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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Whithers" data-source="post: 7140196" data-attributes="member: 6883963">nswanson27 and Saelorn,I am answering both of your posts together.I have been watching a lot of online play to get more familiar with 5E as I am leaving 3.5 Pathfinder.  And yes, I notice that a rogue using daggers can opportunistically out damage the ranger regularly.  First noticed this with Critical Role, but have spotted it elsewhere also.I don't see these making up the difference in damage, and they are certainly not dramatic for story perposes.  But I also understand why this would not be desirable.  I can agree with this argument.I was considering adapting the Linguring Injury Table on DMG 272, or generating a conditional effects table.  I can understand your argument.HP bloat affects all weapons.  The difference to me is that originally the only actual HP of the character were those of the first HD at 1st level.  All HP above that were not health points, but were a sort of exhaustion points.  They represented the characters ability to outlast, dodge, etc. in 1E.  Real physical damage didn't take place until the hero was worn down to his last HD.  I don't remember which book or article I read this in 40 years ago, but my rulings as DM were based on this as far back as 1977-78.My issue is somewhat with both.  The ranger class has some amusing features but is overall weak at being ranged, and certainly nothing special.  The Beast Master has always been a joke because players don't want their pet to die.  A real Beast Master treats his "pets" as an expendable and replaceable asset.  Keep them healthy, keep them trained, use them, and replace them.  Those who play "pet keepers" do not approach their pets with the cold calculating efficiency of Suntzu.  Plus pets are almost always too weak to be of any real value - they are almost always a negative.But it is also because of the loss of dramatic effect.  When Bard of the Lakemen kills Smaug, the as yet undamaged ancient dragon, with one arrow it is a highlight in the book and the movie.  When a sniper kills the enemy leader with a single shot at 300 meters, it is a dramatic effect.  In game, unless I as the DM decide to simply make a ranged character's sniping shot a clear kill shot by utterly ignoring the rules this dramatic plot point cannot exist in game.  Unless I specifically arrange for the guards along the parapet to be 1st level pathetics with minor amounts of HP, then the ranged character taking out the guard in the tower before the assault on the palisade, then this plot device is not available in story.  I shouldn't have to sprinkle kobolds about the battlefield just so the ranged characters can actually get kills.  Because the ranger is generally, as it name implies, ranged this weakness in the story telling structure is more obvious there.In melee combat this is less important because the dramatic blow by blow fight between Don Diego de la Vega and Captain Esteban Pasquale, or between Robin Hood and Sir Guy is about the tension of the scene.  Then there is the infamous fight between Inigo Montoya and the Dread Pirate Roberts.  Wondering how or if the hero will win adds intrigue to the plot device of the drawn out combat.  None of these fights are by any means realistic, but the make great heroic fantasy.</blockquote>

Verification