So related to this topic I could use some help. My Fey Wanderer will be hitting level 8 soon and I’m trying to decide between bumping wisdom to 18 or taking resilient con to get to a 14 and the proficiency to boost concentration. Dex is already 20 and I have sharp shooter. Any advice?
I take it your wisdom is 16 (so the 2 point boost would make it 18) I would take resilient. wisdom will raise your wisdom saves, DCs and SAM by 1 each but resilient will raise your concentration save by 4 (your getting a +1 now but you will get another +1 from the 14 and a +3 from proficiency) that 20% boost to keeping your concentration spells up and running will probably do you a lot more good than the 5% harder save and 5% greater hit on the spells.
Please, don't just look at the d20 and assume that's how the math works. It's not a flat 20% boost to keeping concentration. The target number is just as important as the modifier to the result. If you only need a 10 to maintain concentration and have a +1 modifier (13 Constitution), then you have a 55% chance of success because you need a 9 or better on the die. But if you have a +5 modifier (14 Constitution plus Proficiency), then you only need a 5 or better. So, on the surface that does look like it's a 75% chance of success. But the overall improvement, compared to their original odds of success, is only about 36.4%. In other words, they're more than just 20% better. But that seemingly great benefit can utterly evaporate against a high enough damage roll. And when that happens, Advantage is the better of the two to have. This is why damage mitigation is so important. Every damage roll avoided, every saving throw resisted, makes Concentration less of a concern.
Moving on, Wisdom is more valuable for Fey Wanderers than just their spell save DCs. Two of their subclass-specific spells (charm person and dispel magic) benefit from having a higher Spellcasting ability. They also have Otherworldly Glamour, so how badly they want to be the Face of the group is going to be a factor. That bonus to Constitution (hit points and saving throws) needs to be weighed against the ranger's other skill proficiencies. This particular ranger has up to 9 skills, not just the standard 5, which benefit from a higher Wisdom score.
ok first of all you get the difference in benefit by comparing the 2 chances - just look at your own numbers without the proficiency you have a 55% chance, with the proficiency (and stat boost you have a 75% chance - what is the difference? 75%-55%=20% better chance just what the +4 gives you. You don't divide the 20% difference by the 55% original to see how much better it is. Yes as damage increases you have a worse chance of making the save but you will always be 20% better than if you didn't have the resilient feat. yes charm person and dispel magic (along with other spells) will benefit from an increase in wisdom but they only benefit by 5% what is the ranger most likely to use between L8 and L12 charm person or conjure animals? (as an example) keeping those conjured animals around while in combat is probably going to do more good more regularly than the charm person that gets a save every round. and is only 5% less likely to be passed than before. you can only do one at level 8 and to my mind the resilient feat gets you a lot more than the wisdom boost, don't forget teh resilient feat gives the +4 to ALL Con checks not just concentration so your 20% better at poisons, diseases etc as well.
"I will disagree as a DM can make a magic item do anything they want....they do not have to be limited to the books.
You could make a handcrossbow that does literally anything a magic item in the book does...or the DM could hand out no magic items at all. So as we agreed its fair to not even mention them as a factor in this case..
Funny enough if you want to go down that path with an Artificer buddy it favors the CBE build as Repeating Weapon and Enhanced weapon will improve the CBE/SS build as it only helps offset the -5 penalty more and in the case of repeating weapon makes a shield in the off-hand available and the CBE/SS build has better damage AND better AC.....and DM oversight on this is minimal as its allowed by the build to make as a standard infusion. "
that is really the point i was making about fair comparisons - if your giving one a magic item you have to give the other an equivalent and so they basically cancel out. same thing for adding other feats - if one gets it the other has to get a feat that gives basically the same thing in order to do a fair comparison that is the thing about fair comparisons you take away all those addins to one to make it better and see the real numbers Level 13 Archer vs AC20: +11 to hit (18 Dex-+4, PB +5, Archery style +2) hits on a 9+ so 60% hit rate times 17 average damage for the 3 attacks = 10.2 ADPR (10.5 DPR if you give all 3 attacks the dex stat damage)
Level 13 TWF vs AC20: +9 to hit (dex + PB) 3 attacks for 24 average total damage hits on am 11+ so 50% hit rate so .5 x 24 = 12 ADPR.
That 10% from archery helps but as long as your using hand crossbows vs rapiers your going to be behind in average damage per round unless you do all 3 shots are using the sharpshooter -5 for +10 THEN the archer pulls ahead doing 18.8 (19) or 20.4 ADPR if you get dex on all 3 attacks. so levels 2-7 TWF is better Level 8 up because of the -5/+10 tradeoff the archer is better as you said. give the TWF a similar tradeoff (I don't think any feat so far does this sadly) and it would balance the two again (a feat that gave the TWF a -2 to hit for a +10 damage on each hit would move their ADPR up to 18.9 right in line with the archer)
I mean I disagree as you may face higher ACs in that timeframe that would favor the handcrossbow/CBE build. But I have shown my math which I think fairly shows how AC across the spectrum you would expect to perform.
YMMV depending on what creatures you face.
the problem with Apps is that you have to trust the programmers to have done the math right since you see only the results tables and charts are great visuals but if the math is wrong its all wasted. I don't know how they are calculating things and what they are including or excluding. I looked back at your original APP results - it looks like they are also calculating in critical damage in each case which is going to raise the overall DPR somewhat so those values should be a bit higher than mine but the real trick is to compare the vales at the same ACs. You have seen my math do you find any errors in it? What it shows is that from level 2 through 7 the TWF is slightly ahead because his weapon (the rapier) does enough more damage to offset the +2 from archery. starting at level 8 where sharpshooter kicks in and you can take the -5 to hit (-3 with archery) to get +10 damage on each attack the Archer pulls ahead as you were saying. its hard to read but I think your tables show what I was saying about levels 2-7.
AGREED THE 1D4 is from the feat but the 1D8 is from the shillelagh spell which applies to the entire weapon superseding the feat damage as long as the spell is up. Yes rangers have a lot of ways to use their bonus actions this is specifically a way to get 2 weapon fighting without taking the fighting style or the feat and still get the damage of dual wielding 2 magic long swords when you want it. The only thing you lose is the +1 to AC.
It's from a tweet from four-and-a-half years ago, but Jeremy Crawford disagrees.
"I will disagree as a DM can make a magic item do anything they want....they do not have to be limited to the books.
You could make a handcrossbow that does literally anything a magic item in the book does...or the DM could hand out no magic items at all. So as we agreed its fair to not even mention them as a factor in this case..
Funny enough if you want to go down that path with an Artificer buddy it favors the CBE build as Repeating Weapon and Enhanced weapon will improve the CBE/SS build as it only helps offset the -5 penalty more and in the case of repeating weapon makes a shield in the off-hand available and the CBE/SS build has better damage AND better AC.....and DM oversight on this is minimal as its allowed by the build to make as a standard infusion. "
that is really the point i was making about fair comparisons - if your giving one a magic item you have to give the other an equivalent and so they basically cancel out. same thing for adding other feats - if one gets it the other has to get a feat that gives basically the same thing in order to do a fair comparison that is the thing about fair comparisons you take away all those addins to one to make it better and see the real numbers Level 13 Archer vs AC20: +11 to hit (18 Dex-+4, PB +5, Archery style +2) hits on a 9+ so 60% hit rate times 17 average damage for the 3 attacks = 10.2 ADPR (10.5 DPR if you give all 3 attacks the dex stat damage)
Level 13 TWF vs AC20: +9 to hit (dex + PB) 3 attacks for 24 average total damage hits on am 11+ so 50% hit rate so .5 x 24 = 12 ADPR.
That 10% from archery helps but as long as your using hand crossbows vs rapiers your going to be behind in average damage per round unless you do all 3 shots are using the sharpshooter -5 for +10 THEN the archer pulls ahead doing 18.8 (19) or 20.4 ADPR if you get dex on all 3 attacks. so levels 2-7 TWF is better Level 8 up because of the -5/+10 tradeoff the archer is better as you said. give the TWF a similar tradeoff (I don't think any feat so far does this sadly) and it would balance the two again (a feat that gave the TWF a -2 to hit for a +10 damage on each hit would move their ADPR up to 18.9 right in line with the archer)
I mean I disagree as you may face higher ACs in that timeframe that would favor the handcrossbow/CBE build. But I have shown my math which I think fairly shows how AC across the spectrum you would expect to perform.
YMMV depending on what creatures you face.
the problem with Apps is that you have to trust the programmers to have done the math right since you see only the results tables and charts are great visuals but if the math is wrong its all wasted. I don't know how they are calculating things and what they are including or excluding. I looked back at your original APP results - it looks like they are also calculating in critical damage in each case which is going to raise the overall DPR somewhat so those values should be a bit higher than mine but the real trick is to compare the vales at the same ACs. You have seen my math do you find any errors in it? What it shows is that from level 2 through 7 the TWF is slightly ahead because his weapon (the rapier) does enough more damage to offset the +2 from archery. starting at level 8 where sharpshooter kicks in and you can take the -5 to hit (-3 with archery) to get +10 damage on each attack the Archer pulls ahead as you were saying. its hard to read but I think your tables show what I was saying about levels 2-7.
I and several others have double checked the math and they go to great length to explain their math on the calculator themselves.
And honestly I trust a peer-validated tool over an individual's calculations anyday. No offense meant there but peer-review adds a level of credit to me.
And no you are not correct:
Archery DPR:
TWF DPR:
As you can see the CBE build starts to get better at AC 16+
So depending on what types of enemies you are facing you might get more out of one vs. the other.....so YMMV as I said.
So related to this topic I could use some help. My Fey Wanderer will be hitting level 8 soon and I’m trying to decide between bumping wisdom to 18 or taking resilient con to get to a 14 and the proficiency to boost concentration. Dex is already 20 and I have sharp shooter. Any advice?
I take it your wisdom is 16 (so the 2 point boost would make it 18) I would take resilient. wisdom will raise your wisdom saves, DCs and SAM by 1 each but resilient will raise your concentration save by 4 (your getting a +1 now but you will get another +1 from the 14 and a +3 from proficiency) that 20% boost to keeping your concentration spells up and running will probably do you a lot more good than the 5% harder save and 5% greater hit on the spells.
Please, don't just look at the d20 and assume that's how the math works. It's not a flat 20% boost to keeping concentration. The target number is just as important as the modifier to the result. If you only need a 10 to maintain concentration and have a +1 modifier (13 Constitution), then you have a 55% chance of success because you need a 9 or better on the die. But if you have a +5 modifier (14 Constitution plus Proficiency), then you only need a 5 or better. So, on the surface that does look like it's a 75% chance of success. But the overall improvement, compared to their original odds of success, is only about 36.4%. In other words, they're more than just 20% better. But that seemingly great benefit can utterly evaporate against a high enough damage roll. And when that happens, Advantage is the better of the two to have. This is why damage mitigation is so important. Every damage roll avoided, every saving throw resisted, makes Concentration less of a concern.
Moving on, Wisdom is more valuable for Fey Wanderers than just their spell save DCs. Two of their subclass-specific spells (charm person and dispel magic) benefit from having a higher Spellcasting ability. They also have Otherworldly Glamour, so how badly they want to be the Face of the group is going to be a factor. That bonus to Constitution (hit points and saving throws) needs to be weighed against the ranger's other skill proficiencies. This particular ranger has up to 9 skills, not just the standard 5, which benefit from a higher Wisdom score.
ok first of all you get the difference in benefit by comparing the 2 chances - just look at your own numbers without the proficiency you have a 55% chance, with the proficiency (and stat boost you have a 75% chance - what is the difference? 75%-55%=20% better chance just what the +4 gives you. You don't divide the 20% difference by the 55% original to see how much better it is. Yes as damage increases you have a worse chance of making the save but you will always be 20% better than if you didn't have the resilient feat. yes charm person and dispel magic (along with other spells) will benefit from an increase in wisdom but they only benefit by 5% what is the ranger most likely to use between L8 and L12 charm person or conjure animals? (as an example) keeping those conjured animals around while in combat is probably going to do more good more regularly than the charm person that gets a save every round. and is only 5% less likely to be passed than before. you can only do one at level 8 and to my mind the resilient feat gets you a lot more than the wisdom boost, don't forget teh resilient feat gives the +4 to ALL Con checks not just concentration so your 20% better at poisons, diseases etc as well.
First, if you had read everything I typed out, you would know I did write all those numbers down. Your overly-simplistic approach is misleading, and I understand why your mind went that way, but it is what it is. Probability and statistics do not work the way you think they do. If one of us were to say something outlandish, like, X increases the odds of Y by 100%, that doesn't mean Y is guaranteed to happen. It means Y is twice as likely to happen as before. How you phrase things is important.
And second, you're comparing a 1st level spell every single Fey Wanderer is guaranteed to have against a 3rd level spell they have to choose to fill up one of 5-7 options. Heck, ranger's can't even know conjure animals at 8th level. They have to wait until 9th level, as it's a 3rd level spell. And if you're implying that it's some kind of "must have" for the class, then we're just going to have to disagree on a fundamental level. Not all rangers do, or even should, play the same way. Especially the narrowly-prescribed version you seem to be implying.
its a 37% increase in the chance but only a 20% increase IN THE RESULT. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you over who understands probability and statistics but I DO understand how they work quite well. Your right that they won't get conjure animals until level 9 but I could have just as easily listed hunters mark that they get at level 2 since its a Level 1 spell. which would you prefer to have a 5% better DC on charm person or a 20% better chance to hold your hunter's mark in melee?
its a 37% increase in the chance but only a 20% increase IN THE RESULT. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you over who understands probability and statistics but I DO understand how they work quite well. Your right that they won't get conjure animals until level 9 but I could have just as easily listed hunters mark that they get at level 2 since its a Level 1 spell. which would you prefer to have a 5% better DC on charm person or a 20% better chance to hold your hunter's mark in melee?
TBF Ranger does have a lot of concentration spells as well.
Also as I mentioned CON saves are the most common to have to make as a player in terms of how many creatures have them...along with the major status/conditions that are applied on a failed save.
agreed, I'll take a +4 (+) to con saves over a +1 to wisdom bonus any day. getting that proficiency means every time my PB goes up 1 so does my con save and that is jusdt an added bonus.
nice charts Optimus what app is that? I did notice that you had the AC set to 20 not 13 that may be why your numbers don't match. I'll grant you that as the AC goes up the +2 to hit becomes more important and the archer may match or even exceed the TWF but most foes don't actually have ACs of 20 and above. If you don't trust my math sit down with a calculator and work through it that is what i did and I showed you all the steps check my math. both are good builds but I'm not that the CBE hand crossbow build is so superior that I should stop playing TWF most of the time if you like the archers that's your style of play I'm just sort of tired of hearing about how the archer is SO superior when its really basically even up. I want to play my arcane archer ranger as a variant human with sharpshooter at level 1 - that is an archer charac4et I can get behind that or a Robinhood style variant human with dual wielding at L1 and archery fighting style at level 2 and shasrpshooter at level 4 armed with a rapier, dagger and longbow he is great at range and in melee - best of both worlds.
and comparing the list of magic weapons that can be dual wielded to the list of magic items for crossbows...................... the math becomes a lot harder to distill down to a chart.
I will disagree as a DM can make a magic item do anything they want....they do not have to be limited to the books.
You could make a handcrossbow that does literally anything a magic item in the book does...or the DM could hand out no magic items at all. So as we agreed its fair to not even mention them as a factor in this case..
Funny enough if you want to go down that path with an Artificer buddy it favors the CBE build as Repeating Weapon and Enhanced weapon will improve the CBE/SS build as it only helps offset the -5 penalty more and in the case of repeating weapon makes a shield in the off-hand available and the CBE/SS build has better damage AND better AC.....and DM oversight on this is minimal as its allowed by the build to make as a standard infusion.
I have one question about your chart. Something that I didn't realize for quite a while. Is that a lot of people are adding in Stat Modifier's to damage in a lot of places they shouldn't such as on PAM attacks and the Same would apply to CBE. Without CBE and TWF you would not get the Attribute modifier to damage on the bonus action attack. This is something that I believe a lot of people are making a mistake with. I know in past discussions, particularly about barbarians when trying to say Berserker's are the worst they would often calculate damage of PAM to be almost as much because they were adding modifiers to bonus action attacks.
For the Artificer and the infusions there is also the problem that repeating shot and enhanced weapon cannot be stacked. It's only one or the other. though repeating shot does have a base version of enhanced weapon built into it I believe.
nice charts Optimus what app is that? I did notice that you had the AC set to 20 not 13 that may be why your numbers don't match. I'll grant you that as the AC goes up the +2 to hit becomes more important and the archer may match or even exceed the TWF but most foes don't actually have ACs of 20 and above. If you don't trust my math sit down with a calculator and work through it that is what i did and I showed you all the steps check my math. both are good builds but I'm not that the CBE hand crossbow build is so superior that I should stop playing TWF most of the time if you like the archers that's your style of play I'm just sort of tired of hearing about how the archer is SO superior when its really basically even up. I want to play my arcane archer ranger as a variant human with sharpshooter at level 1 - that is an archer charac4et I can get behind that or a Robinhood style variant human with dual wielding at L1 and archery fighting style at level 2 and shasrpshooter at level 4 armed with a rapier, dagger and longbow he is great at range and in melee - best of both worlds.
and comparing the list of magic weapons that can be dual wielded to the list of magic items for crossbows...................... the math becomes a lot harder to distill down to a chart.
I will disagree as a DM can make a magic item do anything they want....they do not have to be limited to the books.
You could make a handcrossbow that does literally anything a magic item in the book does...or the DM could hand out no magic items at all. So as we agreed its fair to not even mention them as a factor in this case..
Funny enough if you want to go down that path with an Artificer buddy it favors the CBE build as Repeating Weapon and Enhanced weapon will improve the CBE/SS build as it only helps offset the -5 penalty more and in the case of repeating weapon makes a shield in the off-hand available and the CBE/SS build has better damage AND better AC.....and DM oversight on this is minimal as its allowed by the build to make as a standard infusion.
I have one question about your chart. Something that I didn't realize for quite a while. Is that a lot of people are adding in Stat Modifier's to damage in a lot of places they shouldn't such as on PAM attacks and the Same would apply to CBE. Without CBE and TWF you would not get the Attribute modifier to damage. This is something that I believe a lot of people are making a mistake with. I know in past discussions, particularly about barbarians when trying to say Berserker's are the worst they would often calculate damage of PAM to be almost as much because they were adding modifiers.
For the Artificer and the infusions there is also the problem that repeating shot and enhanced weapon cannot be stacked. It's only one or the other. though repeating shot does have a base version of enhanced weapon built into it I believe.
....you get to add your stat mod to PAM attack...nothing suggests you dont?
You also get to with CBE as nothing says you do not.
its a 37% increase in the chance but only a 20% increase IN THE RESULT. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you over who understands probability and statistics but I DO understand how they work quite well. Your right that they won't get conjure animals until level 9 but I could have just as easily listed hunters mark that they get at level 2 since its a Level 1 spell. which would you prefer to have a 5% better DC on charm person or a 20% better chance to hold your hunter's mark in melee?
Considering that I have done a Ranger without Hunter's mark and done just fine.
It really depends on the character. If I got a social character like the Fey Wanderer. I would probably lean towards the Better DC on Charm Person, and by extension the DC on all the other spells that I might cast that require DC's such as the Dispel magic I'd also get for free... Conjure Barrage... And likely several other spells I'm just not thinking of.
However if I'm playing something like a Beast Master or a Hunter (particularly ones that get into melee a fair bit) and I'm focusing more on Concentration spells. I might want the Con bonus more.
The Truth is that there are lots of ways to play a Ranger. And while they have quite a few good concentration Options to choose from. They aren't necessarily the spells that a particular ranger is actually using most. Something focused on long range or on social endeavors is going to prioritize something very different from one that does a lot of melee combat or relies on something like Hunter's mark or conjuring beasts.
its a 37% increase in the chance but only a 20% increase IN THE RESULT. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you over who understands probability and statistics but I DO understand how they work quite well. Your right that they won't get conjure animals until level 9 but I could have just as easily listed hunters mark that they get at level 2 since its a Level 1 spell. which would you prefer to have a 5% better DC on charm person or a 20% better chance to hold your hunter's mark in melee?
We don't care about the result. If the DC is 10, it doesn't matter if you get a 10 total or a 20. The only relevant point is whether or not the threshold for maintaining concentration was met.
Both statistics are valuable. That said, I would try my darndest to have a spellcasting ability of at least 16 by 8th level. Yes, even on a martial character. I don't like putting all my eggs into one basket. And the usefulness of both spells is something to consider. Something like charm person is best used outside of combat; for social situations. Conversely, hunter's mark is great for combat. But...hunter's mark gains in usefulness with the more attacks you can make, so I'd want it with Two Weapon Fighting. And that's, generally, a bit of a trap. As far as fighting styles go, Dueling can output just as much DPR in most circumstances. Which means I could pick something like branding smite or ensnaring strike instead. Both of which make use of your spell save DC.
its a 37% increase in the chance but only a 20% increase IN THE RESULT. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you over who understands probability and statistics but I DO understand how they work quite well. Your right that they won't get conjure animals until level 9 but I could have just as easily listed hunters mark that they get at level 2 since its a Level 1 spell. which would you prefer to have a 5% better DC on charm person or a 20% better chance to hold your hunter's mark in melee?
We don't care about the result. If the DC is 10, it doesn't matter if you get a 10 total or a 20. The only relevant point is whether or not the threshold for maintaining concentration was met.
Both statistics are valuable. That said, I would try my darndest to have a spellcasting ability of at least 16 by 8th level. Yes, even on a martial character. I don't like putting all my eggs into one basket. And the usefulness of both spells is something to consider. Something like charm person is best used outside of combat; for social situations. Conversely, hunter's mark is great for combat. But...hunter's mark gains in usefulness with the more attacks you can make, so I'd want it with Two Weapon Fighting. And that's, generally, a bit of a trap. As far as fighting styles go, Dueling can output just as much DPR in most circumstances. Which means I could pick something like branding smite or ensnaring strike instead. Both of which make use of your spell save DC.
Yeah honestly there is no wrong answer here depending on what spells you like to use and what your place in the party is.
You may pick fey wanderer as you like the flavor and do the Summon Fey spell a lot you might prefer the CON resilient
You may pick it to be a face and still get ranger stuff...then Fey Touched (WIS) makes a lot of sense.
nice charts Optimus what app is that? I did notice that you had the AC set to 20 not 13 that may be why your numbers don't match. I'll grant you that as the AC goes up the +2 to hit becomes more important and the archer may match or even exceed the TWF but most foes don't actually have ACs of 20 and above. If you don't trust my math sit down with a calculator and work through it that is what i did and I showed you all the steps check my math. both are good builds but I'm not that the CBE hand crossbow build is so superior that I should stop playing TWF most of the time if you like the archers that's your style of play I'm just sort of tired of hearing about how the archer is SO superior when its really basically even up. I want to play my arcane archer ranger as a variant human with sharpshooter at level 1 - that is an archer charac4et I can get behind that or a Robinhood style variant human with dual wielding at L1 and archery fighting style at level 2 and shasrpshooter at level 4 armed with a rapier, dagger and longbow he is great at range and in melee - best of both worlds.
and comparing the list of magic weapons that can be dual wielded to the list of magic items for crossbows...................... the math becomes a lot harder to distill down to a chart.
I will disagree as a DM can make a magic item do anything they want....they do not have to be limited to the books.
You could make a handcrossbow that does literally anything a magic item in the book does...or the DM could hand out no magic items at all. So as we agreed its fair to not even mention them as a factor in this case..
Funny enough if you want to go down that path with an Artificer buddy it favors the CBE build as Repeating Weapon and Enhanced weapon will improve the CBE/SS build as it only helps offset the -5 penalty more and in the case of repeating weapon makes a shield in the off-hand available and the CBE/SS build has better damage AND better AC.....and DM oversight on this is minimal as its allowed by the build to make as a standard infusion.
I have one question about your chart. Something that I didn't realize for quite a while. Is that a lot of people are adding in Stat Modifier's to damage in a lot of places they shouldn't such as on PAM attacks and the Same would apply to CBE. Without CBE and TWF you would not get the Attribute modifier to damage. This is something that I believe a lot of people are making a mistake with. I know in past discussions, particularly about barbarians when trying to say Berserker's are the worst they would often calculate damage of PAM to be almost as much because they were adding modifiers.
For the Artificer and the infusions there is also the problem that repeating shot and enhanced weapon cannot be stacked. It's only one or the other. though repeating shot does have a base version of enhanced weapon built into it I believe.
....you get to add your stat mod to PAM attack...nothing suggests you dont?
You also get to with CBE as nothing says you do not.
Not sure what you mean?
WHAt he is saying is that the bonus action attacks are second weapon attacks and only the TWF style actually says you get the stat bonus on the bonus action, therefore in all other cases you don't (anything not specifically allowed is forbidden), while many folks (mis)read this as allowing the stat bonus on the second weapon attack. (anything not specifically forbidden is allowed). While I am normally of the second opinion in this case I agree that is why my basic calculations for CBE the hand crossbow average damages were 6+3(+6). I did also do it the other way (6+6+6) and it does help but doesn't overcome the effect of the harder hitting TWF weapons below L8. this is a case where you really need to speak to your DM to get their take on it for the campaign you're in.
nice charts Optimus what app is that? I did notice that you had the AC set to 20 not 13 that may be why your numbers don't match. I'll grant you that as the AC goes up the +2 to hit becomes more important and the archer may match or even exceed the TWF but most foes don't actually have ACs of 20 and above. If you don't trust my math sit down with a calculator and work through it that is what i did and I showed you all the steps check my math. both are good builds but I'm not that the CBE hand crossbow build is so superior that I should stop playing TWF most of the time if you like the archers that's your style of play I'm just sort of tired of hearing about how the archer is SO superior when its really basically even up. I want to play my arcane archer ranger as a variant human with sharpshooter at level 1 - that is an archer charac4et I can get behind that or a Robinhood style variant human with dual wielding at L1 and archery fighting style at level 2 and shasrpshooter at level 4 armed with a rapier, dagger and longbow he is great at range and in melee - best of both worlds.
and comparing the list of magic weapons that can be dual wielded to the list of magic items for crossbows...................... the math becomes a lot harder to distill down to a chart.
I will disagree as a DM can make a magic item do anything they want....they do not have to be limited to the books.
You could make a handcrossbow that does literally anything a magic item in the book does...or the DM could hand out no magic items at all. So as we agreed its fair to not even mention them as a factor in this case..
Funny enough if you want to go down that path with an Artificer buddy it favors the CBE build as Repeating Weapon and Enhanced weapon will improve the CBE/SS build as it only helps offset the -5 penalty more and in the case of repeating weapon makes a shield in the off-hand available and the CBE/SS build has better damage AND better AC.....and DM oversight on this is minimal as its allowed by the build to make as a standard infusion.
I have one question about your chart. Something that I didn't realize for quite a while. Is that a lot of people are adding in Stat Modifier's to damage in a lot of places they shouldn't such as on PAM attacks and the Same would apply to CBE. Without CBE and TWF you would not get the Attribute modifier to damage. This is something that I believe a lot of people are making a mistake with. I know in past discussions, particularly about barbarians when trying to say Berserker's are the worst they would often calculate damage of PAM to be almost as much because they were adding modifiers.
For the Artificer and the infusions there is also the problem that repeating shot and enhanced weapon cannot be stacked. It's only one or the other. though repeating shot does have a base version of enhanced weapon built into it I believe.
....you get to add your stat mod to PAM attack...nothing suggests you dont?
You also get to with CBE as nothing says you do not.
Not sure what you mean?
WHAt he is saying is that the bonus action attacks are second weapon attacks and only the TWF style actually says you get the stat bonus on the bonus action, therefore in all other cases you don't (anything not specifically allowed is forbidden), while many folks (mis)read this as allowing the stat bonus on the second weapon attack. (anything not specifically forbidden is allowed). While I am normally of the second opinion in this case I agree that is why my basic calculations for CBE the hand crossbow average damages were 6+3(+6). I did also do it the other way (6+6+6) and it does help but doesn't overcome the effect of the harder hitting TWF weapons below L8. this is a case where you really need to speak to your DM to get their take on it for the campaign you're in.
There are a few things that give bonus action Primary Attacks. or certain things make allowances for adding the stat in.
But PAM says nothing about adding the stat in and flavors itself as a second weapon/secondary attack. Such attacks are called out as not getting your attribute bonus to damage unless they say they do. or some ability modifies them to do so... Same goes for CBE and Dual Wielding. PAM doesn't fit the wording of TWF style to qualify though because it's a special secondary attack from the Feat and not two weapon fighting like CBE and Dual Wielding are.
martial ARts gets around it by only simulating dual wielding and finesse but working technically by it's own Rules. Which also covers monk weapons which By Default covers Ki Fueled strike. Frenzy of Barbarians by it's wording calls it out as a primary weapon attack, which is different from the wording of PAM.
I honestly just recently noticed the distinction. I'm not currently DM so i don't have to worry about it at my table yet. But it is something that I noticed recently when dealing with something else. But PAM by RaW is mimicing Two Weapon Fighting without the fighting style or the dual wielder feat but doesn't give caveats for enhancement by either. Kind of Like how MA mimics those things and the Finesse trait, but doesn't actually qualify for any kind of enhancement by the others. If PAM was going to allow the attribute modifier to damage by RaW because of the way it's written. It would have had to say 1d4+strength like so many other alternate attacks and abilities. Even some that are primarily just modifiers to other things like racial attacks changing unarmed damage from bludgeoning to something like slashing.
All weapon damage rolls add their corresponding modifier to the damage unless a feature tells you otherwise. This is from the rules on Damage Rolls in the Combat chapter of the Basic Rules:
"When attacking with a weapon, you add your ability modifier--the same modifier used for the attack roll--to the damage."
Since you're making an attack with the weapon, you add the modifier. It doesn't matter that you're making that attack because of a feat, or with the opposite end of a weapon, or using a bonus action, or so on. Nothing in the feat suggests an exception to the general rule, so add that modifier.
I think you have it backwards. When employing Two-Weapon Fighting, the rules are specific to that circumstance. There is no general rule for Bonus Action attacks and not adding the ability modifier used for the attack roll to the damage roll. In other words, the only thing the rule here cares about is the character must be wielding two melee weapons with the light property.
The monk's Martial Arts doesn't need to stipulate that their attack modifier is added to the damage roll. Neither do any other Bonus Action attacks; regardless of whether or not they come from a feat (i.e. Crossbow Expert and Polearm Master) or a feature (the Berserker barbarian's Frenzied Rage). It's assumed because the general rule you seem to allude to doesn't exist. And the rules for Two-Weapon Fighting do not apply unless the conditions for Two-Weapon Fighting have been met.
have fun arguing guys this is what i mean with " 2 ways to view rules - 1) asnything not specifically allowed is forbidden or 2) anything not specifically forbidden is allowed" enjoy yourselves.
have fun arguing guys this is what i mean with " 2 ways to view rules - 1) asnything not specifically allowed is forbidden or 2) anything not specifically forbidden is allowed" enjoy yourselves.
I think you're looking at it from the wrong angle. The rules are written in the affirmative, not the prohibitive. They tell you what you can do. They don't bother with what you can't.
All weapon damage rolls add their corresponding modifier to the damage unless a feature tells you otherwise. This is from the rules on Damage Rolls in the Combat chapter of the Basic Rules:
"When attacking with a weapon, you add your ability modifier--the same modifier used for the attack roll--to the damage."
Since you're making an attack with the weapon, you add the modifier. It doesn't matter that you're making that attack because of a feat, or with the opposite end of a weapon, or using a bonus action, or so on. Nothing in the feat suggests an exception to the general rule, so add that modifier.
Same with CBE.... You add the modifier.
No. All weapon's add the damage modifier when the game says they add them. PAM is not your typical weapon attack and thus it doesn't apply unless PAM says so. PAM supercedes the damage dice and such about the attack and states exactly what the attack can do. Which says nothing about adding the stat modifier. Any other Special attack like that. Even when it mimics the rules of something else says that it can be used.
MA specifically says that Dexterity can be used and that it adds to the damage of all attacks with monk weapons and unarmed strikes. You may say that it doesn't require the necessity to say this. But funnily enough. it does say exactly that. Both in regards to imitating finesse and adding the damage modifier.
CBE and Two Weapon Fighting work under the same Rules. CBE does not add a modifier. it does not in any way say that you can add a modifier. All it does is effectively make two weapon fighting apply to the hand Crossbow. Interestingly enough in it's own twist of wording, though likely not the intention, It allows for two weapon fighting and not two weapon fighting. Though the intent from the way it is written suggests a 1 handed melee attack and a hand crossbow. They failed to actually explicitly state the melee part which by RaW allows it to do it's own complicated things. It is through this poor wording that creates a lack of specification that people deem it gets it's modifier for the damage despite the fact that the RaI of it seems to imply that the Hand Crossbow is a second weapon held in your other hand and is functioning like an offhand attack. CBE has the problem that if you do use it with something in your other hand it does actually qualify for two weapon fighting, but there is the potential use that wasn't accounted for of only holding the hand crossbow in your hand in it's RaW which is why people make the assumption that it allows for the Damage modifier Bonus on the bonus action attack.
People Try to get away with this because main hand and off hand are no longer defined. But there is the issue that the only way to actually fight with a weapon in each hand is with Two Weapon Fighting And through Modifications of Two Weapon Fighting. The Two Weapon Fighting Style does not even make a distinction about melee or ranged weapons. CBE adds the ability to use a ranged weapon in two weapon fighting. Thus Two Weapon Fighting Style and CBE actually can synergize and work together. This actually makes clear the intent of CBE as a modification of Two Weapon Fighting despite the fact that it's final print wording creates situations for other shenanigans.
There is also the fact that Rules wise. Two Weapon Fighting, CBE, and Two Weapon Fighting Style are actually highly compatible from a rules standpoint in all ways except for in the glaring issue that CBE managed to fail defining the first weapon which leaves open the Shenanigans by RaW over the hand crossbow being the second weapon.
Even More than this We actually know that Shillelagh does not in fact modify the PAM damage through Official sage advice in the PDF fully sanctioned by WotC that I believe somebody actually linked in the thread. This is just more proof that the Attack is actually distinct and different and does not fall under all of the normal attack rules that people are trying to use to grant PAM the modifier damage. Shillelagh modifies all normal uses of such weapons as it applies to which helps to create the distinction. It shows there is a specificity level to the Bonus Action attack from PAM that precludes things that apply to the normal attacks.
When you combine all that with the fact that PAM is written in a way to mimic Two Weapon Fighting by effectively making the other end of your weapon a second weapon that is not enhanced by Shillelagh and Does not list the modifier damage as part of the damage calculation of this created second weapon in the ability giving this attack that is being Explicit about the damage it deals. You end up in only one real situation. Modifier damage does not apply.
ok first of all you get the difference in benefit by comparing the 2 chances - just look at your own numbers without the proficiency you have a 55% chance, with the proficiency (and stat boost you have a 75% chance - what is the difference? 75%-55%=20% better chance just what the +4 gives you. You don't divide the 20% difference by the 55% original to see how much better it is. Yes as damage increases you have a worse chance of making the save but you will always be 20% better than if you didn't have the resilient feat. yes charm person and dispel magic (along with other spells) will benefit from an increase in wisdom but they only benefit by 5% what is the ranger most likely to use between L8 and L12 charm person or conjure animals? (as an example) keeping those conjured animals around while in combat is probably going to do more good more regularly than the charm person that gets a save every round. and is only 5% less likely to be passed than before. you can only do one at level 8 and to my mind the resilient feat gets you a lot more than the wisdom boost, don't forget teh resilient feat gives the +4 to ALL Con checks not just concentration so your 20% better at poisons, diseases etc as well.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
the problem with Apps is that you have to trust the programmers to have done the math right since you see only the results tables and charts are great visuals but if the math is wrong its all wasted. I don't know how they are calculating things and what they are including or excluding. I looked back at your original APP results - it looks like they are also calculating in critical damage in each case which is going to raise the overall DPR somewhat so those values should be a bit higher than mine but the real trick is to compare the vales at the same ACs. You have seen my math do you find any errors in it? What it shows is that from level 2 through 7 the TWF is slightly ahead because his weapon (the rapier) does enough more damage to offset the +2 from archery. starting at level 8 where sharpshooter kicks in and you can take the -5 to hit (-3 with archery) to get +10 damage on each attack the Archer pulls ahead as you were saying. its hard to read but I think your tables show what I was saying about levels 2-7.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
thank you for the info I'll check them out.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I and several others have double checked the math and they go to great length to explain their math on the calculator themselves.
And honestly I trust a peer-validated tool over an individual's calculations anyday. No offense meant there but peer-review adds a level of credit to me.
And no you are not correct:
Archery DPR:
TWF DPR:
As you can see the CBE build starts to get better at AC 16+
So depending on what types of enemies you are facing you might get more out of one vs. the other.....so YMMV as I said.
First, if you had read everything I typed out, you would know I did write all those numbers down. Your overly-simplistic approach is misleading, and I understand why your mind went that way, but it is what it is. Probability and statistics do not work the way you think they do. If one of us were to say something outlandish, like, X increases the odds of Y by 100%, that doesn't mean Y is guaranteed to happen. It means Y is twice as likely to happen as before. How you phrase things is important.
And second, you're comparing a 1st level spell every single Fey Wanderer is guaranteed to have against a 3rd level spell they have to choose to fill up one of 5-7 options. Heck, ranger's can't even know conjure animals at 8th level. They have to wait until 9th level, as it's a 3rd level spell. And if you're implying that it's some kind of "must have" for the class, then we're just going to have to disagree on a fundamental level. Not all rangers do, or even should, play the same way. Especially the narrowly-prescribed version you seem to be implying.
its a 37% increase in the chance but only a 20% increase IN THE RESULT. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you over who understands probability and statistics but I DO understand how they work quite well. Your right that they won't get conjure animals until level 9 but I could have just as easily listed hunters mark that they get at level 2 since its a Level 1 spell. which would you prefer to have a 5% better DC on charm person or a 20% better chance to hold your hunter's mark in melee?
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
TBF Ranger does have a lot of concentration spells as well.
Also as I mentioned CON saves are the most common to have to make as a player in terms of how many creatures have them...along with the major status/conditions that are applied on a failed save.
agreed, I'll take a +4 (+) to con saves over a +1 to wisdom bonus any day. getting that proficiency means every time my PB goes up 1 so does my con save and that is jusdt an added bonus.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I have one question about your chart. Something that I didn't realize for quite a while. Is that a lot of people are adding in Stat Modifier's to damage in a lot of places they shouldn't such as on PAM attacks and the Same would apply to CBE. Without CBE and TWF you would not get the Attribute modifier to damage on the bonus action attack. This is something that I believe a lot of people are making a mistake with. I know in past discussions, particularly about barbarians when trying to say Berserker's are the worst they would often calculate damage of PAM to be almost as much because they were adding modifiers to bonus action attacks.
For the Artificer and the infusions there is also the problem that repeating shot and enhanced weapon cannot be stacked. It's only one or the other. though repeating shot does have a base version of enhanced weapon built into it I believe.
....you get to add your stat mod to PAM attack...nothing suggests you dont?
You also get to with CBE as nothing says you do not.
Not sure what you mean?
Considering that I have done a Ranger without Hunter's mark and done just fine.
It really depends on the character. If I got a social character like the Fey Wanderer. I would probably lean towards the Better DC on Charm Person, and by extension the DC on all the other spells that I might cast that require DC's such as the Dispel magic I'd also get for free... Conjure Barrage... And likely several other spells I'm just not thinking of.
However if I'm playing something like a Beast Master or a Hunter (particularly ones that get into melee a fair bit) and I'm focusing more on Concentration spells. I might want the Con bonus more.
The Truth is that there are lots of ways to play a Ranger. And while they have quite a few good concentration Options to choose from. They aren't necessarily the spells that a particular ranger is actually using most. Something focused on long range or on social endeavors is going to prioritize something very different from one that does a lot of melee combat or relies on something like Hunter's mark or conjuring beasts.
We don't care about the result. If the DC is 10, it doesn't matter if you get a 10 total or a 20. The only relevant point is whether or not the threshold for maintaining concentration was met.
Both statistics are valuable. That said, I would try my darndest to have a spellcasting ability of at least 16 by 8th level. Yes, even on a martial character. I don't like putting all my eggs into one basket. And the usefulness of both spells is something to consider. Something like charm person is best used outside of combat; for social situations. Conversely, hunter's mark is great for combat. But...hunter's mark gains in usefulness with the more attacks you can make, so I'd want it with Two Weapon Fighting. And that's, generally, a bit of a trap. As far as fighting styles go, Dueling can output just as much DPR in most circumstances. Which means I could pick something like branding smite or ensnaring strike instead. Both of which make use of your spell save DC.
Yeah honestly there is no wrong answer here depending on what spells you like to use and what your place in the party is.
You may pick fey wanderer as you like the flavor and do the Summon Fey spell a lot you might prefer the CON resilient
You may pick it to be a face and still get ranger stuff...then Fey Touched (WIS) makes a lot of sense.
WHAt he is saying is that the bonus action attacks are second weapon attacks and only the TWF style actually says you get the stat bonus on the bonus action, therefore in all other cases you don't (anything not specifically allowed is forbidden), while many folks (mis)read this as allowing the stat bonus on the second weapon attack. (anything not specifically forbidden is allowed). While I am normally of the second opinion in this case I agree that is why my basic calculations for CBE the hand crossbow average damages were 6+3(+6). I did also do it the other way (6+6+6) and it does help but doesn't overcome the effect of the harder hitting TWF weapons below L8. this is a case where you really need to speak to your DM to get their take on it for the campaign you're in.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
There are a few things that give bonus action Primary Attacks. or certain things make allowances for adding the stat in.
But PAM says nothing about adding the stat in and flavors itself as a second weapon/secondary attack. Such attacks are called out as not getting your attribute bonus to damage unless they say they do. or some ability modifies them to do so... Same goes for CBE and Dual Wielding. PAM doesn't fit the wording of TWF style to qualify though because it's a special secondary attack from the Feat and not two weapon fighting like CBE and Dual Wielding are.
martial ARts gets around it by only simulating dual wielding and finesse but working technically by it's own Rules. Which also covers monk weapons which By Default covers Ki Fueled strike. Frenzy of Barbarians by it's wording calls it out as a primary weapon attack, which is different from the wording of PAM.
I honestly just recently noticed the distinction. I'm not currently DM so i don't have to worry about it at my table yet. But it is something that I noticed recently when dealing with something else. But PAM by RaW is mimicing Two Weapon Fighting without the fighting style or the dual wielder feat but doesn't give caveats for enhancement by either. Kind of Like how MA mimics those things and the Finesse trait, but doesn't actually qualify for any kind of enhancement by the others. If PAM was going to allow the attribute modifier to damage by RaW because of the way it's written. It would have had to say 1d4+strength like so many other alternate attacks and abilities. Even some that are primarily just modifiers to other things like racial attacks changing unarmed damage from bludgeoning to something like slashing.
Yeah doesn't matter as you add the modifier.
All weapon damage rolls add their corresponding modifier to the damage unless a feature tells you otherwise. This is from the rules on Damage Rolls in the Combat chapter of the Basic Rules:
"When attacking with a weapon, you add your ability modifier--the same modifier used for the attack roll--to the damage."
Since you're making an attack with the weapon, you add the modifier. It doesn't matter that you're making that attack because of a feat, or with the opposite end of a weapon, or using a bonus action, or so on. Nothing in the feat suggests an exception to the general rule, so add that modifier.
Same with CBE.... You add the modifier.
I think you have it backwards. When employing Two-Weapon Fighting, the rules are specific to that circumstance. There is no general rule for Bonus Action attacks and not adding the ability modifier used for the attack roll to the damage roll. In other words, the only thing the rule here cares about is the character must be wielding two melee weapons with the light property.
The monk's Martial Arts doesn't need to stipulate that their attack modifier is added to the damage roll. Neither do any other Bonus Action attacks; regardless of whether or not they come from a feat (i.e. Crossbow Expert and Polearm Master) or a feature (the Berserker barbarian's Frenzied Rage). It's assumed because the general rule you seem to allude to doesn't exist. And the rules for Two-Weapon Fighting do not apply unless the conditions for Two-Weapon Fighting have been met.
have fun arguing guys this is what i mean with " 2 ways to view rules - 1) asnything not specifically allowed is forbidden or 2) anything not specifically forbidden is allowed" enjoy yourselves.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I think you're looking at it from the wrong angle. The rules are written in the affirmative, not the prohibitive. They tell you what you can do. They don't bother with what you can't.
No. All weapon's add the damage modifier when the game says they add them. PAM is not your typical weapon attack and thus it doesn't apply unless PAM says so. PAM supercedes the damage dice and such about the attack and states exactly what the attack can do. Which says nothing about adding the stat modifier. Any other Special attack like that. Even when it mimics the rules of something else says that it can be used.
MA specifically says that Dexterity can be used and that it adds to the damage of all attacks with monk weapons and unarmed strikes. You may say that it doesn't require the necessity to say this. But funnily enough. it does say exactly that. Both in regards to imitating finesse and adding the damage modifier.
CBE and Two Weapon Fighting work under the same Rules. CBE does not add a modifier. it does not in any way say that you can add a modifier. All it does is effectively make two weapon fighting apply to the hand Crossbow. Interestingly enough in it's own twist of wording, though likely not the intention, It allows for two weapon fighting and not two weapon fighting. Though the intent from the way it is written suggests a 1 handed melee attack and a hand crossbow. They failed to actually explicitly state the melee part which by RaW allows it to do it's own complicated things. It is through this poor wording that creates a lack of specification that people deem it gets it's modifier for the damage despite the fact that the RaI of it seems to imply that the Hand Crossbow is a second weapon held in your other hand and is functioning like an offhand attack. CBE has the problem that if you do use it with something in your other hand it does actually qualify for two weapon fighting, but there is the potential use that wasn't accounted for of only holding the hand crossbow in your hand in it's RaW which is why people make the assumption that it allows for the Damage modifier Bonus on the bonus action attack.
People Try to get away with this because main hand and off hand are no longer defined. But there is the issue that the only way to actually fight with a weapon in each hand is with Two Weapon Fighting And through Modifications of Two Weapon Fighting. The Two Weapon Fighting Style does not even make a distinction about melee or ranged weapons. CBE adds the ability to use a ranged weapon in two weapon fighting. Thus Two Weapon Fighting Style and CBE actually can synergize and work together. This actually makes clear the intent of CBE as a modification of Two Weapon Fighting despite the fact that it's final print wording creates situations for other shenanigans.
There is also the fact that Rules wise. Two Weapon Fighting, CBE, and Two Weapon Fighting Style are actually highly compatible from a rules standpoint in all ways except for in the glaring issue that CBE managed to fail defining the first weapon which leaves open the Shenanigans by RaW over the hand crossbow being the second weapon.
Even More than this We actually know that Shillelagh does not in fact modify the PAM damage through Official sage advice in the PDF fully sanctioned by WotC that I believe somebody actually linked in the thread. This is just more proof that the Attack is actually distinct and different and does not fall under all of the normal attack rules that people are trying to use to grant PAM the modifier damage. Shillelagh modifies all normal uses of such weapons as it applies to which helps to create the distinction. It shows there is a specificity level to the Bonus Action attack from PAM that precludes things that apply to the normal attacks.
When you combine all that with the fact that PAM is written in a way to mimic Two Weapon Fighting by effectively making the other end of your weapon a second weapon that is not enhanced by Shillelagh and Does not list the modifier damage as part of the damage calculation of this created second weapon in the ability giving this attack that is being Explicit about the damage it deals. You end up in only one real situation. Modifier damage does not apply.