Ranged Options for All Classes

[Mistwell]

To be clear, that wasn't meant to be disparaging of you, it was meant to be disparaging of the rule. I don't understand the reason the limit exists. What abuse are we closing, and how often does it actually happen? Shouldn't the rules just distinguish between what's readily available and what isn't?



No, but you're not always in a position to go and retrieve the weapons. OP's scenario involved a lake of lava. Presumably that would make retrieval of javelins a bit complicated. Even in the open wilderness, you may end up with javelins all over the place in several directions if you're battling and flying enemy.

I agree, but at levels where you're fighting dragons or Big Bads behind lava, someone in the party should have a bag of holding, portable hole, handy haversack, or Efficient Quiver by then too. Not to mention javelins are pretty common items to retrieve off of mook monsters, and easily bought in town. So far my (now 8th level) fighter has never run out of javelins, and he dumped Dex and uses javelins for ranged attacks when needed.

 

[Oofta]

Round 1: Enter with two Javelins drawn. Throw both. Draw 1.
Round 2: Draw a second and throw 2 Javelins.
Round 3: Draw one and perform another useful action, such as assisting an ally, using an item, etc....
Round 4: Draw a second and throw both....

This isn't the hardest thing in the world to manage. Yes, just as a wizard that has used up all their slots is not as effective with their cantrips as they are with spells, your ranged attacks with a javelin are weaker than your melee strikes - which can be devastatingly powerful relative to other PCs. I watched a 12th level Fighter SOLO a beholder in one round. Tell me how a 12th level wizard can do that. It is ok if the ranged combat potential is something you'r not focused upon and it is one of the weakest combat elements out there.

Who walks around with two drawn javelins? Javelins are not light so you can't use two-weapon fighting without a feat. You can only help someone with an ability check, to aid in attacking you have to be within 5 ft of the target. I don't remember an encounter where that would have been useful.

If using a light weapon (hand-axes/daggers) so you could throw one with a bonus action, your range is limited to 40 ft.

So 1 attack per round, likely at disadvantage is all you're getting. Meanwhile the dex based guy is probably as good at melee and far superior at ranged using a weapon that realistically require a fair amount of strength. I don't care too much about realism in D&D and not everything needs to be balanced but this is one area I choose to not ignore an issue that I can easily fix.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

First of all, you're usually throwing two (and definitely if you have the feat or Fast Hands).

You're throwing one, unless there's a house rule to mitigate that (or you have a feat or class feature). House rules can provide good solutions to systemic problems, but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

Second, it's definitely not a trivial amount of damage as it's almost the same amount of damage you'd deal in melee since you still add your strength to the damage roll as normal (it's the same as a short sword or scimitar - except thrown).

Nobody goes into melee with a short sword and nothing to back that up. Everyone who would want to use a short sword will also have some sort of ability which increases that damage. And since you can't use Extra Attack (unlike, for example, an archer who is forced into melee), that means you're dealing less than half as much damage as anyone else.

The big issue is the combination of one attack with Disadvantage on the attack roll. If you could make two attacks, and had a reasonable chance of hitting with those, then you'd be dealing enough damage that it might actually matter. That's where the Dex-based fighter stands, even if they're specialized in melee.

Third, so now this is only applicable in your mind to boss battles, and only if that boss battle is always beyond 30'?

We're talking about the very specific situation mentioned in this thread, which is a boss battle against a boss monster that can stay at range. It might seem like a corner-case scenario, but that's what dragons are, so it's definitely worth considering.

In most other situations, the barbarian will be fine. Either it isn't a boss monster, so a javelin is still meaningful, or there will be some way to close the distance.

This is becoming silly. I wish you'd articulate your objection in a more straight manner than the whack-a-mole style of argumentation you're adopting here. Is it that you want them to do as much damage as they'd do in melee? What is your objection aside from the canard of "playing mario cart instead"? Let's have it straight, without the exagerations.

The disparity in efficacy between a specialist and a non-specialist is too great, and it gets worse as you gain levels. It's a systemic issue with Bounded Accuracy, that every relevant aspect of an enemy will always improve across levels, while only specific aspects of PCs will improve. At higher levels, the game is balanced for specialists to operate within their areas of specialization, and trying to operate outside of that zone is an exercise in futility.

As a secondary issue, Dex-based melee fighters have a much broader area of specialization than Strength-based melee fighters. They can stray further from their wheelhouse, before experiencing that drop-off. It's bad game design when players are sidelined for long periods of time, but when some character concepts are sidelined more frequently than others, then it's also un-fair. (See also: The Problem with Deckers.)

 

[Mistwell]

You're throwing one, unless there's a house rule to mitigate that (or you have a feat or class feature). House rules can provide good solutions to systemic problems, but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

Two. jgsugden already detailed how that is done with no house rules. Maybe you have him blocked?

Nobody goes into melee with a short sword and nothing to back that up. Everyone who would want to use a short sword will also have some sort of ability which increases that damage. And since you can't use Extra Attack (unlike, for example, an archer who is forced into melee), that means you're dealing less than half as much damage as anyone else.

My comparison to short sword is just to say the damage is not that far off. Plenty of people go into battle with a battleaxe or longsword, and they're only one point more average damage - and you're comparing to an archer, which is also just one point off. And again, jgsugden already explained how you can in fact use your extra attack with the javelin for most rounds of combat.

The big issue is the combination of one attack with Disadvantage on the attack roll. If you could make two attacks, and had a reasonable chance of hitting with those, then you'd be dealing enough damage that it might actually matter. That's where the Dex-based fighter stands, even if they're specialized in melee.

Yes disadvantage is the main difference. If you can mitigate that, great. If not, that's the drawback of ranged for you. Much like the ranged character is going to get hit more often in melee due to a lack of a shield, or doing less damage than a two handed weapon user.

We're talking about the very specific situation mentioned in this thread, which is a boss battle against a boss monster that can stay at range. It might seem like a corner-case scenario, but that's what dragons are, so it's definitely worth considering.

This thread is not just about the specific lava scenario because if it were you wouldn't be making all these generalizations about how strength based attackers are useless at range in general. Again, I wish you'd be more straight in this thread because we'd all be having a better conversation.

In most other situations, the barbarian will be fine.

Agreed, so why all the generalizations about them sucking?

As a secondary issue, Dex-based melee fighters have a much broader area of specialization than Strength-based melee fighters. They can stray further from their wheelhouse, before experiencing that drop-off. It's bad game design when players are sidelined for long periods of time, but when some character concepts are sidelined more frequently than others, then it's also un-fair. (See also: The Problem with Deckers.)

And there it is again - the claim the PC is sidelined...because they have disadvantage sometimes in the rare instance they cannot get closer or mitigate that disadvantage. WHY the exagerations Saelorn? You already know they're not sidelined and that's not what this topic comes down to, so why do you keep claiming they are, given it sure doesn't appear to be swaying opinions by mistating the situation.

 

[5ekyu]

So ... if I have a setup where dragons are attacking, I should always run the dragons stupid? Lower the challenge rating because I know my melee PCs are going to be ineffective?

I run NPCs and monsters the best I can given their intelligence and goals. A dragon will almost never land to go toe-to-toe (there are exceptions to all rules of course). Why should they lower themselves to the level of earth bound worms? These are intelligent, evil opponents, many of whom have been around for centuries. They fight dirty. Breath fire, pick up boulders and drop them on the PCs, swoop down and grab the pesky ranged guy and drop them from half a mile up (being careful not to get in melee range). That's how dragons fight.

Not sure what you replied to that seemed to you to be telling you how dragons fight?

But as for your question about lowering CR - to whatever extent you make use of CR as GM a GM is well advised to take into account scenario and terrain encounter variables as they impact the estimated CR. That's covered in the DMG. If the scenario setup will leave half the party weak, that will adjust your effective challenge and should affect the estimated CR.

 

[Oofta]

Two. jgsugden already detailed how that is done with no house rules.

Except that he's incorrect. Javelins are not light weapons, you can't use two weapon fighting to throw the second one as a bonus action. [EDIT: unless you have the two weapon fighting feat, of course]

In addition you had mentioned things like quiver of efficiency, but that has no impact on the object interaction rules, it's still only 1 per turn. Unless you're pulling arrows because ummm ... reasons.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Except that he's incorrect. Javelins are not light weapons, you can't use two weapon fighting to throw the second one as a bonus action. [EDIT: unless you have the two weapon fighting feat, of course]

He is correct in the example that is being discussed: of the character with multiple attacks. The character is not throwing a second javelin as a bonus action, they are throwing it as part of their Attack action.

No two-weapon fighting required.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Two. jgsugden already detailed how that is done with no house rules. Maybe you have him blocked?

One. The process detailed only applies when you know the situation you're going into, because it requires a round of preparation, and even then it only holds for two rounds. There's not necessarily a "useful action" that you can provide on turn three, and even if there is, it probably takes your free item interaction for the round.

If you did know the situation you'd be getting into, and you choose to move forward anyway, then you may well decide to go with the longbow. With twice the rate-of-fire and no Disadvantage on the attack roll, your chance of hitting is substantially increased.

Yes disadvantage is the main difference. If you can mitigate that, great. If not, that's the drawback of ranged for you. Much like the ranged character is going to get hit more often in melee due to a lack of a shield, or doing less damage than a two handed weapon user.

The main drawback is that you don't get to use your cool sword, or any of your feats or class features which specifically work in melee combat. Disadvantage on the attack roll is more like adding insult to injury. The ranged character may have -2 AC against melee attacks, but at least they can still fight back.

This thread is not just about the specific lava scenario because if it were you wouldn't be making all these generalizations about how strength based attackers are useless at range in general. Again, I wish you'd be more straight in this thread because we'd all be having a better conversation.

It's not just about that scenario, but it is primarily about that scenario, or other similar ones. Those are the situations where it matters that the barbarian can't fight at range. If there's no lava, and the barbarian can just run over there, then ranged combat ability becomes irrelevant. If it's not a boss fight, then it will be over quickly anyway, and it doesn't matter how little they contributed.

If you claim that they aren't bad at range, because they can easily get into melee, or because the fight will be over quickly, then that does nothing to change the fact that they're bad at range; and sometimes - often in the most important and climactic fights of the campaign - they will be forced to fight at range. No matter how much you try to re-frame the conditions of the argument so that they seem irrelevant, that doesn't change the reality of the situation when those conditions are in effect.

 

[jgsugden]

Yes, unprepared folks tend to be less efficient, so if you are surprised by a foe that attacks at a range, you're at an even weaker position. If you scout the enemy and are prepared for them, a 5th level (or higher) strength fighter can launch 2 javs per turn for 3 of 4 rounds at the start of combat.

All of these specifics are pointless to argue over:

A primarily melee PC is INTENDED to be weaker at range, and is attacking at low efficiency when doing so. Like a spellcaster with cantrips, you're not going to shine as a star, but you are contributing some. You don't need to have more because every class has weaknesses - and this is yours.

 

[Oofta]

He is correct in the example that is being discussed: of the character with multiple attacks. The character is not throwing a second javelin as a bonus action, they are throwing it as part of their Attack action.

No two-weapon fighting required.

Ah, I misread. Apologies. But as [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION] pointed out it assumes you know you're going into a particular type of combat and doesn't make a difference after the second round.