Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 7161476" data-attributes="member: 6787650">Dude. I picked foes who get Misty Step as a bonus action. (And I picked them because I happen to find them cool, and because it's a realistic challenge that I would actually give to a PC and which would be interestingly difficult for both sides.) If I were trying for a one-sided example I would have picked Slaads or Chuuls or dinosaurs or something, and then the offensive-focused PC would just lose even harder. But that's the kind of one-sided fight that isn't even worth playing out at the table, so I'm not going to use it as an example.First you write:Then you try to support that with:Are you even listening to yourself? First you claim that the EK Sharpshooter is &quot;subpar compared to most other builds,&quot; comparable to Valor Bards(!). Then you try to back that up by naming... a bunch of fighters with comparable or worse damage (3 worse, 1 slightly better), and a Ranger. So in the end, you back up a claim about &quot;most other builds&quot; with a bunch of highly-specialized builds, only one of which even succeeds at making the EK look &quot;subpar.&quot; (And the poor Ranger can't maintain his relative superiority, unfortunately--for Ranger, level 5 is as good as it ever gets.)All you're doing here is proving my point and showing conclusively why a purely offensive focus doesn't pay dividends.What a coincidence! I didn't claim that it stops at level 5, and you don't agree (with whom?) that it stops at level 5. Wow, what are the odds of both of those things being true simultaneously?Yet again you're attacking a fabrication made out of your own misapprehensions and false assumptions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 7161476, member: 6787650"] Dude. I picked foes who get Misty Step as a bonus action. (And I picked them because I happen to find them cool, and because it's a realistic challenge that I would actually give to a PC and which would be interestingly difficult for both sides.) If I were trying for a one-sided example I would have picked Slaads or Chuuls or dinosaurs or something, and then the offensive-focused PC would just lose even harder. But that's the kind of one-sided fight that isn't even worth playing out at the table, so I'm not going to use it as an example. First you write: Then you try to support that with: Are you even listening to yourself? First you claim that the EK Sharpshooter is "subpar compared to most other builds," comparable to Valor Bards(!). Then you try to back that up by naming... a bunch of fighters with comparable or worse damage (3 worse, 1 slightly better), and a Ranger. So in the end, you back up a claim about "most other builds" with a bunch of highly-specialized builds, only one of which even succeeds at making the EK look "subpar." (And the poor Ranger can't maintain his relative superiority, unfortunately--for Ranger, level 5 is as good as it ever gets.) All you're doing here is proving my point and showing conclusively why a purely offensive focus doesn't pay dividends. What a coincidence! I didn't claim that it stops at level 5, and you don't agree (with whom?) that it stops at level 5. Wow, what are the odds of both of those things being true simultaneously? Yet again you're attacking a fabrication made out of your own misapprehensions and false assumptions. [/QUOTE]

Verification