Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 7525880" data-attributes="member: 6795602">At least you stopped talking about GWM and SS. That’s a start I suppose.&nbsp; Of course it’s a given that in any given situation ranged or melee can be better. Thanks for stating the obvious. The question is that if you have a team with melee PC’s And ranged PC’s, would it be better to increase the number of melee PC’s or ranged PC’s in order to prevent PC death. All ranged and all melee parties were never the question as we all agree that’s just not how d&amp;d gets played. There is always a mix of range and melee. We also all tend to agree that the melee pc’s tend to take the brunt of attacks.&nbsp; The most likely case for enemy focus fire on a PC is having 1 melee PC engaging in combat while the rest of the ranged PC’s stay back as far as possible.&nbsp; That generally places melee enemies with nothing to attack except the single melee PC.&nbsp; That’s much worse, in terms of chance for of death than having the chance for that damage to be spread around 2 melee PC’s, and using some basic tactics to increase that chance.&nbsp; What I’m saying above is obvious right?&nbsp; So then any discussion about ranged vs melee has to not only look at how the PC’s damage the enemies but also how the enemies damage the PC’s.&nbsp; That’s something your ranged is superior side ignores. You do that in many ways such as by looking at ranged only parties. Such as by only ever looking at encounters starting at very favorable distances for ranged heavy parties. Etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 7525880, member: 6795602"] At least you stopped talking about GWM and SS. That’s a start I suppose. Of course it’s a given that in any given situation ranged or melee can be better. Thanks for stating the obvious. The question is that if you have a team with melee PC’s And ranged PC’s, would it be better to increase the number of melee PC’s or ranged PC’s in order to prevent PC death. All ranged and all melee parties were never the question as we all agree that’s just not how d&d gets played. There is always a mix of range and melee. We also all tend to agree that the melee pc’s tend to take the brunt of attacks. The most likely case for enemy focus fire on a PC is having 1 melee PC engaging in combat while the rest of the ranged PC’s stay back as far as possible. That generally places melee enemies with nothing to attack except the single melee PC. That’s much worse, in terms of chance for of death than having the chance for that damage to be spread around 2 melee PC’s, and using some basic tactics to increase that chance. What I’m saying above is obvious right? So then any discussion about ranged vs melee has to not only look at how the PC’s damage the enemies but also how the enemies damage the PC’s. That’s something your ranged is superior side ignores. You do that in many ways such as by looking at ranged only parties. Such as by only ever looking at encounters starting at very favorable distances for ranged heavy parties. Etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification