D&D 5E Question on using Favored Foe more than once per turn

[doctorbadwolf]

That is not a fair comparison because it does not use a spell slot or a spell known. It is free, where Hunters Mark is expensive to cast and VERY expensive to have as a known spell.

Not really. It requires your concentration, and can only be used once per turn. HM cost a spell slot and a bonus action. Your known spells are low, sure, but not that low with Tasha's. And the payoff for HM is much higher.

Using FF 5 times a day at my current level is more 1st level slots than I have total even if I did have HM. Also you do not have to use a bonus action to activate it, RAW you can even activate it on an OA.

I've run the numbers. You can check them by finding the last thread about exploiting FF by stacking uses of it during the same instance. HM still beats it unless it's a long fight against enemies that go down quickly, and even then, FF only catches up, it doesn't surpass HM.

I don't think FF is great, but I do think it is in general better than favored enemy, which is really what it should be compared to. Not a whole lot better and not strictly better, but probably marginally better for most builds and most campaigns.

It's more narrowly focused, but only generally better if your campaign doesn't challenge you outside of combat. You assumption that most campaigns are like yours is simply false.

What you're proposing isn't possible RAW, but it won't break anything. You'll just burn through your FF uses very quickly.

 

[ECMO3]

Not really. It requires your concentration, and can only be used once per turn. HM cost a spell slot and a bonus action. Your known spells are low, sure, but not that low with Tasha's. And the payoff for HM is much higher.

I've run the numbers. You can check them by finding the last thread about exploiting FF by stacking uses of it during the same instance. HM still beats it unless it's a long fight against enemies that go down quickly, and even then, FF only catches up, it doesn't surpass HM.

It's more narrowly focused, but only generally better if your campaign doesn't challenge you outside of combat. You assumption that most campaigns are like yours is simply false.

What you're proposing isn't possible RAW, but it won't break anything. You'll just burn through your FF uses very quickly.

Copy all.

You are right that HM is a better use of concentration certainly, although not necessarily better than other low-level spells and worse than other high level spells.

You do get a lot of spells known if you take Primal Awareness instead of Primeval awareness, and more with some subclasses. But you can't really choose any of them or trade them for other spells. The problem with HM is the Ranger has a ton of awesome spells that you really want (goodberry, pass without trace, spike growth, Absorb Elements ....) and you don't get these through subclass or PA. HM is not bad, especially with a martial focused Ranger that is not using his bonus and concentration for something else. The problem with it is the opportunity cost for getting it. I think if I really wanted that mechanic I would strongly consider playing a Human and starting with Fey Touched for HM (or for Hex since it is a better spell).

The regular Favored enemy is better if you are in a campaign focused on a particular type of enemy and you are going to be frequently doing wisdom checks against that enemy, but I have seen entire published WOTC campaigns and adventures run beginning to end where it was not used a single time, and many were complaining about it as a feature before Tashas was published (although to be fair many complain about FF too).

What is not RAW about it specifically, assuming I attack a different enemy every time?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Copy all.

You are right that HM is a better use of concentration certainly, although not necessarily better than other low-level spells and worse than other high level spells.

You do get a lot of spells known if you take Primal Awareness instead of Primeval awareness, and more with some subclasses. But you can't really choose any of them or trade them for other spells. The problem with HM is the Ranger has a ton of awesome spells that you really want (goodberry, pass without trace, spike growth, Absorb Elements ....) and you don't get these through subclass or PA. HM is not bad, especially with a martial focused Ranger that is not using his bonus and concentration for something else. The problem with it is the opportunity cost for getting it. I think if I really wanted that mechanic I would strongly consider playing a Human and starting with Fey Touched for HM (or for Hex since it is a better spell).

The regular Favored enemy is better if you are in a campaign focused on a particular type of enemy and you are going to be frequently doing wisdom checks against that enemy, but I have seen entire published WOTC campaigns and adventures run beginning to end where it was not used a single time, and many were complaining about it as a feature before Tashas was published (although to be fair many complain about FF too).

What is not RAW about it specifically, assuming I attack a different enemy every time?

FF specifies that you can add to the damage the first time on your turn that you deal damage. That only happens once per turn.

 

[Redwizard007]

FF specifies that you can add to the damage the first time on your turn that you deal damage. That only happens once per turn.

I believe it is "The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy and deal damage to it..." If you target a different enemy each time, intentionally dropping FF and targeting a different foe it works by RAW. Breaks RAI all to hell, but it works.

 

[ECMO3]

FF specifies that you can add to the damage the first time on your turn that you deal damage. That only happens once per turn.

No, it says the "first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy". If I am changing the favored enemy every attack then I should be ok RAW.

I agree if you attack just one creature multiple times you could interpret the RAW to mean you can not do it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

No, it says the "first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy". If I am changing the favored enemy every attack then I should be ok RAW.

I agree if you attack just one creature multiple times you could interpret the RAW to mean you can not do it.

So it does, fair enough.

Im not sure why you want to do this, though. Is front loading multitarget damage that much a strong strategy in your game?

Like do you fight hordes a lot?

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Sure, go for it if you are attacking 3 different enemies that are clustered together in fireball formation and you aren't particularly worried about Opportunity Attacks, if applicable.

Quite the situational, suboptimal, and silly exploit, IMO.
Although, it's the "silly" part I'm actually cool with, if "losing focus" or "fickle" is something that is in your character's TIBFs. Inspiration!

 

[ECMO3]

So it does, fair enough.

Im not sure why you want to do this, though. Is front loading multitarget damage that much a strong strategy in your game?

Like do you fight hordes a lot?

I use concentration spells a lot and almost always finish the day with favored foe uses left. On that rare turn that I am both attacking and not concentrating on something else it would be good to be able to burn through them.

Although having to attack multiple enemies does make it situational.

 

[ECMO3]

Sure, go for it if you are attacking 3 different enemies that are clustered together in fireball formation and you aren't particularly worried about Opportunity Attacks, if applicable.

Quite the situational, suboptimal, and silly exploit, IMO.
Although, it's the "silly" part I'm actually cool with, if "losing focus" or "fickle" is something that is in your character's TIBFs. Inspiration!

"Suboptimal" is relative. Nothing is more suboptimal than going to bed with favored foe uses left.

My Ranger is a multiclass Rogue and on top of that I know Misty Step and Nature's Veil so opportunity attacks are rare (although if I did TWF I would probably have to take one). TWF was for this discussion, usually I only attack with a magic dagger in one hand and an empty offhand.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

"Suboptimal" is relative. Nothing is more suboptimal than going to bed with favored foe uses left.

True true.

My Ranger is a multiclass Rogue and on top of that I know Misty Step and Nature's Veil so opportunity attacks are rare (although if I did TWF I would probably have to take one). TWF was for this discussion, usually I only attack with a magic dagger in one hand and an empty offhand.

Ah, your table rules allow offhand attack to be an unarmed strike. This comes up every ten sessions or so and I always pause and consider but ultimately squash it since RAW demands two light weapons (without the feat)… and allowing it kinda steps on the monk’s toes.