D&D (2024) Treantmonk's Ranger DPS video:

[mellored]

Not following your calculations

3d10 * 50% chance to fail the save
+3d10 * 50% chance to deal 50% damage.
= 12.375

Did the same for Lightning Arrow and compared the difference.

Treantmonk uses 16 rounds of combat per day (4 combats * 4 rounds), and divides by 16 to get an average damage per round. Boost Wis to for 60% rate at higher levels, and he uses half the spell slots for damage (level 3, 4, 4, 5). Lower level slots are still Hail of Thorns, so I am just looking at the damage boost of these 4.

I didn't calculate the level 4 slot difference. But 1 is nearly between .77 and 1.2 so I just rounded to 1* 4.

Also. I didn't add Lightning Arrow on a crit.


...
But that's wrong. Lighting arrow doesn't add damage. It replaces damage.

Treantmonk is probably correct then.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sounds reasonable provided the creature is already hunter's marked before you start meleeing it with your sword and scimitar. It's just ranger's lose so much damage when they need to reapply hunters mark, vex, etc.

Is it "so much" though?

Before you get the Dual Wielder feat and a 4th attack, you cannot lose damage by doing this. Because none of your attacks use a bonus action.

By level 4 or 8 (assuming you take the feat early) then you can lose 1d6+4 (avg 7.5) to gain 3d6 (avg 10.5). But other than that situation, as long as you take Nick Mastery... you cannot lose damage by moving the mark because you aren't using the bonus action to attack.

 

[FrogReaver]

Is it "so much" though?

Before you get the Dual Wielder feat and a 4th attack, you cannot lose damage by doing this. Because none of your attacks use a bonus action.

By level 4 or 8 (assuming you take the feat early) then you can lose 1d6+4 (avg 7.5) to gain 3d6 (avg 10.5). But other than that situation, as long as you take Nick Mastery... you cannot lose damage by moving the mark because you aren't using the bonus action to attack.

When you are expecting to do 4 attacks at 2d6+4 damage each and are doing 3 attacks at 2d6+4 damage, that’s a loss of 2d6+4 damage.

Apply the same to less vex attacks in the turn for lower overall accuracy too.

 

[Minigiant]

Here's the thing

The Ranger gets a Defense Feature at level 10

The Paladin, Fighter, Barbarian, and Monk gets a Offence Feature at level 9, 10, or 11

That's it.

It's not Hunter's Mark. It's not Foe Slayer.

It's Tireless.

 

[Chaosmancer]

When you are expecting to do 4 attacks at 2d6+4 damage each and are doing 3 attacks at 2d6+4 damage, that’s a loss of 2d6+4 damage.

Apply the same to less vex attacks in the turn for lower overall accuracy too.

But that isn't the actual thing going on. You are expecting to make four attacks AFTER applying Hunter's Mark in the future. At the moment you are deciding to take the action though, you have two paths in front of you. You can deal 4d6+16 (30) damage by not using Hunter's Mark, or you can deal 6d6+12 (33) damage by using Hunter's Mark. Dealing 8d6+16 damage is NOT AN OPTION. You cannot do that without applying Hunter's Mark on the turn before. So choosing to use Hunter's Mark is not losing damage, because a) it deal more damage to use Hunter's Mark as a Bonus action and make 3 attacks than to make 4 attacks without it and b) you cannot deal the maximum damage without having set up Hunter's mark first.

Your premise rests on being able to use Hunter's Mark without having cast or moved it first. But that isn't how it works.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Here's the thing

The Ranger gets a Defense Feature at level 10

The Paladin, Fighter, Barbarian, and Monk gets a Offence Feature at level 9, 10, or 11

That's it.

It's not Hunter's Mark. It's not Foe Slayer.

It's Tireless.

That, and Ranger's don't have smite spells. The new warlock blade video really hits that home, since they were basically carried by being able to use every spell slot to use Eldritch Smite. Give Ranger's a smite spell, and their damage would sky-rocket.

 

[Minigiant]

That, and Ranger's don't have smite spells. The new warlock blade video really hits that home, since they were basically carried by being able to use every spell slot to use Eldritch Smite. Give Ranger's a smite spell, and their damage would sky-rocket.

Yeah if

1) Zephyr Strike was reprinted and converted to the new smite format

and

2) Rangers had a offensive bonus from Tireless (+2 damage or 1d10+Wis THO)

There would not be much complaining about Rangers being too weak but complains about Rangers being too strong

You would get 4 DPR If you use the same amount of levels of spells as combat rounds.

Wait a second. IT ALL MAKES SENSE...

WOTC DIDN'T REPRINT ZEPHYR STRIKE 2.0 IN ORDER TO FORCE RANGER PLAYERS TO BUY ANOTHER BOOK! ​

 

[mellored]

Your premise rests on being able to use Hunter's Mark without having cast or moved it first. But that isn't how it works.

Expertise in stealth might make that possible.

Also, if there are a lot of enemies, range has some decent AoEs instead.

 

[ECMO3]

y level 4 or 8 (assuming you take the feat early) then you can lose 1d6+4 (avg 7.5) to gain 3d6 (avg 10.5). But other than that situation, as long as you take Nick Mastery... you cannot lose damage by moving the mark because you aren't using the bonus action to attack.

If you are all out optimizing you do, because the best light weapons (pistols) are not available with nick. If you go scimitar and pistol instead of two pistols you lose 2 DPR.

Also your highest damage with light weapons comes from Vex weapons, even if they use the same die, because you can leverage the advantage more.

2 shortswords with Vex does more damage than shortsword and scimitar with Vex.

 

[FrogReaver]

If you are all out optimizing you do, because the best light weapons (pistols) are not available with nick. If you go scimitar and pistol instead of two pistols you lose 2 DPR.

Also your highest damage with light weapons comes from Vex weapons, even if they use the same die, because you can leverage the advantage more.

2 shortswords with Vex does more damage than shortsword and scimitar with Vex.

Interesting hypothesis, but not one i really believe without something more to back it up. Care to show a workup on it?