Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aulirophile" data-source="post: 5416832" data-attributes="member: 86312">Play like an idiot.Die.Reroll a striker, let someone else take over being the controller (which can be a pretty important job depending on your DM and how good you are at it). Even optimized Genasi Blaster Wizards and Tiefling Fire Wizards don't really compete with Rangers at the same level of optimization (no one competes with Rangers, though). If you want to do damage, you are basically playing the wrong class. That difference is very normal.@Mad: TS gives you two chances to trigger quarry and two chances to crit, TS is much further ahead then that analysis suggests. Now Careful Attack (+2 to hit) is competitive.... at first level, barely.10.84 for Twin Strike (including misses, crits, and quarry triggering) vs 11.60 for careful attack. With a longbow and 20 dex. 12.40 vs 12.24 with a Greatbow. At level 2 if you take Expertise and have a magic weapon it is 16.06 for TS vs 14.80 for Careful Attack. So assuming 20 Dex and and a Longbow, Careful Attack is a tiny bit ahead at level 1. And only at level 1. Reasonably speaking though, Greatbow proficiency is going to be right up there for feats at level 1 for a pure-class ranged Ranger. That is at-will DPR against an even level monster, and again includes crits, misses, quarry triggering, and assumes both attacks have the same stats, feat support, and magic items backing them up. But really anything will make TS pull ahead. The feat to make Quarry d8s is better for TS then it is for Careful Attack. Ditto Weapon Focus, etc.It goes without saying that Nimble Strike is garbage for damage by comparison, since Careful Attack has +2 to attack on it and is barely competitive at level 1 and only if you use a sub-optimal weapon. Whoever thought it was even close was.... very wrong.</blockquote>

Verification