Talk:Reaper (5e Feat)

"You can attack enemies from behind cover and vice versa. " - you can already attack creatures behind cover. Marasmusine (talk) 10:25, 19 February 2016 (MST)

---

Good, heavy revision! I still like the die increase though. The Unearthed Arcana article introduced the Spear Master feat. The idea is to make it a simple weapon that you'll actually want to use even if you have proficiency with martial weapons. Just adding d4 to critical hits doesn't seem to do it for me, personally.

That article (I can find a link to it if you want) is also where using the lower of the d20s came from, but I actually REALLY like the idea of being able to split the advantage into two separate attacks! That's pretty awesome! --Carcabob (talk) 21:47, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment! I checked the Unearthed Arcana article you mentioned, and yes, there is a damage dice improvement feature over there, I thought it was gone in 5th edition. After seeing this, yeah, damage dice improvement would be better than a critical hit improvement.

Splitting advantage to attacks is actually not my invention, it was already on the previous version - all I did was a little bit of edits to clarify what it does. Anyway, thanks for the comments! --WeirdoWhoever (talk) 23:46, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, to be clear, die improvement is okay for simple weapons. As UA says, this is incentive for for martial types to specialize in a simple weapon.

Looking at the change from mine to yours, I'm not sure. You forgo the advantage to make another attack, but it's possible that the extra attack also has advantage, so it loops around again. With my revision, the attack roll is already determined (so there's no loop and it's faster) Marasmusine (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey Mara, thanks for the comments! Yes, I do think you have a point there, I was doing an experimental edit with UA Samurai's feature, but maybe it's a bit too much. I think your version would be clearer, so I think it will do. --WeirdoWhoever (talk) 14:30, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Marasmusine (talk) 17:07, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

It requires a bonus action, so there's actually no loop. I actually like the idea of splitting the advantage into separate attacks better. There's something more elegant about it, and there's more of a choice: accuracy, or damage overall output? It's kind of like Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master. Using a bonus action if you hit to make another attack seems like something you'll just always do, making it more of a passive ability. --Carcabob (talk) 21:58, 11 June 2017 (UTC)