D&D 5E The 2024 Ranger is Actually Pretty Good (with numbers)

[Mistwell]

1) Agreed, starting Fighter 1 doesn't make you "not a Ranger" so I'd just do that if the concept fits
2) Treantmonk specifically says he's not fully optimizing just making simple builds with similar flat simple decisions to get a rough comparison. His conclusion was all the melee classes roughly fit within the same window of damage, though yes Ranger lags a bit on single target damage but may well make up for it on multi target damage, and spellcasters are just not good at single target damage which includes all flavors of bard.

 

[Zardnaar]

1) Agreed, starting Fighter 1 doesn't make you "not a Ranger" so I'd just do that if the concept fits
2) Treantmonk specifically says he's not fully optimizing just making simple builds with similar flat simple decisions to get a rough comparison. His conclusion was all the melee classes roughly fit within the same window of damage, though yes Ranger lags a bit on single target damage but may well make up for it on multi target damage, and spellcasters are just not good at single target damage which includes all flavors of bard.

One of his simple builds was inadvertently one of the best.

By simple I mean one feat race doesn't matter, single class. Same concept as hit i added almost 40% damage he used the wrong feat.

So he is comparing the best class with one of the vest feats and a heavy weapon to sword and board builds that were mediocre.

He needs to compare greatsword to greatsword imho and get better builds for ther stuff eg S tier feat vs S tier feat .

His math seems fine his inputs are off.

He missed hex on a single target sorcerer with scorching ray for example. 2d6 per ray becomes 3d6. That's a very big difference.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'd be curious about the difference between the Ranger and the 3rd highest damage dealer, instead of the two barbarians. Even stating it as 60% might hide the actual numbers. I don't have the time to make those comparisons now myself though.

I do want to point out that we often seem to underestimate just how good AOE's can be. Conjure Barrage might "only" deal ~11 damage if you assume the enemy makes their saves, but if you are able to hit 5 or 6 enemies with that 60ft cone that ignores all allies, that becomes 55 to 66 damage, even if everyone makes every save. And if you do that, while concentrating on a Conjure ANimals which can hit another 2 or 3 for ~9 damage if they make the save, then your WORST outcome is dealing 73 damage. And yes, that won't kill any enemy at that level, but if it drops an enemy into killshot range, then it was incredibly good for a TEAM play.

 

[Mistwell]

One of his simple builds was inadvertently one of the best.

By simple I mean one feat race doesn't matter, single class. Same concept as hit i added almost 40% damage he used the wrong feat.

So he is comparing the best class with one of the vest feats and a heavy weapon to sword and board builds that were mediocre.

He needs to compare greatsword to greatsword imho and get better builds for ther stuff eg S tier feat vs S tier feat .

His math seems fine his inputs are off.

He missed hex on a single target sorcerer with scorching ray for example. 2d6 per ray becomes 3d6. That's a very big difference.

He didn't use the "wrong" feat he explains he picked the feats he thought he would at each level, even if the feat didn't influence damage. He's not building a "Damage only" build.

He DOES compare greatsword to greatsword. Did you not see his conclusion videos, where he lumps each type of build with itself and does those comparisons?

His inputs are not off, you just wish he'd made different builds than he did.

If you think he missed hex on the sorc (and I'd bet you're wrong and there was a good reason) then tell him and lets see if he correct it. A hundred guys in his discord channel will jump on it and know right away.

 

[Zardnaar]

He didn't use the "wrong" feat he explains he picked the feats he thought he would at each level, even if the feat didn't influence damage. He's not building a "Damage only" build.

He DOES compare greatsword to greatsword. Did you not see his conclusion videos, where he lumps each type of build with itself and does those comparisons?

His inputs are not off, you just wish he'd made different builds than he did.

If you think he missed hex on the sorc (and I'd bet you're wrong and there was a good reason) then tell him and lets see if he correct it. A hundred guys in his discord channel will jump on it and know right away.

The feat he picked for barbarian buffed damage.
. The feat he picked for sorcerer did not. It was warcaster.

Sorcerers are proficient in con saves. If he picked hex via shadow adept instead it's a fairer comparison. His entire Sorcerer video was assuming you used scorching ray. There's a feat tgat boosts it 50%.

Great weapon is also one of the best feats. There's no equivalent that adds proficiency bonus to damage for the other styles.

In his other videos he was comparing whatever the current build was vs Barbarian. Said Barbarian was packing one of the best feats. So he was using a specific build that was good vs a specific build that didn't.

 

[Mistwell]

The feat he picked for barbarian buffed damage.
. The feat he picked for sorcerer did not. It was warcaster.

Right. And he explains why for each. Both make perfect sense.

Sorcerers are proficient in con saves.

They need to make their concentration checks, particularly in that build.

If he picked hex via shadow adept instead it's a fairer comparison.

Again, I think you missed the point of the exercise. He's not being "fair" in damage-only comparison. He's being "fair" in "this is what a realistic player probably chooses at these levels, which often isn't going to be focused on damage."

His entire Sorcerer video was assuming you used scorching ray. There's a feat tgat boosts it 50%.

What feat boosts that damage by 50% consistently?

Great weapon is also one of the best feats. There's no equivalent that adds proficiency bonus to damage for the other styles.

In his other videos he was comparing whatever the current build was vs Barbarian. Said Barbarian was packing one of the best feats. So he was using a specific build that was good vs a specific build that didn't.

Both builds were good. Both builds however did not focus on damage. WHICH HE EXPLAINS. Either you missed the context (seems likely) or are intentionally misrepresenting the context (seems unlikely). But assuming you missed it, he explains the point of the exercise is not the point you seem to have taken from it.

 

[Zardnaar]

Right. And he explains why for each. Both make perfect sense.


They need to make their concentration checks, particularly in that build.



Again, I think you missed the point of the exercise. He's not being "fair" in damage-only comparison. He's being "fair" in "this is what a realistic player probably chooses at these levels, which often isn't going to be focused on damage."



What feat boosts that damage by 50% consistently?


Both builds were good. Both builds however did not focus on damage. WHICH HE EXPLAINS. Either you missed the context (seems likely) or are intentionally misrepresenting the context (seems unlikely). But assuming you missed it, he explains the point of the exercise is not the point you seem to have taken from it.

His Sorcerer Build was built around scorching ray.

Feat is shadow touched with hex. You get a free cast so can follow it up with scorching ray.

2d6 per ray to 3d6. I'm sure the Barbarian still wins the damage but comparing a damage feat to a damage feat is a fair comparison imho.

If one build isn't taking the feat that enables the damage and the other build does in a danage comparison........

 

[Ashrym]

He's being "fair" in "this is what a realistic player probably chooses at these levels, which often isn't going to be focused on damage."

That would be easier if DDB released statistics on which classes take which feats at what levels for 2024 rules if they have enough data yet.

War Caster was the most popular feat in 2020 so I think it typically is a safe assumption, especially for casters who start with a 17 ability score that they can cap up to 18 at 4th level. But more players have been historically taking an ASI instead.

If we are focusing on damage then war caster paired with scorching ray should need to be taken with a grain of salt. I would have to question what concentration spells on the sorcerer spell list are being used to maintain concentration on a build focused on direct damage using scorching ray.

I think spell sniper is more likely on that build so as to not lose attacks to cover and add range. I would probably take careful spell to be party friendly with other spells, transmuted spell so my spell is not stymied by resistance or invulnerability, and rely on innate sorcery for advantage on attacks with scorching ray.

 

[Zardnaar]

That would be easier if DDB released statistics on which classes take which feats at what levels for 2024 rules if they have enough data yet.

War Caster was the most popular feat in 2020 so I think it typically is a safe assumption, especially for casters who start with a 17 ability score that they can cap up to 18 at 4th level. But more players have been historically taking an ASI instead.

If we are focusing on damage then war caster paired with scorching ray should need to be taken with a grain of salt. I would have to question what concentration spells on the sorcerer spell list are being used to maintain concentration on a build focused on direct damage using scorching ray.

I think spell sniper is more likely on that build so as to not lose attacks to cover and add range. I would probably take careful spell to be party friendly with other spells, transmuted spell so my spell is not stymied by resistance or invulnerability, and rely on innate sorcery for advantage on attacks with scorching ray.

Well my feat would be shadow touched:hex.

Just watched his tier 3 video. It would boost his unoptimised build up a tier and the optimized one up to high end of B or low A.

 

[Ashrym]

Well my feat would be shadow touched:hex.

Just watched his tier 3 video. It would boost his unoptimised build up a tier and the optimized one up to high end of B or low A.

Hex might work, but I try to limit concentration spells. I do not know if his math takes cover into consideration though so that might make a difference.