Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 7701798" data-attributes="member: 6787650">Range is one dimension, including the 5E ranged advantage over not just hill giant rocks but also spells and monster abilities; 5E movement rules are another (shoot-and-scoot is entirely legal and quite easy); increased damage is yet another (in 5E, not only do you get your Dex bonus to attacks but you can pump damage even further via a number of feats/options); also feat support to increase to-hit chances, damage, and mobility even further; the fact that magical longbows in 5E are explicitly outlined to bypass weapon immunity a la werewolves; class abilities like Missile Catch that provide ways for players to tilt ranged combat in their favor; synergistic combat options like Dodge that synergize with ranged combat (especially with options like Sharpshooter) in the way I outlined previously in the discussion about Fighter 3 vs. Hill Giant.Ranged combat is dominant in 5E from a powergaming perspective. There's very little reason not to be a range-specialized combatant, even if you specialize in dungeon crawling.Maybe in 1E, but in 2nd edition, a Hill Giant does 2d6+7 (14) which, as I mentioned previously, is about 75% of a 3rd level Fighter's HP; 18 damage is only about 67% of a 5E fighter's HP. And &quot;dropping&quot; a PC has very different implications in 5E vs. AD&amp;D. In AD&amp;D, one blow from the Hill Giant can take you out of the adventure; in 5E, it can take you out of the combat for a round.You're making the claim that 5E is less robust than AD&amp;D when it comes to writing an adventure that accomodates a wide range of levels (e.g. 4-6 players of levels 3-5), so I don't think you get to ignore 2nd edition here. Unless you're limiting your claim to 1E? My only exposure to 1E is the Gold Box games, which don't really count, so if you're making a 1E-specific claim I'll have to bow out.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 7701798, member: 6787650"] Range is one dimension, including the 5E ranged advantage over not just hill giant rocks but also spells and monster abilities; 5E movement rules are another (shoot-and-scoot is entirely legal and quite easy); increased damage is yet another (in 5E, not only do you get your Dex bonus to attacks but you can pump damage even further via a number of feats/options); also feat support to increase to-hit chances, damage, and mobility even further; the fact that magical longbows in 5E are explicitly outlined to bypass weapon immunity a la werewolves; class abilities like Missile Catch that provide ways for players to tilt ranged combat in their favor; synergistic combat options like Dodge that synergize with ranged combat (especially with options like Sharpshooter) in the way I outlined previously in the discussion about Fighter 3 vs. Hill Giant. Ranged combat is dominant in 5E from a powergaming perspective. There's very little reason [I]not[/I] to be a range-specialized combatant, even if you specialize in dungeon crawling. Maybe in 1E, but in 2nd edition, a Hill Giant does 2d6+7 (14) which, as I mentioned previously, is about 75% of a 3rd level Fighter's HP; 18 damage is only about 67% of a 5E fighter's HP. And "dropping" a PC has very different implications in 5E vs. AD&D. In AD&D, one blow from the Hill Giant can take you out of the adventure; in 5E, it can take you out of the combat for a round. You're making the claim that 5E is less robust than AD&D when it comes to writing an adventure that accomodates a wide range of levels (e.g. 4-6 players of levels 3-5), so I don't think you get to ignore 2nd edition here. Unless you're limiting your claim to 1E? My only exposure to 1E is the Gold Box games, which don't really count, so if you're making a 1E-specific claim I'll have to bow out. [/QUOTE]

Verification