent two different, but mostly equal styles, when really, ranged attacks offer massive intrinsic advantages. With Crossbow Expert, you can make ranged attacks while within 5 feet of enemies without suffering disadvantage. If foes move next to you, then your attacks suffer disadvantage and you stop being immune to their melee attacks.įortunately for ranged attackers, the game’s two most broken feats dismantle all these disadvantages. Ranged attacks suffer drawbacks: Targets can gain cover. No wonder melee attackers tend to be barbarians and paladins no sensible person would opt for such inefficiency and risk. You can switch targets without having to move. You can fire past obstacles that hamper movement. When you attack from a distance, melee attackers can’t hit you. My broken feat designs make a provocative way to show the big advantages of attacking from range. I’m not competing for worst D&D designer. What would you think of Dungeons & Dragons feats that gave these benefits?īefore making a melee attack, you can teleport to within melee attack range of your target, attack, and then teleport back to your original position.
0 kommentar(er)
