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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 6983134" data-attributes="member: 12731">Sorry but this is an example illustrating how easy it is to derail the subject. Why would a party with ranged builds run into melee? The playstyle line - I call relativism.  [MENTION=6774887]Ashkelon[/MENTION], my advice is to stick to the basics. I don't see how the pit fight against Gronks can help people see the validity in the "ranged trumps melee" claim. I have realized it's come out of a "ranged does melee just as good melee". But truthfully, all we can say is that ranged does melee good enough, meaning "without any significant disadvantages". Obviously a mele-specific build can do stuff a CE/SS fighter can only dream of. The path out of that pit fight is to focus on the fact that a ranged party will have much fewer pit fights, and that the Gronks of the Monster Manual will dish out exactly zero damage* while they are not in melee.The point transcends simpler DPR calculations. It's more the realization that ranged combat kind of breaks the game. The MM is clearly designed on the assumption that melee combat will be commonplace. By not running with this assumption you can essentially shortcircuit the model of the game.A ranged party can almost always focus their entire firepower on the same foe. This effiency simply doesn't come up in any DPR calculation, no matter how detailed.A ranged party sustains, as I said, much less damage. This efficiency factors even less into DPR, yet has a huge impact on play and percieved party power.If you want to object that sounds close to cheating, I am the first to agree. It feels exactly like cheating. It's akin to "don't bring a sword to a gunfight". Bringing ranged tactics to a melee fight is essentially cheating - it's using the modern genre to break the fantasy genre. *) Going purely by the name here; not sure what race your Gronks are...</blockquote>

Verification