Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Helping melee combat to be more competitive to ranged.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6988866" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>RE: topic</p><p></p><p>I'm running a game with a rogue ranged focused character and a ranger with ranged focus. The rogue is entirely manageable (they usually get advantage from hiding, and usually get sneak attack, but that's perfectly fine. The ranger, though, I often joke that I have to add more bad guys just to offset the damage put out by the ranger. In reality, it's not to horrible, but she averages 40ish dpr a round since 5th level (magic bow, hunters mark, collossus slayer, 20 dex). The party is now 11th, and the battlemaster fighter is just now reaching something akin to parity in damage output with 3 attacks (he can burn superiority to go higher, of course). He's not max DPR, going shield master, dueling style, and using a pick, so he hits pretty often (often has advantage) and does d8+8 with his magic pick per attack, so right in the same ballpark. The difference I see, though, is that the battlemaster often loses an attack or can't make any attacks at all due to positioning. I don't run many fights at long range for the bows, and most start within 100' (most actually within 50'), but that single round or the need to reposition loses the melee fighter attacks. I'm generous with allowing multiple thrown weapons on a single interaction, so he has javelins (2) and hand axes (2) which he throws, and that helps as he often goads with those to control the field, but the ranger archer almost never cannot attack, so she manages a much better damage throughput. And this is without the ranger having sharpshooter (her choice) at all. IN fact, the ranger is built to do much more than just shoot things, and is a vital part of the exploration pillar of my game. If I had a player bring in an actually optimized ranged character, they would far outpace the others in contribution to combat (I'm a firm adherent that killing monsters faster is almost always the best tactical option due to the way D&D does hitpoints).</p><p></p><p>So, yeah, I see that ranged can be unbalancing to the game, if players feel like they should have fairly equal contributions. If they don't, or you, like me, have players that aren't that interested in optimization, then it's not much of an issue. But if there was a fix put in to "level" the field, then likely my players wouldn't notice. I will say that I nerfed sharpshooter earlier to remove the -5/+10 and add +1 DEX, so that may be why it hasn't been that attractive to my ranger. The rogue took it first chance, though, but mostly because that players HATES taking penalties in any form and would have taken the feat if it did nothing other than eliminate cover OR range penalties -- either would have been sufficient for him to take the feat. Heck, I could have made it two separate feats, one to eliminate cover and the other to eliminate range disad, and he'd have prioritized those feats anyway. </p><p></p><p>Long and short: I clearly see that ranged CAN be very destablizing to a game. Telling people who have this complaint that they should just change the way they play to accomodate the way the ruleset allows this is a bit annoying. Pointing out "hinderances" that really aren't is also a bit annoying. I don't have much of a dog in the fight other than to say that the rules do allow it to be out of hand, but that it's a specific table issue.</p><p></p><p>Don't get me started on the borkedness of sorlocks (a violently broken combination -- xd10+x*5+x*d6+10 ft pushback @ 600 feet range for the cost of 5 levels of Warlock and the spellsniper feat (either pushback OR 600ft range for 2 levels), up to twice a round AND synergizing with other area spells like wall of fire? Nope, not a cool combination.</p><p></p><p>And minions are right out.</p><p></p><p>But those two existing and be more egregious than the martial ranged vs melee disparity doesn't mean the ranged disparity doesn't exist or can't be an issue for some tables. <em>All </em>of them are rules failures.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 6988866, member: 16814"] RE: topic I'm running a game with a rogue ranged focused character and a ranger with ranged focus. The rogue is entirely manageable (they usually get advantage from hiding, and usually get sneak attack, but that's perfectly fine. The ranger, though, I often joke that I have to add more bad guys just to offset the damage put out by the ranger. In reality, it's not to horrible, but she averages 40ish dpr a round since 5th level (magic bow, hunters mark, collossus slayer, 20 dex). The party is now 11th, and the battlemaster fighter is just now reaching something akin to parity in damage output with 3 attacks (he can burn superiority to go higher, of course). He's not max DPR, going shield master, dueling style, and using a pick, so he hits pretty often (often has advantage) and does d8+8 with his magic pick per attack, so right in the same ballpark. The difference I see, though, is that the battlemaster often loses an attack or can't make any attacks at all due to positioning. I don't run many fights at long range for the bows, and most start within 100' (most actually within 50'), but that single round or the need to reposition loses the melee fighter attacks. I'm generous with allowing multiple thrown weapons on a single interaction, so he has javelins (2) and hand axes (2) which he throws, and that helps as he often goads with those to control the field, but the ranger archer almost never cannot attack, so she manages a much better damage throughput. And this is without the ranger having sharpshooter (her choice) at all. IN fact, the ranger is built to do much more than just shoot things, and is a vital part of the exploration pillar of my game. If I had a player bring in an actually optimized ranged character, they would far outpace the others in contribution to combat (I'm a firm adherent that killing monsters faster is almost always the best tactical option due to the way D&D does hitpoints). So, yeah, I see that ranged can be unbalancing to the game, if players feel like they should have fairly equal contributions. If they don't, or you, like me, have players that aren't that interested in optimization, then it's not much of an issue. But if there was a fix put in to "level" the field, then likely my players wouldn't notice. I will say that I nerfed sharpshooter earlier to remove the -5/+10 and add +1 DEX, so that may be why it hasn't been that attractive to my ranger. The rogue took it first chance, though, but mostly because that players HATES taking penalties in any form and would have taken the feat if it did nothing other than eliminate cover OR range penalties -- either would have been sufficient for him to take the feat. Heck, I could have made it two separate feats, one to eliminate cover and the other to eliminate range disad, and he'd have prioritized those feats anyway. Long and short: I clearly see that ranged CAN be very destablizing to a game. Telling people who have this complaint that they should just change the way they play to accomodate the way the ruleset allows this is a bit annoying. Pointing out "hinderances" that really aren't is also a bit annoying. I don't have much of a dog in the fight other than to say that the rules do allow it to be out of hand, but that it's a specific table issue. Don't get me started on the borkedness of sorlocks (a violently broken combination -- xd10+x*5+x*d6+10 ft pushback @ 600 feet range for the cost of 5 levels of Warlock and the spellsniper feat (either pushback OR 600ft range for 2 levels), up to twice a round AND synergizing with other area spells like wall of fire? Nope, not a cool combination. And minions are right out. But those two existing and be more egregious than the martial ranged vs melee disparity doesn't mean the ranged disparity doesn't exist or can't be an issue for some tables. [I]All [/I]of them are rules failures. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Helping melee combat to be more competitive to ranged.
Top