Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9025402" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Okay, but this is just... not true. Maybe in 3.X, sure, but in 5e? In 5e the fighter with a bow between 5th and 9th level does 2d8+10. This is without subclasses. And fighter subclasses could range from entirely beside the point for damage (eldritch knight), minor passive benefits (champion) or... burst damage like the Battlemaster. The Ranger does 2d8+10... but then can cast Hunter's Mark. And yes, this is a spell, but it isn't "burst" damage. Hunter's Mark lasts a minimum of an hour, and can be upcast to last FAR longer. Most ranger's I know keep it up pretty consistently, and the OD&D playtest ranger doesn't even need concentration. So, for 1 hour, nonconcentration, the Ranger can deal 2d8+10+2d6. And every single ranger subclass (except the Gloomstalker) has an ability to add 1d8 damage to this every round. Meaning that, for 1 hour, nonconcentration they can do 3d8+10+2d6. Consistently. For a single spell slot. Sure, if we want to have dozens of fights spread over multiple hours, the fighter can still do 2d8+10 every turn... but so can the ranger, and many of them are going to be doing 3d8+10 per turn. So this idea that the fighter deals more damage consistently... fails. Until level 11. Post level 11 then they can do this, and the ranger falls behind. But this is why the ranger needs a good level 11 ability.No? The only way they "kind of stink" is if you lose concentration on Hunter's Mark a lot, which is no longer an issue they will have. But I've seen a lot of melee rangers, and they are kind of good. Especially at low levels. We had one we called "The Blender" because they would deal out 6d6+1d8+12 damage every turn.As did all top melee builds. Even Paladins.No? Or at least, they would have the same melee feats as the fighters and rangers, so they would exist in melee for the exact same reason. Rangers are actually getting buffed in melee compared to before. I mean, sure, the ranged paladin doesn't exist because it sucks, but that doesn't mean opening both options, just like we have for the Rogue, the fighter, and the Ranger, will erase the melee version. That has never happened, so why do we think it would happen here?And this still doesn't answer the question. The ranger is going to be doing more sustained damage, ranged and melee, than the paladin. So if the melee ranger doesn't erase the melee paladin, then why would a ranged paladin erase a ranged ranger?</blockquote>

Verification