In 5e the average starting stat is either 16 or 17 using the standard array. At level 5 unless vuman they only have only one feat/ASI and to be "full build" they need three; two to reach Dex 20 and a third for the Sharpshooter feat. (In the playtest of course, you need three +Dex feats to reach Dex 20, so the gap is arguably wider from levels 8-11).
Sure if you want to expressly care about the exact details of their arrays. I tend to find that as long as I make the same assumptions for ability scores, it doesn't really matter. I also don't know why Sharpshooter matters, whether or not the Ranger or the fighter has sharpshooter doesn't make a difference, its impact is identical.
4e? Is this a mistype?
and assuming that no magic weapons and that both sides grabbed Sharpshooter at level 4 (because that's both a solid choice and entirely defensible for CharOp) then at level 5 the baseline damage isn't 2d8+10 damage, but 2d8+6, moving up to 2d8+8 with +1 to hit for the fighter at level 6 and the ranger at level 8 - while at level 8 the fighter hits 2d8+10 damage with a further +1 to hit.
And from the rate of exchange for Sharpshooter +1 to hit is worth +2 damage. On each attack. If we can use that rate of exchange the ranger's "consistent" damage is effectively 2d8+8 + d6 + d8 while the fighter's consistent damage is 2d8+14. Which is ... not that far away especially as the fighter should have extra damage available from their subclass.
Okay, so this all relies on the Fighter getting a +2 dex for level 6. Which is not a guarantee. Yes, they very much might, but it isn't certain.
I'm also not sure about that +1 = +2 damage. What I would probably do is...
Ranger8: 3d8 (13.5) +2d6 (7) + 28 = 48.5 x 0.45 (0.6+0.1-0.25) = 21.825
Fighter8: 2d8 (9) +30 = 39 x 0.5 (0.65+0.1-0.25= 19.5
And yes, the fighter is not that far away. But again, Fighter subclasses are inconsistent. For example, the champion only gives buffs to critting, while the Eldritch knight's spells likely don't play into this at all, and the battlemaster can burst damage. But, remember, this entire thing is assuming that the ranger is dealing less consistent damage. But a hour long concentration spell (minimum) is not a burst. It IS consistent damage
And I agree the ranger needs a good level 11 ability.
Yeah, because this is where the fighter gets that powerful 3rd attack and paladins add +1d8 to every attack, both of which are incredibly strong options.
They really aren't, especially after level 5 (TWF is strong before you get the extra attack but doesn't scale). They have three fundamental flaws compared to fighters, paladins, and barbarians:
- Concentration - which matters far more when you are on the front lines trying to soak up the damage
- They are squishy. The Barbarian has their half damage thing, the fighter has heavy armour and a bonus action self heal, and the paladin has heavy armour and a big lay on hands. So they can't either tank or be up in the big bad's face unless they have someone with Sentinel (or Ancestral Spirits or some other tank ability) drawing aggro. And as a two weapon fighter, of course, you have no shield and have taken the defensive fighting style so you have a poor AC.
- Hunter's Mark and your off-hand attack both want your bonus action. If you are Hunters' Marking something you can not also make your extra attack that turn. (This is clearly intended behaviour which is why they've reverted the TWF change and added the Nick property)
And I did address concentration and the bonus action. However, this is why I brought up the One DnD rules. Because ranged smites are a One DnD concept, so the fact that two of these issues are resolved by the current One DnD rules is important. Ranged Smite might have been a bigger impact without these changes, but these changes do exist.
"The Blender" unless they found magic armour will have had an AC of 16 (Studded Leather with +4 AC) at level 7, and they lack spells like Shield or False Life to make them tougher.
And AC of 16 is not bad per se, especially at low levels. Also, you are discounting Half Plate, which would make it 17, almost as good as full plate, and if they are a dual-wielder, well, the dual-wielding character gets an additional +1 AC, bringing them up to the same AC as a two-hander in Full Plate. Which is certainly not bad.
Additionally, they do have healing spells. Which can help cover their hp, just like the paladin's lay on hands or the fighter's second wind.
And they won't have been able to do that 6d6+1d8+12 damage on the first round of combat because they needed the bonus action to set the Hunter's Mark so it was 4d6+ 1d8 + 8. Which is not insignificant but far from OP (for comparison a barbarian with a maul and +2 Str rather than GWM does 4d6+12 damage). If they are dealing with chaff then the targets are going to die before they get to spin up so it's 3d6 + 1d8 + 12 damage (again barbarian with a maul damage).
I never said it was OP. I said it didn't stink. And that doesn't look like stinking to me.
The only time you actually get to do the 6d6+1d8 + 12 damage is your second round against a big target. But this gives a BBEG an entire round to pound on you with your AC 16 and lack of spells like Shield or other defensive tech like Rage.
Oh, and your spike damage is 6d6+1d8 + 12 = 37.5. That isn't that exceptional. Compare to a raging reckless attacking barbarian using GWM: 4d6 + 6 (Str) + 4 (Rage) + 20 (2 power attacks) with the possibility of a third attack if you kill something.
But again, I'm not talking about it being exceptional. I'm talking about it not stinking.
And, it isn't like a Dual-wielding fighter is doing better damage than the dual-wielding ranger in this scenario.
