So this may just be an annoyance rather than a real issue, but I still find it frustrating.
You're limited to one bonus action, and if you're two-weapon fighting your off hand attack is your bonus action. But a lot of my ranger spells and abilities are also bonus actions.
Casting Hunter's Mark
Marking a new creature w Hunter's Mark
Slayer's Prey
Casting Ensnaring Strike
Casting Zephyr Strike
Sure, these bonus actions make sense for archery focused Rangers who can do a bonus action spell or class ability, but I feel like the two-weapon fighting focused Rangers should be able to as well. Do people allow a bonus action spell/ability and a two-weapon fighting bonus action in the same turn, or does everyone force you to choose?
Thanks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Mike Mearls has gone on record saying bonus actions are one of his big regrets among rules from this edition. But two-weapon fighting has been ****** in every edition since 2ed, in overcompensation for when it used to be a bit too good. Part of "fixing" Beast Master was removing the bonus action requirements, but as you point out there's still quite a bit of overlap.
On the other hand, Hunter's Mark gives you an extra d6 on every attack, including offhand attacks, as opposed to many such abilities that only add to your first attack each turn. Two-weapon fighting lets you do good 'nova' turns, but Duelist is probably the more balanced fighting style for melee Rangers.
It does hurt the action economy of a Two-Weapon Fighter, and Mike Mearls has commented the Bonus Action isn't something he's satisfied with. As it stands, it's what we have and I personally really like the economy (I can't image a better system, until I see one)... Having to make choices about what you're going to do every round from a tactical/mechanics game sense creates interesting decision.
As a balancing factor remember Hunter's mark is *EVERY* hit, not once a turn... so you're not really losing much.
at 2nd level. 1st round: B.Action: Spell, Action: single attack with primary +1d6 damage 2nd Acton: single attack with primary +1d6 damage, B.Action: single attack with secondary +1d6 damage ... This keeps going until you need to change targets.
at 5th lvl. 1st round: B.Action: Spell, Action: two attacks with primary +1d6 damage each 2nd Acton: two attacks with primary +1d6 damage each, B.Action: single attack with secondary +1d6 damage ... This keeps going until you need to change targets.
It does hurt the action economy of a Two-Weapon Fighter, and Mike Mearls has commented the Bonus Action isn't something he's satisfied with. As it stands, it's what we have and I personally really like the economy (I can't image a better system, until I see one)... Having to make choices about what you're going to do every round from a tactical/mechanics game sense creates interesting decision.
As a balancing factor remember Hunter's mark is *EVERY* hit, not once a turn... so you're not really losing much.
at 2nd level. 1st round: B.Action: Spell, Action: single attack with primary +1d6 damage 2nd Acton: single attack with primary +1d6 damage, B.Action: single attack with secondary +1d6 damage ... This keeps going until you need to change targets.
at 5th lvl. 1st round: B.Action: Spell, Action: two attacks with primary +1d6 damage each 2nd Acton: two attacks with primary +1d6 damage each, B.Action: single attack with secondary +1d6 damage ... This keeps going until you need to change targets.
And this gets even better with Colossus Slayer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You, you and you- panic. Everyone else- follow me.
Yeah, that all makes sense - and maybe the Monster Slayer exacerbates my frustration as well. At level 3 and 4 it is like this:
1st round: B.Action: Spell (cast or re-target hunter's mark); Action: single attack with primary +1d6 damage
2nd round: B.Action: Slayer's Prey; Action: single attack with primary +1d6 hunter's mark damage and +1d6 from Slayer's Prey
3rd rounds: primary hand attack w +1d6 hunter's mark damage and +1d6 from Slayer's Prey; B.Action: off hand attack w +1d6 from Hunter's Mark
So I'm not two weapon fighting until level 3, where if you were archery or single weapon focused, you're hitting harder at both the first and second rounds. Yes, it is a choice, but still annoying.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Not more actions - a ranger using a stronger two-handed weapon gets the same number of actions as a two-weapon fighting ranger who only gets to use one of their weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Two weapon fighting does not require the use of dexterity. As the others have said, it is a slight delay to your extra damage on your primary target, a very nice amount of extra damage on the next round with the double attacks. You may feel it is 'gimping' you but that is just not entirely true, your opinion yes, but not truth.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Yes, it may just be annoying that it isn't until 3rd round that I'm actually dual wielding, or later if I need to cast ensnaring strike or another bonus spell.
Maybe if I wanted to us a rapier (finesse non-light) the first couple rounds so I'm dealing a little more damage at the beginning that would be something - but that's a bit more min-maxingish than even I want to go.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Yes, it may just be annoying that it isn't until 3rd round that I'm actually dual wielding, or later if I need to cast ensnaring strike or another bonus spell.
Maybe if I wanted to us a rapier (finesse non-light) the first couple rounds so I'm dealing a little more damage at the beginning that would be something - but that's a bit more min-maxingish than even I want to go.
Two spells in the first round, you must have a DM that lets you rest after every other combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
At that point why even bother using Hunter's mark at all? Isn't that the point of Slayer's Prey to give you a free version of the spell? I guess you just don't get your biggest damage until a couple rounds go by, that certainly isn't the end of the world. Seems like a fair trade off for a big damage ramp like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Point is that an archer ranger gets to do their full attack power every round while the two-weapon fighting ranger doesn't.
Such is life I suppose. You are talking about a decrease for the first two rounds of ~2+mod damage/round (total assumed is 12), and then a damage increase after those first two rounds (3d6+mod ~14) so as soon as you hit the third round you outpace an archer in damage (by ~2). That seems like a good trade off, for the time it takes to ramp to that damage. Every turn after that you get further and further ahead of an archer for damage per round
*edit forgot you will get your stat bonus to offhand
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Which they cannot do for every single encounter, your slice and dicer can do this reliably in nearly every single encounter since there is only one spell (which lasts a while). It really seems reasonable.
A side note, when you mention the archer ranger using zephyr strike or something similar don't forget that it cancels your hunters mark as soon as you start concentrating on the new spell.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
So this may just be an annoyance rather than a real issue, but I still find it frustrating.
You're limited to one bonus action, and if you're two-weapon fighting your off hand attack is your bonus action. But a lot of my ranger spells and abilities are also bonus actions.
Sure, these bonus actions make sense for archery focused Rangers who can do a bonus action spell or class ability, but I feel like the two-weapon fighting focused Rangers should be able to as well. Do people allow a bonus action spell/ability and a two-weapon fighting bonus action in the same turn, or does everyone force you to choose?
Thanks.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Mike Mearls has gone on record saying bonus actions are one of his big regrets among rules from this edition. But two-weapon fighting has been ****** in every edition since 2ed, in overcompensation for when it used to be a bit too good. Part of "fixing" Beast Master was removing the bonus action requirements, but as you point out there's still quite a bit of overlap.
On the other hand, Hunter's Mark gives you an extra d6 on every attack, including offhand attacks, as opposed to many such abilities that only add to your first attack each turn. Two-weapon fighting lets you do good 'nova' turns, but Duelist is probably the more balanced fighting style for melee Rangers.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
It does hurt the action economy of a Two-Weapon Fighter, and Mike Mearls has commented the Bonus Action isn't something he's satisfied with. As it stands, it's what we have and I personally really like the economy (I can't image a better system, until I see one)... Having to make choices about what you're going to do every round from a tactical/mechanics game sense creates interesting decision.
As a balancing factor remember Hunter's mark is *EVERY* hit, not once a turn... so you're not really losing much.
at 2nd level.
1st round: B.Action: Spell, Action: single attack with primary +1d6 damage
2nd Acton: single attack with primary +1d6 damage, B.Action: single attack with secondary +1d6 damage
... This keeps going until you need to change targets.
at 5th lvl.
1st round: B.Action: Spell, Action: two attacks with primary +1d6 damage each
2nd Acton: two attacks with primary +1d6 damage each, B.Action: single attack with secondary +1d6 damage
... This keeps going until you need to change targets.
You, you and you- panic. Everyone else- follow me.
Yeah, that all makes sense - and maybe the Monster Slayer exacerbates my frustration as well. At level 3 and 4 it is like this:
So I'm not two weapon fighting until level 3, where if you were archery or single weapon focused, you're hitting harder at both the first and second rounds. Yes, it is a choice, but still annoying.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Could you specify how an archer or single weapon fighter is more actions? I don't see the imbalance.
Perpetually annoyed that Eldritch Knights can't use Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Smite, and Eldritch Sight.
Not more actions - a ranger using a stronger two-handed weapon gets the same number of actions as a two-weapon fighting ranger who only gets to use one of their weapons.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Precisely. One chooses Strength and one chooses Versatility. They are balanced, not equal.
Perpetually annoyed that Eldritch Knights can't use Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Smite, and Eldritch Sight.
An archer ranger using a two-handed longbow and a two-weapon fighting ranger both use Dex.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Two weapon fighting does not require the use of dexterity. As the others have said, it is a slight delay to your extra damage on your primary target, a very nice amount of extra damage on the next round with the double attacks. You may feel it is 'gimping' you but that is just not entirely true, your opinion yes, but not truth.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Yes, it may just be annoying that it isn't until 3rd round that I'm actually dual wielding, or later if I need to cast ensnaring strike or another bonus spell.
Maybe if I wanted to us a rapier (finesse non-light) the first couple rounds so I'm dealing a little more damage at the beginning that would be something - but that's a bit more min-maxingish than even I want to go.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
One thing, is that unless you have the feat you can't duel wield until your 2nd round anyways unless you already have your weapon out.
Round1: Draw main weapon (free), Attack Action, Spell (B.Action)
Round2: Draw 2ndary weapon (free), Attack Action, Two Weapon Fighitng (B.Action)
With the Feat you can draw both and then attack.
I don't understand why it would be your 3rd round that you start using 2 weapons?
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
No, as I said above 2nd round is Slayer's Prey - not a spell. It is from the new Xanathar Ranger subclass Monster Slayer.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
At that point why even bother using Hunter's mark at all? Isn't that the point of Slayer's Prey to give you a free version of the spell? I guess you just don't get your biggest damage until a couple rounds go by, that certainly isn't the end of the world. Seems like a fair trade off for a big damage ramp like that.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Point is that an archer ranger gets to do their full attack power every round while the two-weapon fighting ranger doesn't.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
That's true, provided the archer doesn't do anything else w their bonus action round 3 or after, such as cast ensnaring strick, zephyr strike, etc.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Which they cannot do for every single encounter, your slice and dicer can do this reliably in nearly every single encounter since there is only one spell (which lasts a while). It really seems reasonable.
A side note, when you mention the archer ranger using zephyr strike or something similar don't forget that it cancels your hunters mark as soon as you start concentrating on the new spell.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Very good point.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.