log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Why do people think elven accuracy is so great?

I've played one character with this feat - a ranged-specialised Battle Master fighter. The first fight I got into, I was hidden at range, and made my attack with super-advantage.

And rolled a triple 1.

I suppose that is the experience of every 8000th person who takes the feat.

But it feels like a level of fumble where your character should just spontaneously combust or something.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

ECMO3

Adventurer
People have mentioned the crit-fishing benefit, but the simple accuracy benefit is also sizable. If you normally hit 60% of the time, with triple-advantage you hit over 93% of the time. If you would normally only hit 30% of the time, triple-advantage gives you more than a 65% chance to hit. IOW, Elven Accuracy can turn battles that should be "just run, you have no hope in hell" into "this is reasonably achievable," so long as you still have any chance at all of hitting in the first place. And, as noted, you can push yourself up to over 14% chance to crit, so not only are you hitting far more often, more of your hits will be crits, too.
This is overstating the benefit, because any time you can use eleven accuracy you would not be hitting "normally". You have to have advantage for Elven accuracy to do anything at all so it is not correct to compare 93% to 60%.

If you hit 60% of the time "normally", most of the time Elven accuracy will be useless and you will still hit 60%. If you have advantage it will increase it from 84% to 93% as you noted. To elaborate a little further if you assume you have advantage on 25% of your attacks (which is more than typical in my games) you overall hit rate is 69% with elven accuracy and 66% without elven accuracy. So out of every 100 attacks you will hit 3 more times with elven accuracy if you need a 9+ to hit and have advantage 25% of the time.

If you "normally" hit 30% of the time when you have advantage your accuracy will increase from 49% to 66%. Again if you have advantage 25% of the time your overall accuracy is 39% with Elven accuracy and 35% without elven accuracy. Again out of 100 attacks you hit 4 more times when you need a 15+ to hit and have advantage 25% of the time.
 

This is overstating the benefit, because any time you can use eleven accuracy you would not be hitting "normally". You have to have advantage for Elven accuracy to do anything at all so it is not correct to compare 93% to 60%.

If you hit 60% of the time "normally", most of the time Elven accuracy will be useless and you will still hit 60%. If you have advantage it will increase it from 84% to 93% as you noted. To elaborate a little further if you assume you have advantage on 25% of your attacks (which is more than typical in my games) you overall hit rate is 69% with elven accuracy and 66% without elven accuracy. So out of every 100 attacks you will hit 3 more times with elven accuracy if you need a 9+ to hit and have advantage 25% of the time.

If you "normally" hit 30% of the time when you have advantage your accuracy will increase from 49% to 66%. Again if you have advantage 25% of the time your overall accuracy is 39% with Elven accuracy and 35% without elven accuracy. Again out of 100 attacks you hit 4 more times when you need a 15+ to hit and have advantage 25% of the time.

You do need to include the crit thing, too, though. Elven accuracy isn't just about hitting. A normal hit has a 5% chance to become a crit through EA.

(And, to be fair, my earlier analysis comparing EA to Lucky left out the crit thing, too.)
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
If you "normally" hit 30% of the time when you have advantage your accuracy will increase from 49% to 66%. Again if you have advantage 25% of the time your overall accuracy is 39% with Elven accuracy and 35% without elven accuracy. Again out of 100 attacks you hit 4 more times when you need a 15+ to hit and have advantage 25% of the time.
To be fair, Elven Accuracy really shouldn't be your choice unless you anticipate a lot more than 25% of your attacks having advantage. It really isn't worth it unless you have almost on-demand advantage.
 


Mort

Legend
Something not yet mentioned:

EA's interaction with Sharpshooter.

A few levels of rogue (for steady aim) and then fighter or ranger (fighter is easier here because of the extra ASIs) and the mid level damage will get pretty serious.
 
Last edited:

ph0rk

Friendship is Magic, and Magic is Heresy.
I've played one character with this feat - a ranged-specialised Battle Master fighter. The first fight I got into, I was hidden at range, and made my attack with super-advantage.

And rolled a triple 1.
And you'll probably remember that for decades.

A bit like rolling a double 20 when attacking with disadvantage; they're just dice but the table erupts in reaction in ways they just don't with the use of a luck point.
 

MarkB

Legend
And you'll probably remember that for decades.

A bit like rolling a double 20 when attacking with disadvantage; they're just dice but the table erupts in reaction in ways they just don't with the use of a luck point.
Absolutely. My reaction was just an exclamation of "holy crap!" and gesturing at my dice bowl, and the GM taking a picture of the dice for posterity.
 

NotAYakk

Legend
EA with "free"-advantage and a -5/+10 feat is really strong.

It is also strong with crit-fuel like smites, and with 19-20 crit ranges.

Each attack grants 0.05 crit chances.
19-20 makes it 0.1 (19-20 grants 0.05 crits/attack)
"Free" advantage also makes it 0.1 (Adv grants 0.05 crits/attack)
EA+A makes it 0.14 (EA+A grants 0.09 crits/attack)
A+19-20 makes it 0.19 (each grants 0.09 crits/attack)
EA+A+19-20 makes it 0.27 (EA grants 0.08 crits/attack)

The return on the 2nd of any of these features is more than the first, and it in turn multiplies with crit-fuel abilities.

We are comparing this to a +1 to hit and damage.

If advantage has 90% accuracy on an attack with 5 dice and 5 static damage does 9.5 damage per round.

Adding +1 to hit and static damage is 94% to hit for 5+6, or 10.8 damage per round.

Adding EA instead gives 97% hit 14% crit for 5+5, or 10.4 damage per round. And EA added +1 to your attack stat as well.

This is the bad case for EA. If you leverage EA it gets better.

Assume you have a -5/+10 feat, that becomes 5 dice 15 static at 70% hit/10% crit, or 14.5 DPR without EA.

Add +1/+1 it becomes 75% hit/10% crit for 5+16, or 16.25 DPR.

Add EA and it becomes 83%/14% crit for 5+15, or 17.3 DPR. EA pulls ahead.

And then you can start leveraging this even more.

EA is not bad without optimizing, and you can leverage it to give better results than the naive one with synergy.
 

ECMO3

Adventurer
To be fair, Elven Accuracy really shouldn't be your choice unless you anticipate a lot more than 25% of your attacks having advantage. It really isn't worth it unless you have almost on-demand advantage.
You are right. In my games no one really has on demand advantage, although Rogues can come close ... maybe 50% on a ranged Rogue.

As I noted earlier though flanking is not used in the games I DM or most of those I play.
 

(Ok, the +1 Dex makes Elven Accuracy win, though.)
Yeah, if it were JUST the triple-advantage on attacks, the comparison would be very difficult--I could see arguments either way. But with triple advantage and a stat point to good stats (Cha is also quite good for many characters), it's clearly the better feat.

To be fair, Elven Accuracy really shouldn't be your choice unless you anticipate a lot more than 25% of your attacks having advantage. It really isn't worth it unless you have almost on-demand advantage.
This, absolutely. Advantage isn't hard to acquire in 5e.

You are right. In my games no one really has on demand advantage, although Rogues can come close ... maybe 50% on a ranged Rogue.

As I noted earlier though flanking is not used in the games I DM or most of those I play.
While I obviously don't have unassailable, robust statistics? It sounds like the way your groups have played is not generally in keeping with either the designers' overall intent,* nor with the way most folks play. Advantage is quite common in most games, if you do anything whatsoever to seek it out, based on what I've seen of others' descriptions. Remember, the rules have effectively made it so the "DM's best friend"--that is, generic +2 for "this is a good situation" and -2 for "this is a bad situation"--has been replaced by Advantage. It is, IIRC explicitly but I could be mistaken, expected that any time a player comes up with an actually good plan (or roleplays really well, or whatever else), the DM will hand them Advantage as their reward.
 

robmox

Villager
You are right. In my games no one really has on demand advantage, although Rogues can come close ... maybe 50% on a ranged Rogue.

As I noted earlier though flanking is not used in the games I DM or most of those I play.
I was reading this month old post, just because I wanted to look at the math for Elven Accuracy. I agree that it’s not worth it unless you have on demand advantage, which is pretty easy to get for a lot of builds, and crucial for anything with a power attack (in the case of EA it’s only Sharpshooter, or GWM for Warlocks). But, warlocks can get Darkness, and later Shadow of Moil. Rangers get Guardian of Nature at higher level. A Bladesinger could get Blind Fighting from a 1 level dip in Fighter or Pally, and combine it with Darkness like a Warlock. And, a bard can use any of the above options, though Shadow of Moil is probably the strongest. When you’re already doing -5/+10, EA is the biggest increase to DPR you can get. Think about it like this, +2 to your attack stat adds 1.1 damage to each attack. GWM/Sharpshooter adds ~5 damage to each attack. A character that already has GWM/Sharpshooter adds a little more than 2 damage to each attack depending on enemy AC. So it’s better than +2 to your attack stat, worse than GWM/Sharpshooter, and few other feats are better than these 3 options (PAM and XBE being the notable ones, but depends on your build and your bonus action usage).
 

AcererakTriple6

Autistic DM (he/him)
Crit fishing. Your chance for a crit goes from 5% on a d20, to 9.75% on 2d20, and 14.2626% on 3d20. If you have a build with lots of crit bonus damage, Elven Accuracy is a good feat. Paladins can definitely benefit here due to smite mechanics. Rogues, obviously. Spellcasters with ray spells or riders can benefit as well.
It's especially good when using with the Blade of Disaster. That triples your likelihood to get a critical hit per attack, and you get two attacks per bonus action with it. It is a 9th level spell, so it's expected to be good, but still, it's crazy good with that combo.
 

ECMO3

Adventurer
I was reading this month old post, just because I wanted to look at the math for Elven Accuracy. I agree that it’s not worth it unless you have on demand advantage, which is pretty easy to get for a lot of builds, and crucial for anything with a power attack (in the case of EA it’s only Sharpshooter, or GWM for Warlocks). But, warlocks can get Darkness, and later Shadow of Moil. Rangers get Guardian of Nature at higher level. A Bladesinger could get Blind Fighting from a 1 level dip in Fighter or Pally, and combine it with Darkness like a Warlock. And, a bard can use any of the above options, though Shadow of Moil is probably the strongest.
I would not consider any of those are "on demand" as they require a spell and use an action which is a big cut into their damage output over a combat as compared with attacking that first turn. If we are looking at DPR, sure this will bring it up, but it requires an entire turn of combat (and lost damage that turn) to get it up. Over the course of most combats I think you will do less damage overall.

Now if you are playing a fighter with blind fighting and your party wizard is going to throw down darkness regularly then sure.
 

I would not consider any of those are "on demand" as they require a spell and use an action which is a big cut into their damage output over a combat as compared with attacking that first turn. If we are looking at DPR, sure this will bring it up, but it requires an entire turn of combat (and lost damage that turn) to get it up. Over the course of most combats I think you will do less damage overall.

Now if you are playing a fighter with blind fighting and your party wizard is going to throw down darkness regularly then sure.
They are absolutely "on demand" as you can get them whenever you decide to without needing to rely on other players or DM fiat.
 


robmox

Villager
I would not consider any of those are "on demand" as they require a spell and use an action which is a big cut into their damage output over a combat as compared with attacking that first turn. If we are looking at DPR, sure this will bring it up, but it requires an entire turn of combat (and lost damage that turn) to get it up. Over the course of most combats I think you will do less damage overall.

Now if you are playing a fighter with blind fighting and your party wizard is going to throw down darkness regularly then sure.
Just wanted to clarify, Guardian of Nature is a bonus action. However, it takes the largest investment to get if you’re full ranger, coming at level 13. Level 7 if you’re a bard (I guess level 10, because that’s when you get magical secrets). But, you generally reach a point where spell slots are no longer a barrier.
 

ECMO3

Adventurer
They are absolutely "on demand" as you can get them whenever you decide to without needing to rely on other players or DM fiat.
For the darkness, blind fighting combo you get it the turn after you decide, if you do not lose concentration between casting and acting. You can't get it on demand this turn.

You are setting it up with another action. This is no different than a fighter with extra attack using shove prone so he or she can have advantage, yeah it works to get advantage but at a high cost.
 

For the darkness, blind fighting combo you get it the turn after you decide, if you do not lose concentration between casting and acting. You can't get it on demand this turn.

You are setting it up with another action. This is no different than a fighter with extra attack using shove prone so he or she can have advantage, yeah it works to get advantage but at a high cost.
On demand doesn't mean "free", or else my bookshelves would be full of books from on-demand print services ;)

Darkness and similar effects also have defensive benefits, so it's not like the turn you cast it is wasted even if you don't attack.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
EDIT: Sorry, just realized this was responding to a necro'd thread. BVut it's not hugely old so I'll leave this.
oof. Thanks, but I disagree with this.

Unless you roll abilitles, bladesinger should not have an odd dexterity (or intelligence). Bladesingers more than any other subclass need to take ASIs and if they have a spare feat it needs to be lucky to counter crits against them.
I was unaware that you can start with higher than a 17 with +2 racial and either point buy or standard array. So it seems that when you don't roll ability scores it is simpel to position yourself to have a high odd score that would be improved with Elven Accuracy.

In games I have played, bladesingers do not get advantage enough for this to be worthwhile. I guess if you use Shadowblade yes you might have advantage often, but if you are using shadowblade then you are not using PGE, blur or greater invisibility. You are not going to last long in melee as a bladesinger without one of those spells up. I guess greater invisibility would give that third dice though .....
Okay, so you aren't using shadowblade to use greater invisibility - which also grants advantage. Or you've cast Tensor's and have advantage every melee attack.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top