Begging to be errata'd: Archer Ranger At-Wills

[thc1967]

One of my players is contemplating switching away from ranger because of the stiff "penalties" the at-will attacks seem to impose. Let's look at a few items off this 4th level Elf Archer-Ranger's character sheet.

1) Ranged Basic Attack (Longbow). +10 vs. AC for 1d10+7 damage.
2) Careful Attack (Longbow). +12 vs. AC for 1d10+2 damage.
3) Twin Strike (Longbow). +10 vs. AC for 1d10+2 damage, twice.

Average damage with attack 1 is 5.5 + 7 = 12.5

Average damage with attack 2 is (5.5 + 2) * 1.1 (hits 10% more than 1) = 8.25

Average damage with attack 3 is (5.5 + 2) * 1.5 (assume he hits 66% of the time) = 12.45

Ultimately, niether class at-will attack is better than a basic attack. This is not the case with any other class. These at-wills have any other effect than damage, either, so there's also no benefit there.

Was this really by design? It seems so gimped.

 

[Mistwell]

Your analysis is far too simplistic. Indeed, most people who really crunch all the numbers find the Ranger consistently does the MOST amount of damage of all the classes at low levels with twin strike.

 

[Starbuck_II]

One of my players is contemplating switching away from ranger because of the stiff "penalties" the at-will attacks seem to impose. Let's look at a few items off this 4th level Elf Archer-Ranger's character sheet.

1) Ranged Basic Attack (Longbow). +10 vs. AC for 1d10+7 damage.
2) Careful Attack (Longbow). +12 vs. AC for 1d10+2 damage.
3) Twin Strike (Longbow). +10 vs. AC for 1d10+2 damage, twice.

Average damage with attack 1 is 5.5 + 7 = 12.5

Average damage with attack 2 is (5.5 + 2) * 1.1 (hits 10% more than 1) = 8.25

Average damage with attack 3 is (5.5 + 2) * 1.5 (assume he hits 66% of the time) = 12.45

Ultimately, niether class at-will attack is better than a basic attack. This is not the case with any other class. These at-wills have any other effect than damage, either, so there's also no benefit there.

Was this really by design? It seems so gimped.

Careful Strike is bad, but did you just call Twin Strike sucky? For serious?!

Why is Bow attack 1d10 +7: Can you explain this?
+2 Bow and 5 Dex? (why does a level 4 guy have a +2 bow...)

Remember, Twin Strike gives you 2 chances to hit. You can easily mess up a roll (bad luck/rolls happen), but you get extra attack.

And you don't take careful Strike ever when you can choose Twin Strike and the moving one (lets you move prior).

And you are wrong Fighter also has Careful Strike and it sucks too (less so because he doesnt' have twin strike).

 

[Stalker0]

Your analysis is far too simplistic. Indeed, most people who really crunch all the numbers find the Ranger consistently does the MOST amount of damage of all the classes at low levels.

Yeah if you look on the boards there are plenty of threads where number crunching is done. Twin Strike is considered by many to be one of of the best at wills in the game, probably only righteous brand is superior.

And just to get you started, note that your note including the hunter's quarry in your results. That's a big factor, because twin strike has a much higher chance of hitting than a normal attack, you are much more likely to get in that quarry damage.

 

[hafrogman]

assume he hits 66% of the time

If you're going to assume that about the second shot of Twin Strike only hits 66% of the time, you have to assume that is true for all three attacks.

Basic .66 * 12.5 = 8.3
Careful .66 * 1.1 * 7.5 = 5.5
Twin .66 * 7.5 + .66 * 7.5 = 9.9

 

[Obryn]

And just to get you started, note that your note including the hunter's quarry in your results. That's a big factor, because twin strike has a much higher chance of hitting than a normal attack, you are much more likely to get in that quarry damage.

This has completely been my experience. Each strike does individually less damage, but that extra d6 or d8 really adds up over a few rounds.

If you're going to assume that about the second shot of Twin Strike only hits 66% of the time, you have to assume that is true for all three attacks.

Basic .66 * 12.5 = 8.3
Careful .66 * 1.1 * 7.5 = 5.5
Twin .66 * 7.5 + .66 * 7.5 = 9.9

And this is a good catch, as well.

Why is Bow attack 1d10 +7: Can you explain this?
+2 Bow and 5 Dex? (why does a level 4 guy have a +2 bow...)

Well, a +2 bow's not completely unreasonable at level 4. I'm going to guess, though, that it's a +1 bow with weapon focus.

-O

 

[thc1967]

OK good catch on the math, but Hunter's Quarry is a wash between ranged basic and at-will's.

The +7 damage to ranged basic is +1 bow, +1 for weapon focus feat, +5 DEX.

Let's play with the math more realistically. Assume he's targeting an Orc Raider, AC 17.

1) Ranged Basic Attack (Longbow). +10 vs. AC for 1d10+7 damage.
2) Careful Attack (Longbow). +12 vs. AC for 1d10+2 damage.
3) Twin Strike (Longbow). +10 vs. AC for 1d10+2 damage, twice.

1 hits on a 7 or higher, so 70% of the time. Damage per hit is 0.70 * (5.5 + 7) = 8.75

2 hits on a 5 or higher, so 80% of the time. Damage per hit is 0.80 * (5.5 + 2) = 6.00, clearly inferior to ranged basic.

3 hits on a 7 or higher or 70% of the time, and you get to attack twice. Damage is (0.70 * (5.5 + 2)) x2 = 10.5 Clearly better than ranged basic.

So maybe it's only Careful Strike that needs the errata?

 

[Hammerhead]

HQ is not a wash. With Twin Strike, you have a higher chance of hitting at least once, and thus more average damage from the HQ.

Careful Strike doesn't need erratta. It just sucks. Don't take it, and get the other At Will.

 

[Mistwell]

OK good catch on the math, but Hunter's Quarry is a wash between ranged basic and at-will's.

No, it is not.

HQ can only function once per round. It only functions on a hit. With twin strike, you increase the odds you will hit that round, thus triggering HQ. That has to be figured in, since it influences average damage per round, which is the only thing being measured.

As for Careful Strike, I agree it needs errata. I believe it was originally supposed to be +4, and a last minute decision was made to make it +2 because it was deemed too powerful. I think that was an error. It should be +3, or even put back to +4.

 

[thc1967]

Picky, picky. I've already conceded Twin Strike is better than ranged basic based on points above, but to see the math...

1) HQ adds 1d8 * 70% = 3.15
2) HQ adds 1d8 * 70% = 3.15
3) HQ adds 1d8 * 85% = 3.83

Guessing on that 85%; I'm no statistician. Should be close enough though.