Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9441828" data-attributes="member: 6801228">You don't get to count the entire attack action, then declare the spell does all that damage. Swift Quiver isn't doing 4d10+32 damage. Swift Quiver with a Heavy Crossbow is doing 2d10+10, because that is the section of the damage the spell is responsible for. So, no, the base damage of Swift Quiver is either 21 or 19. Because the rest of it has nothing to do with Swift Quiver itself.I like how you want to criticize the "don't forget's" on my options, while ignoring things like the fact that the Dual-Wielding is using only a single feat, but to use a heavy Crossbow with GWM is going to require two feats (GWM and XBow Expert). Vex may be redundant, but Nick isn't, and a character may choose to also have a ranged mastery. After all, there is nothing wrong with being a switch hitter. But sure, if you have built to be a heavy crossbow ranger, taking two feats to make that viable, then at level 8 when you are dealing 2d10+4+6 damage, and the the Dual-Wielder is dealing 4d6+20... oh wait, that is more damage. So you actually need to build the ranger to take advantage of swift quiver, then spend a long time dealing less damage, until level 17. All to prove the "point" that Hunter's Mark won't be useful?That isn't quite how I would characterize that. It is 3d10 to any enemies in the moving zone. You might be able to get multiple people with that, in which case sure, if multiple people fail the save it is more damage. Of course, if they make the save it is zero damage. And if you are dealing with a few scattered targets, the focus fire of Hunter's Mark might be more effective.I am not saying this now, I've always thought this about your exploit. I just didn't feel like bothering to argue with you about it, because it doesn't matter, and I knew you had debated this at length before and not changed your mind.Nope, "giving up" your 4th attack to cast hunter's mark nets you more damage, as I demonstratedBy the time you are making 3 attacks, a 4th is not going to make that much of a difference in your chance to hit once per turn.So two homebrew magical items. Glad this is showing the failure of the design of the base game.You do realize that it is awfully strange how you keep making these very specific characters, while also making them so utterly poorly. You are just meshing together an old build, applying the new things that were part of my discussion on why the design is good, then ignoring how a player might actually make this character if this was their goal.Being effective is pretty key to good class design. The 2014 Monk had tons of flavor and aesthetic... and lacked effectiveness, making it widely disparaged. Sure, the opposite is also bad, but the Ranger doesn't actually lack aesthetics and flavor despite everyone freaking out over a few extra abilities.No it wouldn't. Half your arguments have nothing to do with concentration. And, if you want to say "but a bonus action to get a free stacking damage buff on top of all my other damage buffs..." yeah, that's why they don't do that. Stacking buffs are a dangerous game to start playing. If you weren't acting like having access to Hunter's Mark meant you could do nothing else, I think you would be able to see that much more clearly.</blockquote>

Verification