NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6991296" data-attributes="member: 6785785">In the example provided, the gnoll has what most would consider a better melee attack because it has better to hit, can do more damage if it uses two hands, and if it drops an enemey, it can Rampage for a bonus move and a bite attack. However, due to the Spirit Guardians spell, it makes far more sense for the gnoll to use its inferior ranged attack so that it can avoid being affected by the spell, and on a hit it has a chance to break the cleric's concentration, which would drop the spell, and then allow its allies to close for melee. The thing is that ranged superiority is not a binary situation. It's not either "ranged is better" or "ranged isn't better". As the thread has shown there are a variety of opinions about it, and a variety of factors that influence it. It's so situational, and varies from table to table. I believe people who say that ranged combat is superior in their games. However, I also believe people who don't share that opinion about their own games. I actually fall into this category myself; I don't experience it in my games because my players don't necessarily care to focus on ranged combat, and the one or two PCs that do, while highly effective, don't radically outshine anyone else. For folks who do find ranged combat to be superior, there are many ways that it can be addressed. Acting as if only altering the rules is a viable option is limiting. There are environmental factors that can be used (let's say a battle on a hilltop marked with old ruins where pillars of stone and crumbling walls block sight lines from afar), and there are tactics by the enemies (even if they are as simple as not charging into a damaging spell when a ranged attack that could end the spell is available, but there are also more complex options). I would also say that you could try and shift the players' focus from DPR as the end-all-be-all. My guess is that is a really big factor in a lot of this. Maybe place some focus on other areas of the game than combat. Maybe have the decisions players make in social interaction matter just as much. Maybe explain to the players that no matter how much they min-max, the DM can still design encounters to threaten them.....so maybe min-max isn't the key to character design? This is probably the most difficult method that has been put forward because it relies on both the DM and the players shifting their thinking of the game and how they play it, but it would likely have the biggest impact. Then there is of course the alteration of feats or other game mechanics that people can use to try and balance the ranged combat out. That is certainly an option as well. I think the point is that it is not the only option.</blockquote>

Verification