The final word on DPR, feats and class balance

[Oofta]

I'm just following the OP's lead.



I think the point about classes is an important one. Maybe the knife-thrower should be a rogue?

But this also creates tensions with Oofta's point. If it's true that a thrown knife does a lot less damage than an arrow from a longbow, then why - when a rogue uses a thrown knife - does it do so much more damage than a fighter's longbow?

This is one of many reasons why I think discussion of viable archetypes isn't something that is helped by considerations of "realism".

But this isn't a reason why (eg) warlocks should be better ranged-damage dealers than featless fighters, is it?

In 4e, Cloud of Daggers is a wizard spell. Maybe you're thinking of Blinding Barrage? I'm not sure why it's particularly impossible (anymore than the other action heroic stuff that happens in D&D).

If you want a knife-throwing character, it probably should be a rogue. You can always use a bonus action to throw that second dagger if you miss with the first. It may not even be a bad build if you have a way to get opportunity or other attacks outside of your normal turn on a regular basis.

However, the long-bow wielding rogue will do more damage on their turn than the knife thrower because long bows do more damage. In a more realistic game, a long bow should do significantly more damage, but that's one of the (many) compromises D&D makes.

As far as 4E, Blinding Barrage (thanks for the correction) was one of those powers that always struck our group as something simply impossible to do outside of an anime cartoon or superhero comic genre. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but PCs in 4E that were supposedly not using supernatural powers did things all the time that would look out of place in an action movie. Non-supernatural PCs in 5E (and basically all non-4E versions of D&D) push what is possible, but at least what they do is a close facsimile. I don't have a problem with wizards casting spells or barbarians getting a boost from their totem because those things are explicitly supernatural.

I don't want to get into a 4E vs 5E discussion, just saying that the only way I see you getting a dagger-based build would be some niche that had supernatural abilities of some sort that could only be done with daggers.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

We need level 12 for 2 ASI and sharp shooter.

Darts have an attack bonus of +6 for 1d4+15 damage.
Feinting attack for advantage. And 1d8 more damage.
Hunters mark +1d6
Colossus slayer and sneak attack +2d6 and +1d8 once per turn.

So against an enemy with low AC you can easily do 62.5 points of damage.

If you are less willing to gamble you could be an elf and take elven accuracy and use daggers. You can be a hexblade warlock instead of ranger and just use a dagger and curse and hex.
That makes 1d4+11 damage with crit at 19 and 20. You only need to be level 1 warlock 3
4 rogue and 5 fighter.
You still have to go dex as main stat but that is ok.
You deal 2d4+22+2d8+2d6 +2d6 SA damage with lowest of 3d20 + 9
That should hit most of the time. So your average damage is 50 damage. Slightly lower than the other build but I did not calculate hit chances for target AC. Probably comparable.
Now the trick is you can use riposte to get another hit with sneak attack in.
So that's probably it. The first build is pure phb. The second one is using all materials.
And that are just two builds out of the head without looking up or precalculating. Maybe paladin instead of fighter might be better or skipping fighter altogether focussing on blade warlock.

 

[TwoSix]

I recently created a knife throwing halfling fighter which originated in 3.5.
He was seriously unoptimized but more than effective. Good AC and rogue skills allowed him to play much more than his role. He started fighter and eventually multiclassed to rogue and master thrower.
In 5e it is quite easy to have an effective guy. The trick is battlemaster with duelling style and rogue thief to use fast hands to be able to throw 2 daggers with your attack action. Dual wielder and using 2 daggers also works.
Battlemaster will give everything you need to be a pain in the ass for your enemy along with cunning action.

Edit: you won't be damage king. But you will be able to easily play your character efficiently.
You have single attribute dependancy and good inititative. You will bring out of combat abilities that are useful. You are durable.

If you want to really deal damage, swap daggers with darts. Take archery fighting style. Take sharpshooter. Be a ranger hunter multiclass for hunter's mark and colossus slayer. (Note that you have con saving throw proficiencies).

Dagger Expert

• You may draw a dagger as part of any attack with a dagger.

• Being within 5 feet of a hostile creature doesn’t impose disadvantage on your ranged attack rolls.

• When you use the Attack action and attack with a one-handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a dagger you are holding.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Dagger Expert

• You may draw a dagger as part of any attack with a dagger.

• Being within 5 feet of a hostile creature doesn’t impose disadvantage on your ranged attack rolls.

• When you use the Attack action and attack with a one-handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a dagger you are holding.

That is a fabulous though boring solution.

Edit: i think doubling point blank range would be nicer than removing disadvantage in melee. You could just stab with the dagger anyway.

 

[pemerton]

Blinding Barrage (thanks for the correction) was one of those powers that always struck our group as something simply impossible to do outside of an anime cartoon or superhero comic genre. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but PCs in 4E that were supposedly not using supernatural powers did things all the time that would look out of place in an action movie.

I guess I don't think it would be out of place, in an action movie, for a ninja to throw half-a-dozen knives or shurikens at everyone in a room (which is a rough approximation to the "blast 3" AoE of Blinding Barrage).

If it was Bullseye or Daredevil (neither of whom is magic) then it would be a single dagger or other object ricocheting from target to target!

I think that ability can also be used with a bow, which pushes thinks a bit further. But the six-second round is also a heuristic approximation rather than a metronomic natural law. (And in 5e as well, I think.)

 

[Mistwell]

Here is one of the Charm Person posts (post 80-something upthread):

This seems to be a response to the OP ("threads like these"). But the OP isn't a complaint that Charm Person is useless. (Maybe the OP believes this - I don't know. But it is not asserted in this thread.)

The "threads like these" is the direction the threads tend to take, not the OP. Charm Person was brought up earlier in the thread as well by the way by someone else prior to my re-raising it. It's a long thread.

 

[pemerton]

The "threads like these" is the direction the threads tend to take, not the OP.

Fair enough.

Charm Person was brought up earlier in the thread as well by the way by someone else prior to my re-raising it. It's a long thread.

But I still don't see how it bears upon the topic of the thread. How does the fact that (some, maybe all) casters have a high degree of flexibility and diverse capability in the way that the engage encounters, which makes their DPR a potentially secondary concern, help show that they're not overshadowing featless fighters, at least in some cases (sorcerer and warlock were the two mentioned in the OP)?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don't think sorcerers and warlocks outclass fighters. There is more than pure damage. Being able to focus on a single target is a main concern. So you need to quicken your cantrip as sorcerer and then you burn through sorcerypoints very very fast. A warlock that focusses on just deqling damage does not do a lot else. Concentration is an often overlooked issue. A battlemaster can and will do well enough. And if you look at theawesome defenses you will see a good package.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The "threads like these" is the direction the threads tend to take, not the OP. Charm Person was brought up earlier in the thread as well by the way by someone else prior to my re-raising it. It's a long thread.

I originally brought up the charm person not in response to the OP, but in response to someone comparing how much better/worse casters are compared to fighters based solely on DPR spells as a way to illustrate that a caster has other spells that aren't DPR, but can completely resolve an entire encounter just by itself, and therefore such comparisons are fundamentally flawed.

 

[Mistwell]

Fair enough.

But I still don't see how it bears upon the topic of the thread. How does the fact that (some, maybe all) casters have a high degree of flexibility and diverse capability in the way that the engage encounters, which makes their DPR a potentially secondary concern, help show that they're not overshadowing featless fighters, at least in some cases (sorcerer and warlock were the two mentioned in the OP)?

It was in reply to the numerous people who were claiming damage is king, that the focus should always be on damage per round, and that focusing on things outside of damage isn't helpful. Again...long thread. I get that you didn't read it all, but maybe catch up before replying to me again that you don't understand why I am talking about what quite a number of people in the thread are in fact talking about?