Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9442970" data-attributes="member: 7030563">Yes the advantage offered by the 17th level Ranger ability absolutely 100% is factually redundant with Vex - the only applicable mastery on light, dex based weapons that can be used more than once a turn.That is what I stated and what I replied to.  You are wrong.I have played them where it happened to and as I pointed out I have seen that sewt up work.  To reiterate what I said - it does not work MOST OF THE TIME.I do not believe it has worked most of the time on Rangers you have seen try this.But on a Ranger at high level you almost always do have a bonus action that can have an immediate impact.In this corner case sure - where you don't have such a bonus action available, where you have an unspent use of Hunter's Mark without using a spell slot, when the spell you just cast is not concentration ..... it can be a good move despite the fact it probably won't work, and in some cases it will work .,. just not most of them.You are presenting this as a normal, viable tactic for a high level Ranger who is casting a spell with thier action when it is not.This is the equivalent of saying my Ranger can dodge instead of attacking or casting a spell.... I absolutely can and in some corner cases that is a viable, helpful decision.  It is not a normal viable choice and Hunter's Mark is not a normal, viable choice as a bonus action when you are casting another spell as an action.Yes it does.  A Hand crossbow has both the light and vex properties.  It works the same as any other light weapons.  It works for two-weapon-fighting and works with the Crossbow expert feat and other light weapons you want to wield.I may not understand what you mean, but what you are "saying" as in writing on the thread is incorrect.That is not what I said.  To reiterate what I said regarding sticks (not specifically pointy sticks either):"[It is a bad] for any Rangers that don't want to hit it with a stick"This is a factually true statement.  Hunter's Mark is a terrible, terrible spell to cast if you are not going to attack and take advantage of the damage boost.All rangers are spellcasters as a class and any Ranger that casts a spell, including Hunter's Mark is a spell caster.This is not a difficult concept to understand.Because it is a fact.  Any class design that requires use of a specific single spell for four separate class features is a bad design.I keep stating it like a fact because it is a fact.Ok just have one like at the end of my last post.This lets a player who wants to use HM continue to use HM and it lets a player who doesn't use any other spell with those 4 abilities .... and it takes up nothe same space as the current abilities.Ok, but you are still wrong.Not in the post I qouted you didn't what you said was: "I also notice that of the very few spells you mentioned that deal damage ..."30% is more than "very few"A SPELL they offered more than one option it would not be a class designed to focus on A SPELL.Offering a choice of spells to use those abilities with or alternatively making the ability generic so you could choose any spell to use would both be better alternatives.Sometime I wonder if you really truely are trying and failing to understand or if you are just trying to be difficult.More different spells you could choose yes.  That way you would not be tied to one spell on any PC you build.Each spell has different problems, advantages, uses and mechanics but you would choose the spell that matched what you desired thematically and/or mechanically.Another issue with Hunter's Mark is the nearly complete lack of thematic support with it.  Aside from being weak it is also very bland.The bad design is tying the class abilities to one spell which the player has no say on.  The problem is not tying a specific character to Hunter's Mark.   Offering players the choice of spells to choose on their character would be a much better class design mechanic ... as is done with the Wizard's spell mastery.Whether I like it or not is completely irrelevant to this discussion, it is a bad class design.  Making it another spell with no choices might be a little more suited to my tastes than HM, but it would still be a bad class design.To make it a good class design you would need to offer a choice of spells, or make it generic so I could choose any spell to use those abilities with.  I offered an example of the latter to alleviate your concerns on length.</blockquote>

Verification