D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
I think you're both wrong. I've posted this spreadsheet before, but take a look at it and tell me where you disagree. For a longbow and normal quarry (d6) and +1 static bonus, you get 10.175 at 50% and 11.790 at 60%.
Compare to a brutal rogue with 20 dex, 16 str, and a rapier
+8[1 higher than the ranger] vs Reflex[def on average 2-3 lower than AC]
Dmg of 1d8+5+3+2d6 = 19.5 avg
Hits Ref of 13(2 lower than target AC from ranger) on a 5 or higher, a 80% hit rate.
So avg dmg is 16.025
Backstabber+dagger is actually a bit higher now that i think about it, topping off at 17 dpr
Oh wait, the rogue will have combat advantage and the ranger won't[he is ranged after all], bringing the hit rate to 90% and the DPR up to 18.95 for the rogue.
At lvl 2 with a +1 dagger and weapon focus that goes up to 20.75 dpr with a 95% hit rate.
I think you're both wrong. I've posted this spreadsheet before, but take a look at it and tell me where you disagree. For a longbow and normal quarry (d6) and +1 static bonus, you get 10.175 at 50% and 11.790 at 60%.
C'mon, show your math!
I was assuming a Greatbow, not a Longbow. I get almost the same numbers using the same assumptions. The only thing you've done wrong is that you haven't properly accounted for what happens if both attack rolls critical in combination with Hunter's Quarry.
When you go to add Hunter's Quarry damage, the chance it's maximized is 0.0975, not 0.1. HQ is maximized when at least one of the two attacks is a critical. If p is the chance each attack criticals, the chance at least one is a crit is 2p-p^2, not 2p as you've done it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goumindong
Compare to a brutal rogue with 20 dex, 16 str, and a rapier
...
Oh wait, the rogue will have combat advantage and the ranger won't[he is ranged after all], bringing the hit rate to 90% and the DPR up to 18.95 for the rogue.
At lvl 2 with a +1 dagger and weapon focus that goes up to 20.75 dpr with a 95% hit rate.
Rogues have very high at-will damage if you assume they always have combat advantage, particularly in the heroic tier. However, Rogues aren't going to always have combat advantage (and their fanatical devotion to getting combat advantage comes with its own costs).
The level 1 Rogue build you mention does 6.45 average damage without Combat Advantage. For example, with a 0.7 chance of having CA, his average damage/round is 15.2.
Compare to a brutal rogue with 20 dex, 16 str, and a rapier
+8[1 higher than the ranger] vs Reflex[def on average 2-3 lower than AC]
Dmg of 1d8+5+3+2d6 = 19.5 avg
Hits Ref of 13(2 lower than target AC from ranger) on a 5 or higher, a 80% hit rate.
So avg dmg is 16.025
We would also need to throw in some percentage chance that the rogue doesn't have combat advantage and factor that in.
Also to me its not about the damage (although that's a factor), its the invincibility of the ranger due to his long range.
A rogue will get in there and do some damage, and then will get mauled by the bad guys. The ranger will shoot comfortably from his lawnchair and whistling while his party is taking all the hits.
Now if the bow ranger suddenly became very vulnerable in tight spaces like a dungeon that would be one thing. But the ranger has plenty of "get the heck out of here" powers for when the monsters get close. His mobility allows him to keep getting in the back and laying down the pain. At this point he becomes a normal striker and I think he's decently balanced with the other strikers. Its the outdoor areas where the ranger absolutely dominates, and there's no balance point to compensate for that.
Its the outdoor areas where the ranger absolutely dominates, and there's no balance point to compensate for that.
I think that archer rangers' gameplay would be far more interesting if their damage depended more on Prime Shot. As it is now, it's usually better to safely shoot from a million squares away than getting closer for a +1 to hit -Damage output and accuracy being already great without any effort.
In my house rules, I have weakened Twin Strike and other multi-attacks (-2 to hit) and slightly reduced base quarry damage (d4s instead of d6s), but Prime Shot also adds your Wisdom modifier to quarry damage. This turns HQ into a sort of Sneak Attack, rewarding mobile, riskier tactics. A similar change would apply to melee rangers (using a new, Prime Shot-like feature)
__________________ My blog about 4e rules and news: Square Fireballs
The only thing you've done wrong is that you haven't properly accounted for what happens if both attack rolls critical in combination with Hunter's Quarry.
When you go to add Hunter's Quarry damage, the chance it's maximized is 0.0975, not 0.1. HQ is maximized when at least one of the two attacks is a critical. If p is the chance each attack criticals, the chance at least one is a crit is 2p-p^2, not 2p as you've done it.
Good catch! Thanks for pointing that out. I've also added some logic so you can set the damage to zero to simulate a nonmagical weapon. See attached revision if you care. Btw, I'm still only using d10 because we only use core + PHB2.
Its the outdoor areas where the ranger absolutely dominates, and there's no balance point to compensate for that.
Great for avoiding AE damage, but haven't we already agreed that a ranger taking a few hits is better for the group than not due to the healing surge mechanic and the ranger's inability to share theirs out? Plus soaking a few hits, without putting the character in actual danger of dying, is effectively wasting the actions of the enemy. Very useful. And bow rangers don't exactly have sucky defenses.
A dual striking tempest fighter does almost as much damage. At first level 1d12+4/1d8+4 is quite possible. They are not even strikers. Rangers are strong strikers, but I don't find their damage at low levels to be unreasonable. Damage is what they're supposed to do. Tempest fighters are the ones over the top if you ask me, as they have the hit points, AC, and healing surges of a defender, and boast striker level damage.
A rogue with combat advantage can do 3d8+8 with an at-will at 1st level.
A sorcerer that can target multiple enemies can do 1d8+8 multiple times, and do more damage with a rider potentially. With a bit of luck, against a mere 2 targets that can be up to 2d8+32 damage.
A barbarian can get up to 1d12+1d6+5 with no strings attached, and more than any other striker on a crit.
If the stars line up, even a first level hellock can do about 3d6+15 damage in one round with an at-will.
This is what strikers do. It's not a problem, it's a feature.
And on the topic of ranger taking out minions, if that's what they focus on, they are doing a disservice to the rest of the party. Controllers and sorcerers are much more efficient at minion clearing.
__________________ Warning: This post may contain sarcasm.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
