D&D 5E Concentration spells over 10 minutes can be a pain in the a**

[Flamestrike]

Our 10th level ranger is stuck with only two attacks and shoots two arrows for a small bonus of 1d6. (and one d8 if hunter)
Yet, our rogue 10th level rogue, will have 5d6 consistently.

So the Ranger makes 2 bow attacks for 1d8 damage, plus flame arrows for 1d6, plus 1d8 damage for hunter?

Thats 3d8+2d6+(dex x2). Assuming Dex 20, thats 30.5 damage.

As an archer, hes also quite likley to have taken Sharpshooter, and the Archery style, so its probably considerably higher.

The rogue gets 1 attack at 6d6+dex (or 1d6+dex if no sneak attack). Thats 26 damage, even with sneak attack.

In additon to having more HP and Spells, the Ranger (the worst class in the game apparently) is out DPRing the striker.

If our rogue gets xbow expert, he becomes much more dangerous.

Actually, the Ranger does.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

If you want to move concentration, then just remove concentration. Spells like Fire Shield, Longstrider, and Armor of Agathys are already concentration-free.

Don't mess around with finicky extra restrictions like "this weapon can have only one long-duration spell on it at a time". Just remove concentration, maybe boost the level of the spell to compensate, give it a spiffy new name like "Ordwen's Inimical Haste", and be done with it.

 

[Helldritch]

Well, by looking at the answers I think I have found what bothers me the most. Key spell dmg enhancer are on the spell list and not a class feature.

Hex and Hunter's mark should not be on concentration and it's probably my old vision of these features that is interfering with my thinking.

As for the rogue doing more dmg. I should've mentionned that he does his sneak attack dmg twice per round with our battle master. That means 52 average dmg vs 43 dmg if the ranger was chosen. And the gap will only increase as our rogue gets higher level but our ranger won't improve a bit.

As for the sharp shooter, both have it and our rogue is considering to take xbow expert but we'll see in a few sessions if she does.

Party composition all level 10:
Human Fighter (Battle Master)
Human Rogue (Assassin)
Elf Ranger (Hunter)
Human Cleric (Fire, Amunator)
Human Cleric (Life, Amunator)
Human Paladin (Protection)

No Arcane casters but the fire Cleric does have access to fire balls. So large group are not that of a problem. I'll see if the gap increase as time goes on. But I fully expect it to grow. That's why I feel that some spells should not have concentration on them. At low level, the difference is almost non existent. But at high level, it starts to show.

I think i'll remove concentration from Hex and Hunter's mark just to see if it is so bad in the long run. I'll keep you informed.

 

[Kryx]

As for the rogue doing more dmg. I should've mentionned that he does his sneak attack dmg twice per round with our battle master. That means 52 average dmg vs 43 dmg if the ranger was chosen. And the gap will only increase as our rogue gets higher level but our ranger won't improve a bit.

A battlemaster cannot enable a rogue to get 2 sneak attacks per round unless you have houseruled something (broken). The main way for a rogue to get 2 sneak attacks is hope for an OA or get hasted and ready an action on the off turn and attack on this turn.

I think i'll remove concentration from Hex and Hunter's mark just to see if it is so bad in the long run. I'll keep you informed.

Matchematically this should present no problems beyond the ranger being able to get 3.5 more per attack with flame arrows (won't be a problem) or either class being able to use CC spells while doing normal damage.

 

[Leatherhead]

As for the rogue doing more dmg. I should've mentionned that he does his sneak attack dmg twice per round with our battle master. That means 52 average dmg vs 43 dmg if the ranger was chosen. And the gap will only increase as our rogue gets higher level but our ranger won't improve a bit.

Maybe you should focus on attacking the rogue, so that they are forced to use their Reaction for Uncanny Dodge instead of an attack?

Or just have the enemies walk away with no risk of OA.

 

[Leatherhead]

A battlemaster cannot enable a rogue to get 2 sneak attacks per round unless you have houseruled something (broken). The main way for a rogue to get 2 sneak attacks is hope for an OA or get hasted and ready an action on the off turn and attack on this turn.

Commander's Strike.

 

[Kryx]

Commander's Strike.

Ah, right, my mistake.

So the Fighter is giving up a bunch of DPR (from either PAM, GWM, S&B trip, or god forbid TWF) to give the rogue a second attack. That shouldn't really count as the rogue > ranger. That's more of the fighter sacrificing damage to give the rogue more damage.

 

[Arial Black]

A battlemaster cannot enable a rogue to get 2 sneak attacks per round unless you have houseruled something (broken).

One of the maneuvers is Command Strike, which allows the Battlemaster, on his turn, to let another PC (when it is not their turn) to make an attack.

Sneak Attack is once per turn, not once per round. So if the BM commands the rogue to attack, the rogue can add Sneak Attack damage to that attack (if it applies) because this is the only time this turn that Sneak Attack has been used.

A multiclass rogue/BM with riposte can do this all by himself. On his turn he attacks, adding SA damage. On the baddy's turn the baddy attacks and misses, so the BM/rogue uses Riposte to attack the baddy, adding SA damage because this is a different turn than when he used SA last time.

 

[Staccat0]

My only gripe is Hunter's Mark for melee Rangers. Overall I think the mechanic is great.

 

[auburn2]

One of the maneuvers is Command Strike, which allows the Battlemaster, on his turn, to let another PC (when it is not their turn) to make an attack.

Sneak Attack is once per turn, not once per round. So if the BM commands the rogue to attack, the rogue can add Sneak Attack damage to that attack (if it applies) because this is the only time this turn that Sneak Attack has been used.

A multiclass rogue/BM with riposte can do this all by himself. On his turn he attacks, adding SA damage. On the baddy's turn the baddy attacks and misses, so the BM/rogue uses Riposte to attack the baddy, adding SA damage because this is a different turn than when he used SA last time.

The first is not really the rogue doing the damage though, it is a combination of the battlemaster and rogue. This is no different than saying a ranger can do x more damage after being hasted by the wizard.

As for the second it is highly conditional and assumes the enemy attacks the rogue with a melee weapon, misses and conditions for a sneak attack are present. Certainly predictable for some monsters but hardly universal and not likely to happen more than once per encounter against intelligent monsters.

Also one thing I have noticed in posting is that conditions for sneak attack vary with the DM, the types of encounters he sets up and how intelligently he plays the monsters. Many here seem to play in games where the party Rogue can sneak attack every turn. That is not the case in my games. They can still SA a lot, including nearly every first round, but after the first round it is hit or miss (excuse the pun). Some rounds then can get it some rounds they can't do to disadvantage, battlefield positioning etc. Rogues (and wizards) are heavily targeted after the first round in my games and most monsters will try to prevent sneak attacks after the first successful one.