Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="UngeheuerLich" data-source="post: 9466200" data-attributes="member: 59057">Yes. Some things might stand.It is not a mandatory use. But I do agree that at some point removing concentration moght have been ok. Probably at level 20 at least.(Rogues also pay with damage when using cunning strike. At least there is some consistency.)I disagree. As you know.Yes. Hard agree. Ranger should have at least con save proficiency. Ibjad swapped it with dex proficiency. Latest at level 9, where prof bonus raises to 4.Yes. For STRangers, level 1 fighter dip seems strong.I see no problem here powerwise. Probably optimizers had (or have) shown that concentrationless hunter's mark is too strong.Har agree.I think the THP rules are the problem. They should state that features with a duration remove THP after they end. Actually I think ot works that way. But it is at least unclear.But maybe even then the subclass is too strong.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="UngeheuerLich, post: 9466200, member: 59057"] Yes. Some things might stand. It is not a mandatory use. But I do agree that at some point removing concentration moght have been ok. Probably at level 20 at least. (Rogues also pay with damage when using cunning strike. At least there is some consistency.) I disagree. As you know. Yes. Hard agree. Ranger should have at least con save proficiency. Ibjad swapped it with dex proficiency. Latest at level 9, where prof bonus raises to 4. Yes. For STRangers, level 1 fighter dip seems strong. I see no problem here powerwise. Probably optimizers had (or have) shown that concentrationless hunter's mark is too strong. Har agree. I think the THP rules are the problem. They should state that features with a duration remove THP after they end. Actually I think ot works that way. But it is at least unclear. But maybe even then the subclass is too strong. [/QUOTE]

Verification