D&D 5E Do you prefer to fight with melee or ranged weapons?

5

5ekyu

Hero

• Nov 21, 2017

• #11

Depends on game and genre. Both have appeal - now - i still remember 1e and the d4 crossbows was it - we called them sleestak crossbows and iirc bows not much better and iirc no damage bonus though at some point you could make stronger bpws to give you str bonus

But in 5e type melee can be very dynamic and mobile esp key to rogue play stick and move, dont stand still esp near allies.

Sent from my VS995 using EN World mobile app

 

log in or register to remove this ad

JonnyP71

Explorer

• Nov 21, 2017

• #12

I prefer to fight with words and spells.

(I don't tend to play martial characters)

 

C

CTurbo

Explorer

• Nov 21, 2017

• #13

I much prefer melee. I like my characters to be tough and be up in the thick of things. It's probably why I've yet to play a Wizard, Lore Bard, or Sorcerer in 5e. I won't hesitate to admit how strong Archery is though, and a character that can be strong in melee AND range is best mechanically. I did roll up an Elf Archer Fighter(Battle Master), and even with no feats at level 7(20 Dex), he was very effective with a +1 Long Bow. He almost never misses and deals a good amount of damage too. The problem is, I get bored playing the Archer. I just don't like staying way back. With my Tempest Cleric, I'm always down on the front line, and that is a fun character that is extremely blasty while at least decent in melee being able to deal reaction damage 4 times. I always keep my 20 Dex 20 Wis Long Death Monk down on the front lines too. With an inflated AC and almost always getting temp hp, he is very very hard to bring down. He is fast enough to be his own ranged weapon if he needs to.

 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

• Nov 21, 2017

• #14

When I want my focus to be one "wielding a weapon to inflict damage", I'll play a primarily-ranged character.

When I want my focus to be "absorbing blows and protecting my teammates" I'll play a melee character.

Both are valid but different playstyles. When I play front line characters they have less focus on using their weapons to deal damage and more focus on staying alive and blocking. Not that damage is unimportant, just a secondary priority.

 

Wiseblood

Adventurer

• Nov 21, 2017

• #15

I use ranged against melee until they close. Even if I am not good at it.
I use melee when the ranged situation is unfavorable for me. Like they have cover and I don't. I push for melee if they appear to strongly favor range.

Range, melee, magic, stealth, persuasion, deception are tools for a job.

Melee is more fun for me. Ranged is more efficient. Efficiency allow me to get more xp and more done...so yeah too close to call.

 

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix

• Nov 21, 2017

• #16

When I'm a player, I tend to theorycraft many characters: peerless achers, eccentric mages, know-it-all jack-of-all-trade etc. In the end, at the actual table, I always end up a melee character because it feels that ranged opponents are much rarer and that half my character sheet is useless since I'm rarely attacked. I find it boring when my HP hasnt changed during an entire session or my defenses/saves are not used: I want to be damaged, grabbed, thrown around, make death saving throw, bitten with poison or diseases, this is how you get to feel really heroic. I also often see ranged players become distracted outside their turn since they feel the turn-to-turn shifting of the battlefield matters less if your 2 full-turns move-dash away from the melee where the actual fight happens. That's also why when I Dm, I use enemy archers/skirmisher a lot with a good dose of magic-users.

 

KahlessNestor

Adventurer

• Nov 21, 2017

• #17

Melee, I guess, since most of my ranged characters tend to be switch hitters, pulling out a sword when someone gets in their face.

Not magic users typically though.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

 

akr71

Hero

• Nov 21, 2017

• #18

Honestly, it changes from character to character and sometimes the character's preference changes too.
I like playing tanks who wade in with a melee weapon, I also like rogues & rangers who can deal damage from farther away. My current character is a rogue, who initially would attack, Cunning Action to disengage and pop out of melee range and repeat, preferably next to an ally so he could get sneak attack. It was a lot of fun. He found (stole) a magic dagger that returns to him when he throws it and does more damage when thrown than his short sword. He's far more effective in this role so that's what he does

 

Istbor

Dances with Gnolls

• Nov 21, 2017

• #19

I like my character to be decent enough at both. You never know when you will need a long reach in a fight. However, my preference is definitely melee. There is just something about a sword I really really enjoy.

 

cmad1977

Hero

• Nov 21, 2017

• #20

DMMike said:

Spoken like someone who's never been clubbed in the head. The problem is, your foe wants to smash your face too.

Which is why sticking an arrow into your opponent has a much more...comfortable feeling to it. That, and you can do the attacking with a significant amount of cover nearby, just waiting to grant you safety.

Now, I know that the axe-men will make assertions about bravery versus cowardice, but history will support me in the argument of right versus wrong.

Click to expand...

Meh. Killing a man at range is fine but doesn’t compare to feeling his last moments through the blade of your sword.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk