D&D 5E Are ranged attacks too good in 5e?

[Bill Zebub]

I was with you until there. I think everything up until number 7 is fine, but 7 goes a bit too far.

I dunno. It can make the tactical situation more interesting. There is, of course, a huge incentive for melee to bum rush archers, so there's likewise a huge incentive to make sure they'll draw AoO's from your melee if they try it.

Also, it would (presumably) be symmetric: you get advantage when you bum rush their archers. Which provides an additional incentive for rogues to pull their short swords out.

It makes committed archer builds (Fighter/Ranger, and SS feat) less attractive, but for those who haven't invested resources in archery and can freely swap between ranged and melee it shifts decision-making toward melee.

 

[ECMO3]

1. Move without Disengage within someones reach? AoO.
2. Use ranged weapons while in someones reach? AoO.
3. Cast a non Bonus action spell withing reach? AoO.
4. Drink a potion as Bonus action? AoO, or you can drink it as an Action without AoO.
5. AoOs decoupled from Reaction, and you can make proficiency bonus per round of them. Still only one per opportunity. Like a built in 3.5e combat reflexes feat for all.
6. Boosted damage for 2Handed melee weapons or return of 1+1/2 STR mod to damage or 2×STR mod damage even, to keep it simple.
7. When you use your ranged weapon to Attack on your turn, all MELEE attacks have advantage on you until the start of your next turn.

I think this is a really bad idea. This sounds like it would reintroduce most of things people hate about combat in 3.5 and most of them don't even have a really solid thematic logic behind them. It is just mechanics for mechanics sake I think.

Also #3 and #4 contradict each other I think.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Also #3 and #4 contradict each other I think.

Sorta, but sorta not. I can see why it looks like at first glance, but I think the logic is that #3 is about doing two different things that require different amounts of focus and attention. And #4 is about doing one thing in two different ways: in a rush, or while watching out for swords.

What's weird about #4 is that it actually benefits ranged attackers: they are more likely to be out of reach of AoO's, so more likely to be able to safely drink potions as a bonus action. Still, "You can drink a potion as a bonus action, but it will provoke an AoO" would be an additional option to the game, without penalizing anybody for currently allowable actions.

AoO's for casting normal spells? No, thank you. Full casters need to be able to use their core abilities, whereas archers have relatively good melee options. Also, Mage Slayer is one of my favorite feats, and part of the fun is that casters don't expect it.

 

[loverdrive]

You have it backwards. Strength is in many ways superior to Dexterity. The only real advantage I see is raining down arrows at up to 600ft away without penalty if you have the right feat.

Yes, many unarmored classes use dexterity instead of strength, but that is ok.

Strength is my experience is nearly as underrated as Intelligence in my experience.

In what ways?

DEX affects:

• Ranged attacks (on par with STR-based mêlée at the comparable levels of charop)
• Mêlée attacks
• AC
• Initiative
• A very common saving throw vs. some real nasty effects
• Ability to escape grapple

STR affects:

• Mêlée attacks
• Ranged attacks with thrown weapons
• AC, indirectly
• Ability to grapple and escape grapple
• An uncommon saving throw vs. being prone
• Carrying capacity
• Jumping distance

The only real upsides of STR are AC due to heavy armour and ability to grapple. I've yet to see carrying capacity and jumping distances not handwaved, STR save is almost worthless, what's more there to STR? Is there something I'm not aware of?

 

[Garthanos]

problem with ranged, is that due to simplifying 5E from 3.5E, melee has lost some utility and ranged lost some dangers of using ranged weapons.

what we need back or modified:

1. Move without Disengage within someones reach? AoO.
2. Use ranged weapons while in someones reach? AoO.
3. Cast a non Bonus action spell withing reach? AoO.
4. Drink a potion as Bonus action? AoO, or you can drink it as an Action without AoO.
5. AoOs decoupled from Reaction, and you can make proficiency bonus per round of them. Still only one per opportunity. Like a built in 3.5e combat reflexes feat for all.
6. Boosted damage for 2Handed melee weapons or return of 1+1/2 STR mod to damage or 2×STR mod damage even, to keep it simple.
7. When you use your ranged weapon to Attack on your turn, all MELEE attacks have advantage on you until the start of your next turn.

Seems extreme but 4e did a compromise that worked rather well includes number 5 but unlimited no tracking (*sounds extreme but isnt in practice) and number 2 exactly and something like 3 for ranged spells.

Additionally 4e had other things that boosted melee (you do not have to make ranged as problematic if you buff melee). And some times it was in subtle ways (5e removed a lot of them). For instance a subtle one -- Everyone could charge so the melee combatants range of threat was double a normal 5e character and that includes monsters making them able to reach the ranged combat and ranged caster. And the single attack at the end often by high levels as player characters was much more potent. Also an opportunity attacks would likely be much much more nasty too at high level,, the fighters is likely more than a little badass with lots of effects that are not encounter/short rest limited, instead of the faded meager thing it is in 5e.

 

[Garthanos]

In what ways?

DEX affects:

• Initiative

and initiative is huge particularly in the 3 round fights 5e is geared for.

 

[Horwath]

Seems extreme but 4e did a compromise that worked rather well includes number 5 but unlimited no tracking (*sounds extreme but isnt in practice) and number 2 exactly and something like 3 for ranged spells.

Additionally 4e had other things that boosted melee (you do not have to make ranged as problematic if you buff melee). And some times it was in subtle ways (5e removed a lot of them). For instance a subtle one -- Everyone could charge so the melee combatants range of threat was double a normal 5e character and that includes monsters making them able to reach the ranged combat and ranged caster. And the single attack at the end often by high levels as player characters was much more potent. Also an opportunity attacks would likely be much much more nasty too at high level,, the fighters is likely more than a little badass with lots of effects that are not encounter/short rest limited, instead of the faded meager thing it is in 5e.

Charge could be a nice addition to Action options(yes, I know we have a feat for that too, it's rubbish).
Move up to half speed in straight line over non-difficult terrain and make single attack.
If you have extra attack feature, add your weapon base damage again to your normal melee attack.

 

[Maxperson]

I dunno. It can make the tactical situation more interesting. There is, of course, a huge incentive for melee to bum rush archers, so there's likewise a huge incentive to make sure they'll draw AoO's from your melee if they try it.

Also, it would (presumably) be symmetric: you get advantage when you bum rush their archers. Which provides an additional incentive for rogues to pull their short swords out.

It makes committed archer builds (Fighter/Ranger, and SS feat) less attractive, but for those who haven't invested resources in archery and can freely swap between ranged and melee it shifts decision-making toward melee.

It absolutely does make the tactical situation more interesting. I just think that on top of the rest it's a bit too much.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

It is not always benefical to go first in combat. A defensively oriented fighter wants to go after the wizards has thrown their fireball and after the enemies have closed the 60ft gap. In 3e, as there was a delay action where dex also determined how low you were able to go it was different. In 5e initiative for melee fighters is not that impactful.

5e initiative is cyclical. The only difference between going first and going last is that if you go first you have an entire extra action in the combat.

That defensively oriented fighter could have made some ranged attacks and moved to a more advantageous position to defend the group if they had gone first. They next get to go after everyone else has had their turn just as they would have if they had got the lowest initiative.

 

[Garthanos]

Charge could be a nice addition to Action options(yes, I know we have a feat for that too, it's rubbish).

I suppose then one could make the feat more buff, but you are right it is so trash right now. I think as a maneuver its more interesting could do things like have it trigger on an opportunity action so that caster/ranged combatant starts prepping their move and you can charge them.
.