Human variant archery fighter- did I lock myself into a subpar race?

[Gladius Legis]

I also find the Gloom Stalker 3 to be a more reliable at-will alpha strike feature than the Assassin 3. Gloom Stalker's doesn't rely on initiative to work, and also doesn't require stealth/surprise, so it plays nicer with any party composition.

Not to mention Gloom Stalker's additional attack works wonders as another force multiplier for Sharpshooter, and gets doubled when you Action Surge.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think a Ranger multiclass is more optimal than Rogue for a character like a Hand Crossbow Gunslinger with a high number of attacks per round. Especially from a damage standpoint. (Unless you're planning to take 5 or more levels of the alternate class, in which case Rogue starts to pull ahead.)

The Ranger's Hunter's Mark spell applies 1d6 extra damage to each of your hand crossbow attacks each turn, not just one attack like Sneak Attack. It also doesn't rely on having an adjacent ally or Advantage, like Sneak Attack. Though Hunter's Mark is not without some minor flaws, namely that you can't use your Crossbow Expert Bonus Action attack during the round when you first cast it or a round when you're moving it to a different target, it only affects one target at a time so you have to focus your fire until that enemy goes down, and it's a Concentration spell that could potentially be disrupted. So Hunter's Mark is best utilized when fighting one or two tougher enemies, rather than hordes of weaker enemies.

The Rogue's Cunning Action, which is one of its prime lower-level abilities, isn't as useful for a character that relies on an additional Crossbow Expert attack, which is what you'll want to be spending your Bonus Action on during most turns.

And Ranger has other spells than Hunter's Mark that can give you some additional utility.

Rogue is better. Competing bonus actions and lower accuracy higher damage attacks don’t work well together with hunters mark. Hunters mark shouldn’t be used on a hand crossbow + SS archer IMO

 

[Alice Mur]

of course you can!

 

[FrogReaver]

I also find the Gloom Stalker 3 to be a more reliable at-will alpha strike feature than the Assassin 3. Gloom Stalker's doesn't rely on initiative to work, and also doesn't require stealth/surprise, so it plays nicer with any party composition.

Not to mention Gloom Stalker's additional attack works wonders as another force multiplier for Sharpshooter, and gets doubled when you Action Surge.

If the argument is that the Gloom Stalker ability is more consistent than the assassain abilities I don't disagree. But +2d6 sneak attack and a good chance of advantage on your first turn (just by having initiative higher than any given enemy) is better for damage on average even though there's a few fights where you won't get advantage.

 

[Gladius Legis]

If the argument is that the Gloom Stalker ability is more consistent than the assassain abilities I don't disagree. But +2d6 sneak attack and a good chance of advantage on your first turn (just by having initiative higher than any given enemy) is better for damage on average even though there's a few fights where you won't get advantage.

Assassin 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, longbow, beat initiative, no surprise:
.91*14.5 = 13.2
Gloom Stalker 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, longbow, no advantage:
.7*(7.5+12) = 13.7

Assassin 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, Crossbow Expert, beat initiative, no surprise:
.91*2*6.5 + (1-(1-.7)^4)*7 = 18.8
Gloom Stalker 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, Crossbow Expert, no advantage:
.7*(2*6.5 + 11) = 16.8

So Assassin is slightly more damaging if you're a Crossbow Expert. Gloom Stalker if you're longbow. But Gloom Stalker always works, while Assassin is going to lose initiative about 30-35% of the time until he can take the Alert feat.

And then at the level the Assassin gets to take Alert, the Gloom Stalker is either taking +2 DEX or Sharpshooter ...

 

[FrogReaver]

Assassin 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, longbow, beat initiative, no surprise:
.91*14.5 = 13.2
Gloom Stalker 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, longbow, no advantage:
.7*(7.5+12) = 13.7

Assassin 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, Crossbow Expert, beat initiative, no surprise:
.91*2*6.5 + (1-(1-.7)^4)*7 = 18.8
Gloom Stalker 3/Fighter 1, Archery style, Crossbow Expert, no advantage:
.7*(2*6.5 + 11) = 16.8

So Assassin is slightly more damaging if you're a Crossbow Expert. Gloom Stalker if you're longbow. But Gloom Stalker always works, while Assassin is going to lose initiative about 30-35% of the time until he can take the Alert feat.

And then at the level the Assassin gets to take Alert, the Gloom Stalker is either taking +2 DEX or Sharpshooter ...

I have no idea what you are comparing. Your not even looking at level 5+ fighter.

 

[Gladius Legis]

I have no idea what you are comparing. Your not even looking at level 5+ fighter.

It's pretty obvious what I'm comparing. I even labeled them. If it's not obvious to you, it's because you choose not to acknowledge it.

 

[Yunru]

It's pretty obvious what I'm comparing. I even labeled them. If it's not obvious to you, it's because you choose not to acknowledge it.

You've labelled nothing but the classes.
There's something in there that could be accuracy, but that'd be silly because accuracy varies a lot (and thus one single value can't be used).

Edit: That wasn't supposed to sound nearly as hostile

 

[FrogReaver]

It's pretty obvious what I'm comparing. I even labeled them. If it's not obvious to you, it's because you choose not to acknowledge it.

I think [MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION] explained it better. The comparison you made wasn’t well enough defined or at the proper levels it needs to be at in order to be relevant. Why did you take that specific comparison when you could have easily made one at the appropriate levels?

 

[Gladius Legis]

You've labelled nothing but the classes.
There's something in there that could be accuracy, but that'd be silly because accuracy varies a lot (and thus one single value can't be used).

Since when are we supposed to calculate stuff at different ACs for everything? A baseline 60-65% suffices because that's kind of the average expectation taken over time. Sure, there's variance from enemy to enemy, but over time it averages out to 60-65%. Archery style would bump that to 70% (which I used) or 75%.

Different ACs are helpful when determining something more specific like the breakpoint where -5/+10 starts/stops being optimal. In a general comparison between builds, it's not as useful.