D&D (2024) How to simply fix Ranger in 2024.

[Horwath]

looks at the 2024 DMG and Monster with updated encounter rules

Wait. We don't have that yet.

I guess everyone who is playing something better than a champion fighter with no feats is over optimized for current D&D still.

There is a reason that CR system was the worst thing in 5E.
game was build with no complexity in mind.
All complexity was added by players and then followed by other books later on.

I hope that new MM is with powergamers only in mind.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

There is a reason that CR system was the worst thing in 5E.
game was build with no complexity in mind.
All complexity was added by players and then followed by other books later on.

I hope that new MM is with powergamers only in mind.

I hope that is not the case.

 

[Horwath]

I hope that is not the case.

why not?

you can easily tone down/simplify encounters, it's much harder to make them more complicated and keep balance.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

why not?

Because power gamers can adapt more easily than inexperienced DMs

you can easily tone down/simplify encounters, it's much harder to make them more complicated and keep balance.

I don't think so.

What we need is better guidelines/tools for adventuring days.

If people can just long rest, long rest, long rest, the game is way easier by default.

 

[Horwath]

Because power gamers can adapt more easily than inexperienced DMs

As I said, it's much easier to tone down encounter than to create new complicated mechanics.

I don't think so.

we agree to disagree

What we need is better guidelines/tools for adventuring days.

that is 100% true and part of the whole CR fiasco from 2014.

If people can just long rest, long rest, long rest, the game is way easier by default.

that is outside adventure creation but more in DM/player agreement.

maybe all abilities should be short rest with rest after every encounter and that would be easier to balance.

 

[ECMO3]

Never said it is not simple. Just the assumption that enemies take a few rounds to kill.

Then tell us your assumptions. How many rounds and enemies are common in your games when you don't have to use bonus actions to move Hunter's Mark?

I think there is a reason you won't define those assumptions and I think that reason is it won't support your position if you do.

Yes. But TWF does not necessarily.

This has nothing at all to do with how often you need to use a bonus action to move Hunter's Mark.

This is an entirely different discussion with as you noted many more assumptions than what I made.

Whether you use greatswords, or dual wield pistols or use a longbow or dual wield nick weapons or use truestrike to attack, or make unarmed attacks ..... none of that is relevant to the discussion on how often you need to move Hunter's mark.

Yeah. So you did not claim that favoured foe is better. Try read the whole communication again.

They don't have to get consitent damage. Only more than from favoured foe.

What does Favored Foe, something that is not even RAW any more have to do with how often you need to move your Hunter's Mark?

I don't mind comparing this Ranger to other Rangers but I don't think I posted about FF at all in this thread.

And if you are switching targets a lot. Use a different spell.

How other spells work is not relevant to how Hunter's Mark works.

When you use Hunter's Mark you need to move the mark regularly. This is the bottom line.

To paraphrase another poster - Unless you are fighting a boss you move it every other round best case.

In addition to being consistent with my opinions and experience, that is implicitly supported by the you tube videos I referenced, and the math I provided with associated assumptions.

Data please.

I have other posters on this forum, multiple videos of you tubers, and with math (with associated assumptions).

Now what data have you provided exactly?

So your limited view is better than mine?

I think I have way more experience playing and DMing with PCs using Hex or Hunter's Mark if you truly believe those spells do not need to be moved on to new creatures often in combat.

That is some kind of bias.

Everyone is biased by their experiences as well as by their lack of experience.

Not a lot. As do you. I am extrapolating from my games as you do. Again.

I have played 14 sessions using the 2024 rules since we got them 3 weeks ago. This includes 4 sessions using 2024 characters (i.e. built with the new rules) with Hex or Hunter's Mark and 8 sessions with a 2014 characters using Hex in the new rules construct including as both a DM and a player.

I said that I expect 2024 favoured enemy hunter's mark to outpace favoured foe easily in games

Where did you say this on this thread?

That is certainly not what I have been replying to here. You are quoting me, but I think that is a discussion you are having with someone else.

I have been replying to your claim that players do not need to move Hunter's Mark regularly.

So please. Get your facts straight. Get your math straight. Learn how to actually do analyses and then com back.

I have my facts straight and at least I am providing some level of analysis, data, sources and math to support my statements instead of just making claims.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Then tell us your assumptions. How many rounds and enemies are common in your games when you don't have to use bonus actions to move Hunter's Mark?

I think there is a reason you won't define those assumptions and I think that reason is it won't support your position if you do.



This has nothing at all to do with how often you need to use a bonus action to move Hunter's Mark.

This is an entirely different discussion with as you noted many more assumptions than what I made.

Whether you use greatswords, or dual wield pistols or use a longbow or dual wield nick weapons or use truestrike to attack, or make unarmed attacks ..... none of that is relevant to the discussion on how often you need to move Hunter's mark.





What does Favored Foe, something that is not even RAW any more have to do with how often you need to move your Hunter's Mark?

The whole discussion started with someone claiming favoured foe is better. Because they can use up all uses in a single turn.
I said, if that is all you get out of it, it was no needed to begin with.

I said, that in difficult encounters, hunter's mark sticks a bit longer.
Except when everyone focus fires.

In 2014 focus fire was easier, because ranged did more damage. In melee it is harder.
Also, with TWF and nick, hunter's mark pays dividents faster than without it.
For low level play, twice as fast.
So even if you need to switch it every other turn, you already got 4d6 damage out of it. Which is nice for a resource free bonus action.
And even if you just drop it, youbare doing ok.

I don't mind comparing this Ranger to other Rangers but I don't think I posted about FF at all in this thread.



How other spells work is not relevant to how Hunter's Mark works.

When you use Hunter's Mark you need to move the mark regularly. This is the bottom line.

To paraphrase another poster - Unless you are fighting a boss you move it every other round best case.

In addition to being consistent with my opinions and experience, that is implicitly supported by the you tube videos I referenced, and the math I provided with associated assumptions.





I have other posters on this forum, multiple videos of you tubers, and with math (with associated assumptions).

Now what data have you provided exactly?

I have my own experience of playing 5e for 10 years with many different people.

I think I have way more experience playing and DMing with PCs using Hex or Hunter's Mark if you truly believe those spells do not need to be moved on to new creatures often in combat.

Bollocks. You are still not seeing the whole thing. But you do you.

Everyone is biased by their experiences as well as by their lack of experience.



I have played 14 sessions using the 2024 rules since we got them 3 weeks ago. This includes 4 sessions using 2024 characters (i.e. built with the new rules) with Hex or Hunter's Mark and 8 sessions with a 2014 characters using Hex in the new rules construct including as both a DM and a player.

Which stays irrelevant. As your games are obviously highly tactical optimized.

Where did you say this on this thread?

That is certainly not what I have been replying to here. You are quoting me, but I think that is a discussion you are having with someone else.

Ok. That was the context from my first post you reacted to.

I have been replying to your claim that players do not need to move Hunter's Mark regularly.




I have my facts straight and at least I am providing some level of analysis, data, sources and math to support my statements instead of just making claims.

I am done. All Infos are laid out already.
Bye.

 

[ECMO3]

The whole discussion started with someone claiming favoured foe is better.

The back and forth you and I are having started when you claimed Hunter's Mark does not use bonus actions except on easy fights against numerous enemies.

Favored Foe had nothing to do with it.

I said, that in difficult encounters, hunter's mark sticks a bit longer.

No what you said was:

"If you have to switch hunter's mark over and over again, that means your targets are dying over and over again. Which means the fight was not that hard to begin with or you just marked the wrong guys."

You regularly have to switch Hunter's Mark over and over again in the vast majority of fights if you want to get damage out of it. as noted by Treantmonk, DNDShorts and Pack Tactics.

In 2014 focus fire was easier, because ranged did more damage. In melee it is harder.

Focusing on the guy you have marked is harder in melee as well.

So even if you need to switch it every other turn, you already got 4d6 damage out of it. Which is nice for a resource free bonus action.
And even if you just drop it, youbare doing ok.

It can be nice, but it depends on what you gave up with that bonus action, it assumes you hit all 4 times and if you are talking about melee it assumes you can make it to all targets you need to hit.

As your games are obviously highly tactical optimized.

Not all of them and while some of my games are optimized, my posts on this thread have not been. On the contrary YOU are the optimizer on this thread.

In your defense of Hunter's Mark, you do not use a generic Ranger example using generic weapons. When you mention 4d6 damage over 2 rounds above, or earlier when you noted how nick allows you to take your light attack without a bonus action. You are talking about an optimized build using Light weapons and Nick in melee, and it is a build that is optimized specifically around using Hunter's Mark tactically.

So making specific tactically-focused build choices to make the Hunter's Mark spell more effective is not optimizing, but me saying you need to move Hunter's Mark regularly means that my games are highly tactically optimized? I think you have that backwards!

Ok. That was the context from my first post you reacted to.

No it was't. There was nothing about Favored Foe in the first post of yours I replied to or the second. And I don't think anyone had mentioned it on this thread at all at that point (although I did not read every post).

D&D (2024) - How to simply fix Ranger in 2024.

What people forget: If you have to switch hunter's mark over and over again, that means your targets are dying over and over again. Which means the fight was not that hard to begin with or you just marked the wrong guys.

www.enworld.org

I am done. All Infos are laid out already.

No you still have not provided your assumptions on how many enemies are in an average combat and how many rounds it takes. You have made sweeping statements with no evidence to back them up.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The back and forth you and I are having started when you claimed Hunter's Mark does not use bonus actions except on easy fights against numerous enemies.

Favored Foe had nothing to do with it.





No what you said was:

"If you have to switch hunter's mark over and over again, that means your targets are dying over and over again. Which means the fight was not that hard to begin with or you just marked the wrong guys."

You regularly have to switch Hunter's Mark over and over again in the vast majority of fights if you want to get damage out of it. as noted by Treantmonk, DNDShorts and Pack Tactics.



Focusing on the guy you have marked is harder in melee as well.



It can be nice, but it depends on what you gave up with that bonus action, it assumes you hit all 4 times and if you are talking about melee it assumes you can make it to all targets you need to hit.




Not all of them and while some of my games are optimized, my posts on this thread have not been. On the contrary YOU are the optimizer on this thread.

In your defense of Hunter's Mark, you do not use a generic Ranger example using generic weapons. When you mention 4d6 damage over 2 rounds above, or earlier when you noted how nick allows you to take your light attack without a bonus action. You are talking about an optimized build using Light weapons and Nick in melee, and it is a build that is optimized specifically around using Hunter's Mark tactically.

So making specific tactically-focused build choices to make the Hunter's Mark spell more effective is not optimizing, but me saying you need to move Hunter's Mark regularly means that my games are highly tactically optimized? I think you have that backwards!



No it was't. There was nothing about Favored Foe in the first post of yours I replied to or the second. And I don't think anyone had mentioned it on this thread at all at that point (although I did not read every post).

D&D (2024) - How to simply fix Ranger in 2024.

What people forget: If you have to switch hunter's mark over and over again, that means your targets are dying over and over again. Which means the fight was not that hard to begin with or you just marked the wrong guys.

www.enworld.org

No you still have not provided your assumptions on how many enemies are in an average combat and how many rounds it takes. You have made sweeping statements with no evidence to back them up.

Bye

 

[Corinnguard]

What exactly is the benefit of replicating a spell with a non spell that is a spell in disguise.

Unlike Hunter's Mark, the 2014 Favored Foe feature doesn't cost you an action or a bonus action to use, there is no apparent range limit so you can mark someone who is more than 90 feet away, you can use it silently (no verbal component), and while it allows to add an extra 1d4 on a hit initially, the damage scales up (1d6 at 6th level, 1d8 at 14th level). Also, the number of times the 2014 Favored Foe can be used is tied to your character's PB and it doesn't need a spell slot.

Hunter's Mark is good if your mark decides to flee the scene and you need to track them down well after the fight has ended. But how often does this happen in an adventure? I could see it happening if the DM wants your mark to live and fight another day with regards to the plot or subplot with an adventure. Outside of that, not so much.

Favored Foe otoh is a replacement for Favored Enemy, which requires a particular monster type to be present in whatever adventure you're in. If the monster type is present, Favored Enemy is a nice feature to have. If the monster type isn't present, then it becomes a wasted ability. Btw, Level Up actually fixed this problem by allowing you to change out whatever monster type you selected per long rest. So, one day Dragons are your favored enemy, and then the next it could be some other monster type. Favored Enemy goes by the name of Studied Adversary in Level Up.
Anyhow, with it's one minute duration (with concentration), Favored Foe is more useful in an actual fight where you want to take down whoever you've marked.

Level Up's Hunter's Target works much like Hunter's Mark except that it requires no verbal component, it doesn't require you to give up a spell slot to extend the duration (it goes up automatically to 8 hours at 9th level) and it gives you a +1 to hit an opponent. The only downside for this particular feature is that you can only use once per long rest.

Currently my Bugbear Ranger/Rogue is using the Favored Foe option instead of Hunter's Mark.