There's nothing to concede. "Different" does not mean "better" or "worse". The three classes all work differently. As cute as these comparisons have been, it's also foolish. All of the now 13 classes, by design, aren't balanced against one another. They're deliberately not equal, so holding them up to each other and saying "look here" doesn't actually accomplish what you think it does.
And dumping on any class is just juvenile.
You can concede from the argument if you no longer want to continue. Different does not mean worse, but worse damage does mean worse for a class whose main point is to deal damage. It is not foolish to realize that one class is obviously worse than other to try and fix it. All of the classes are supposed to be balanced against one another. That's why paladins only get 2 attacks, but get smite spells and divine smite. That's why Bladesingers, College of Valor/Swords, and Hexblades have to give up their spells and other class specific features to be good at melee combat. The classes are supposed to be balanced against each other. If a class is obviously not balanced, that is a problem, and needs to be fixed. It is not juvenile to debate the damage effectiveness of a class. It is more juvenile to ignore arguments while making ad hominems and other logical fallacies in place of actually debating. If you want to stop debating, just stop. If you want to stop attacking me, not my arguments, I will let this go without any issues.
You can't tell, but I'm laughing right now. Because that's how laughable this is.
Bards and wizards don't "give up their spells and other class specific features" to be good at melee combat. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to avoid damage have you read the subclass? Hexblades and Pact of the Blade Warlocks have to give up spell slots for Eldritch Smite, Hex, and Eldritch Invocations for Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, Improved Pact Weapon, and Eldritch Smite. Bards have to give up Bardic Inspiration for Blade Flourish and Psychic Blades.
Keep laughing. It shows how little you actually know about this system.
Bladesingers can choose to expend spell slots to reduce damage. Just like how Circle of the Moon druids can choose to expend spell slots to heal themselves. They don't have to.
You really don't get how choice can be empowering, do you? You act as if everything should be handed to you on a silver platter.
A 3rd level fireball ONLY deals an average of 21 damage to a single target (assuming a 50% successful save).
If you're casting a fireball only on one target, you're wasting your spell slots. Fireball is an AoE spell, in an entirely different class than martial classes.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
Rangers get their level 11 damage bump from their subclass, not their core class. For example: level 11 hunter does 34.5 (actually they can do that starting at level 8, and even more at level 11 if their are many opponents around), and level 11 beast master with a wolf does 37 (the attacks are magical, have a knockdown effect, Wolf has a 17+ AC, Wolf has 44 hit points, and wolf has advantage in attack rolls).
I said that I was ignoring subclass features for all of the classes. Battlemaster Fighters get d10 superiority dice at 10th level, Vengeance Paladins get Hunter's Mark at 3rd level, and Eldritch Knights can combine GFB/BB with Shadow Blade and War Caster at 7th-10th level to do unfathomable amounts of damage compared to the ranger. If you want to go back on the "no subclasses" rule that I believe you yourself proposed, I can dig up other specific paladin/fighter features that let them do even more damage.
Cool. Now, here's the problem with that assessment.
Every fighter gets Action Surge and up to 4 attacks. Ever paladin gets Divine Smite. But a big chunk of the ranger's damage comes from their archetypes. Because they all fight differently. Heck, just the Hunter archetype has 54 different combinations of archetype features. Beast Masters are at least as varied as all their possible Animal Companions. Rangers are complex; requiring a lot of thinking and strategy. That's just how skirmishers are.
You think they're "underpowered" because you don't understand them.
If a ranger forgoes a shield they have a free hand to occasionally chuck a dagger with their free hand to trigger restraining strike, hail of thorns, lightning arrow, etc.
Paladins can use their shield as a spellcasting focus, so they don't have to give up AC or their weapon to cast a spell. The dagger chucking has nothing to do with anything. Both paladins and fighters can do that too, and the paladin can even use a smite spell (branding smite, banishing smite) to empower the attack like you said a ranger can.
Most ranger spell don’t need anything but a ranged weapon attack and a verbal component. The dagger gives them some big AoE options or the ability to draw a second weapon and beat down on a big single target that has hunter’s mark on it.
A 3rd level fireball ONLY deals an average of 21 damage to a single target (assuming a 50% successful save).
If you're casting a fireball only on one target, you're wasting your spell slots. Fireball is an AoE spell, in an entirely different class than martial classes.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
No, because Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers as each other, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and anyone else with fireball and AoE spells is completely different. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins attack one person each time they attack, while Fireball can damage more than a dozen creatures at once. This is comparing apples and oranges. Fighters are Fuji, Paladins are Granny Smith, and Rangers are a bruised unripe Red Delicious.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
A 3rd level fireball ONLY deals an average of 21 damage to a single target (assuming a 50% successful save).
If you're casting a fireball only on one target, you're wasting your spell slots. Fireball is an AoE spell, in an entirely different class than martial classes.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
No, because Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers as each other, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and anyone else with fireball and AoE spells is completely different. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins attack one person each time they attack, while Fireball can damage more than a dozen creatures at once. This is comparing apples and oranges. Fighters are Fuji, Paladins are Granny Smith, and Rangers are a bruised unripe Red Delicious.
Incorrect. Rangers are the martial class that specializes in fighting many opponents at the same time. They are the martial AoE. Hunter rangers with a bow can take out small armies that would slaughter a paladin or fighter. Horde Breaker, Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Plant Growth, and Volley for the win.
Show me the numbers too comparing a level 10 dexterity paladin against a level 10 strength ranger.
Okay, same thing as before. Let's ignore subclass features, assume a +3 to attacking score at level 1, increasing to +4 at level 5, and +5 at level 11. Average damage each turn, assuming you hit. Dexterity Paladin is Dexadin, and the Strength Ranger is the Stranger. The dexadin is using a rapier and shield, the stranger is using an strength based 1d8 one handed weapon and a shield, both using Dueling.
Level 1: Dexadin 9.5 damage, AC of 16 (leather armor, shield) Stranger 9.5, AC of 17-18 (scale mail, shield, Dex of 12-14)
Level 5: Dexadin 21 damage (extra attack), AC of 18 (studded leather, shield) Stranger 28 (hunter's mark, extra attack), AC of 19 (halfplate, shield), disdvantage on stealth
Level 11: Dexadin 32 damage (improved divine smite), AC of 19 (studded leather armor Stranger 30 damage, AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
Level 20: Dexadin 32 damage, AC of 19 Stranger 30 damage (+wis mod with capstone), AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
A 3rd level fireball ONLY deals an average of 21 damage to a single target (assuming a 50% successful save).
If you're casting a fireball only on one target, you're wasting your spell slots. Fireball is an AoE spell, in an entirely different class than martial classes.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
No, because Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers as each other, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and anyone else with fireball and AoE spells is completely different. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins attack one person each time they attack, while Fireball can damage more than a dozen creatures at once. This is comparing apples and oranges. Fighters are Fuji, Paladins are Granny Smith, and Rangers are a bruised unripe Red Delicious.
Incorrect. Rangers are the martial class that specializes in fighting many opponents at the same time. They are the martial AoE. Hunter rangers with a bow can take out small armies that would slaughter a paladin or fighter. Horde Breaker, Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Plant Growth, and Volley for the win.
That's a specific subclass of them. They do get some AoE spells, but there are paladin and fighter subclasses that can do AoE effects as well (Conquest Paladins, Eldritch Knights, etc). Rangers are not AoE martial characters, they are martial half-casters with a few AoE spells and subclass features.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Show me the numbers too comparing a level 10 dexterity paladin against a level 10 strength ranger.
Okay, same thing as before. Let's ignore subclass features, assume a +3 to attacking score at level 1, increasing to +4 at level 5, and +5 at level 11. Average damage each turn, assuming you hit. Dexterity Paladin is Dexadin, and the Strength Ranger is the Stranger. The dexadin is using a rapier and shield, the stranger is using an strength based 1d8 one handed weapon and a shield, both using Dueling.
Level 1: Dexadin 9.5 damage, AC of 16 (leather armor, shield) Stranger 9.5, AC of 17-18 (scale mail, shield, Dex of 12-14)
Level 5: Dexadin 21 damage (extra attack), AC of 18 (studded leather, shield) Stranger 28 (hunter's mark, extra attack), AC of 19 (halfplate, shield), disdvantage on stealth
Level 11: Dexadin 32 damage (improved divine smite), AC of 19 (studded leather armor Stranger 30 damage, AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
Level 20: Dexadin 32 damage, AC of 19 Stranger 30 damage (+wis mod with capstone), AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
Cool. Now, here's the problem with that assessment.
Every fighter gets Action Surge and up to 4 attacks. Ever paladin gets Divine Smite. But a big chunk of the ranger's damage comes from their archetypes. Because they all fight differently. Heck, just the Hunter archetype has 54 different combinations of archetype features. Beast Masters are at least as varied as all their possible Animal Companions. Rangers are complex; requiring a lot of thinking and strategy. That's just how skirmishers are.
You think they're "underpowered" because you don't understand them.
There's nothing to concede. "Different" does not mean "better" or "worse". The three classes all work differently. As cute as these comparisons have been, it's also foolish. All of the now 13 classes, by design, aren't balanced against one another. They're deliberately not equal, so holding them up to each other and saying "look here" doesn't actually accomplish what you think it does.
And dumping on any class is just juvenile.
You can concede from the argument if you no longer want to continue. Different does not mean worse, but worse damage does mean worse for a class whose main point is to deal damage. It is not foolish to realize that one class is obviously worse than other to try and fix it. All of the classes are supposed to be balanced against one another. That's why paladins only get 2 attacks, but get smite spells and divine smite. That's why Bladesingers, College of Valor/Swords, and Hexblades have to give up their spells and other class specific features to be good at melee combat. The classes are supposed to be balanced against each other. If a class is obviously not balanced, that is a problem, and needs to be fixed. It is not juvenile to debate the damage effectiveness of a class. It is more juvenile to ignore arguments while making ad hominems and other logical fallacies in place of actually debating. If you want to stop debating, just stop. If you want to stop attacking me, not my arguments, I will let this go without any issues.
You can't tell, but I'm laughing right now. Because that's how laughable this is.
Bards and wizards don't "give up their spells and other class specific features" to be good at melee combat. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to avoid damage have you read the subclass? Hexblades and Pact of the Blade Warlocks have to give up spell slots for Eldritch Smite, Hex, and Eldritch Invocations for Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, Improved Pact Weapon, and Eldritch Smite. Bards have to give up Bardic Inspiration for Blade Flourish and Psychic Blades.
Keep laughing. It shows how little you actually know about this system.
Bladesingers can choose to expend spell slots to reduce damage. Just like how Circle of the Moon druids can choose to expend spell slots to heal themselves. They don't have to.
You really don't get how choice can be empowering, do you? You act as if everything should be handed to you on a silver platter.
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to survive in melee, as they only have a d6 hit dice. Their AC mostly makes up for it, but not against saving throw damaging effects. They do have to give it up in quite a lot of situations.
I like choice. I like how varied things can be. I don't want things handed on a silver platter, I actually want D&D to be a bit more complicated for character customization, but I do want Rangers, Paladins, Fighters, and other martial classes to be able to deal damage pretty much equally.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
There's nothing to concede. "Different" does not mean "better" or "worse". The three classes all work differently. As cute as these comparisons have been, it's also foolish. All of the now 13 classes, by design, aren't balanced against one another. They're deliberately not equal, so holding them up to each other and saying "look here" doesn't actually accomplish what you think it does.
And dumping on any class is just juvenile.
You can concede from the argument if you no longer want to continue. Different does not mean worse, but worse damage does mean worse for a class whose main point is to deal damage. It is not foolish to realize that one class is obviously worse than other to try and fix it. All of the classes are supposed to be balanced against one another. That's why paladins only get 2 attacks, but get smite spells and divine smite. That's why Bladesingers, College of Valor/Swords, and Hexblades have to give up their spells and other class specific features to be good at melee combat. The classes are supposed to be balanced against each other. If a class is obviously not balanced, that is a problem, and needs to be fixed. It is not juvenile to debate the damage effectiveness of a class. It is more juvenile to ignore arguments while making ad hominems and other logical fallacies in place of actually debating. If you want to stop debating, just stop. If you want to stop attacking me, not my arguments, I will let this go without any issues.
You can't tell, but I'm laughing right now. Because that's how laughable this is.
Bards and wizards don't "give up their spells and other class specific features" to be good at melee combat. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to avoid damage have you read the subclass? Hexblades and Pact of the Blade Warlocks have to give up spell slots for Eldritch Smite, Hex, and Eldritch Invocations for Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, Improved Pact Weapon, and Eldritch Smite. Bards have to give up Bardic Inspiration for Blade Flourish and Psychic Blades.
Keep laughing. It shows how little you actually know about this system.
Bladesingers can choose to expend spell slots to reduce damage. Just like how Circle of the Moon druids can choose to expend spell slots to heal themselves. They don't have to.
You really don't get how choice can be empowering, do you? You act as if everything should be handed to you on a silver platter.
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to survive in melee, as they only have a d6 hit dice. Their AC mostly makes up for it, but not against saving throw damaging effects. They do have to give it up in quite a lot of situations.
I like choice. I like how varied things can be. I don't want things handed on a silver platter, I actually want D&D to be a bit more complicated for character customization, but I do want Rangers, Paladins, Fighters, and other martial classes to be able to deal damage pretty much equally.
Rangers get their level 11 damage bump from their subclass, not their core class. For example: level 11 hunter does 34.5 (actually they can do that starting at level 8, and even more at level 11 if their are many opponents around), and level 11 beast master with a wolf does 37 (the attacks are magical, have a knockdown effect, Wolf has a 17+ AC, Wolf has 44 hit points, and wolf has advantage in attack rolls).
I said that I was ignoring subclass features for all of the classes. Battlemaster Fighters get d10 superiority dice at 10th level, Vengeance Paladins get Hunter's Mark at 3rd level, and Eldritch Knights can combine GFB/BB with Shadow Blade and War Caster at 7th-10th level to do unfathomable amounts of damage compared to the ranger. If you want to go back on the "no subclasses" rule that I believe you yourself proposed, I can dig up other specific paladin/fighter features that let them do even more damage.
Cool. Now, here's the problem with that assessment.
Every fighter gets Action Surge and up to 4 attacks. Ever paladin gets Divine Smite. But a big chunk of the ranger's damage comes from their archetypes. Because they all fight differently. Heck, just the Hunter archetype has 54 different combinations of archetype features. Beast Masters are at least as varied as all their possible Animal Companions. Rangers are complex; requiring a lot of thinking and strategy. That's just how skirmishers are.
You think they're "underpowered" because you don't understand them.
Paladins get subclass features that increase damage, too. Most Fighters get the same thing. Eldritch Knights get more combinations than Hunters do from their spells.
Stop calling me stupid, please. I know this system like the back of my hand.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Show me the numbers too comparing a level 10 dexterity paladin against a level 10 strength ranger.
Okay, same thing as before. Let's ignore subclass features, assume a +3 to attacking score at level 1, increasing to +4 at level 5, and +5 at level 11. Average damage each turn, assuming you hit. Dexterity Paladin is Dexadin, and the Strength Ranger is the Stranger. The dexadin is using a rapier and shield, the stranger is using an strength based 1d8 one handed weapon and a shield, both using Dueling.
Level 1: Dexadin 9.5 damage, AC of 16 (leather armor, shield) Stranger 9.5, AC of 17-18 (scale mail, shield, Dex of 12-14)
Level 5: Dexadin 21 damage (extra attack), AC of 18 (studded leather, shield) Stranger 28 (hunter's mark, extra attack), AC of 19 (halfplate, shield), disdvantage on stealth
Level 11: Dexadin 32 damage (improved divine smite), AC of 19 (studded leather armor Stranger 30 damage, AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
Level 20: Dexadin 32 damage, AC of 19 Stranger 30 damage (+wis mod with capstone), AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
1. None of those are level 10. 2. Again, levels 11+ require the subclasses of the ranger for calculating damage. It’s different than fighters and paladins. Just as rogues are different in they have a steady climb in damage not a big jump at level 11. 3. Two points of damage is not...a lot. Definitely not enough to warrant this conversation. 4. For these calculations and any other, the improved divine smite ability literally locks the the paladin into melee only combat (which is were they should be), just as the ranger’s big AoE spells lock them into having at least an option for a ranger weapon attack. 5. Some huge percentage of gameplay takes place at levels 1-10. Something like 70%. So that’s something that should be taken into account, don’t you think?
A 3rd level fireball ONLY deals an average of 21 damage to a single target (assuming a 50% successful save).
If you're casting a fireball only on one target, you're wasting your spell slots. Fireball is an AoE spell, in an entirely different class than martial classes.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
No, because Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers as each other, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and anyone else with fireball and AoE spells is completely different. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins attack one person each time they attack, while Fireball can damage more than a dozen creatures at once. This is comparing apples and oranges. Fighters are Fuji, Paladins are Granny Smith, and Rangers are a bruised unripe Red Delicious.
Incorrect. Rangers are the martial class that specializes in fighting many opponents at the same time. They are the martial AoE. Hunter rangers with a bow can take out small armies that would slaughter a paladin or fighter. Horde Breaker, Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Plant Growth, and Volley for the win.
That's a specific subclass of them. They do get some AoE spells, but there are paladin and fighter subclasses that can do AoE effects as well (Conquest Paladins, Eldritch Knights, etc). Rangers are not AoE martial characters, they are martial half-casters with a few AoE spells and subclass features.
A 3rd level smite does an average of 18 damage. A 3rd level hail of thorns does an an average (assuming a 50% successful saving throw) of 24.75 damage to 2 targets and an average of 37.125 to 3 targets. That’s a noticeable difference.
A 3rd level fireball ONLY deals an average of 21 damage to a single target (assuming a 50% successful save).
If you're casting a fireball only on one target, you're wasting your spell slots. Fireball is an AoE spell, in an entirely different class than martial classes.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
No, because Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers as each other, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and anyone else with fireball and AoE spells is completely different. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins attack one person each time they attack, while Fireball can damage more than a dozen creatures at once. This is comparing apples and oranges. Fighters are Fuji, Paladins are Granny Smith, and Rangers are a bruised unripe Red Delicious.
I don't really agree on "Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers". I think ranger is somewhat in between full frontline class such as Fighter and Paladins and skirmisher class such as rogue and monk.
I think we should bring rogue and monk into comparison as well.
There's nothing to concede. "Different" does not mean "better" or "worse". The three classes all work differently. As cute as these comparisons have been, it's also foolish. All of the now 13 classes, by design, aren't balanced against one another. They're deliberately not equal, so holding them up to each other and saying "look here" doesn't actually accomplish what you think it does.
And dumping on any class is just juvenile.
You can concede from the argument if you no longer want to continue. Different does not mean worse, but worse damage does mean worse for a class whose main point is to deal damage. It is not foolish to realize that one class is obviously worse than other to try and fix it. All of the classes are supposed to be balanced against one another. That's why paladins only get 2 attacks, but get smite spells and divine smite. That's why Bladesingers, College of Valor/Swords, and Hexblades have to give up their spells and other class specific features to be good at melee combat. The classes are supposed to be balanced against each other. If a class is obviously not balanced, that is a problem, and needs to be fixed. It is not juvenile to debate the damage effectiveness of a class. It is more juvenile to ignore arguments while making ad hominems and other logical fallacies in place of actually debating. If you want to stop debating, just stop. If you want to stop attacking me, not my arguments, I will let this go without any issues.
You can't tell, but I'm laughing right now. Because that's how laughable this is.
Bards and wizards don't "give up their spells and other class specific features" to be good at melee combat. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to avoid damage have you read the subclass? Hexblades and Pact of the Blade Warlocks have to give up spell slots for Eldritch Smite, Hex, and Eldritch Invocations for Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, Improved Pact Weapon, and Eldritch Smite. Bards have to give up Bardic Inspiration for Blade Flourish and Psychic Blades.
Keep laughing. It shows how little you actually know about this system.
Bladesingers can choose to expend spell slots to reduce damage. Just like how Circle of the Moon druids can choose to expend spell slots to heal themselves. They don't have to.
You really don't get how choice can be empowering, do you? You act as if everything should be handed to you on a silver platter.
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to survive in melee, as they only have a d6 hit dice. Their AC mostly makes up for it, but not against saving throw damaging effects. They do have to give it up in quite a lot of situations.
I like choice. I like how varied things can be. I don't want things handed on a silver platter, I actually want D&D to be a bit more complicated for character customization, but I do want Rangers, Paladins, Fighters, and other martial classes to be able to deal damage pretty much equally.
They can. They're all fine. You're ranting about nothing. And it's hilarious.
Just because you forgot why you started this tangent doesn't mean I'm "ranting about nothing." The point was that pure fighting characters (rogues, fighters, barbarians) are automatically better than half-casters at fighting unless half-casters use their spells and other magic features to improve their combat capabilities. The same thing applies to Bladesinger Wizards, Hexblade/Bladepact Warlocks, and Swords/Valor/Whispers Bards. Bladesingers use spell slots to reduce damage, Blade cantrips, Shadow Blade, Tenser's Transformation, and other spells to improve their melee abilities. Hexblades/Bladepact Warlocks can use multiple spells and invocations to increase their martial capabilities. Blade/Whispers Bards can use bardic inspiration to increase damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
A 3rd level fireball ONLY deals an average of 21 damage to a single target (assuming a 50% successful save).
If you're casting a fireball only on one target, you're wasting your spell slots. Fireball is an AoE spell, in an entirely different class than martial classes.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
No, because Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers as each other, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and anyone else with fireball and AoE spells is completely different. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins attack one person each time they attack, while Fireball can damage more than a dozen creatures at once. This is comparing apples and oranges. Fighters are Fuji, Paladins are Granny Smith, and Rangers are a bruised unripe Red Delicious.
I don't really agree on "Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers". I think ranger is somewhat in between full frontline class such as Fighter and Paladins and skirmisher class such as rogue and monk.
I think we should bring rogue and monk into comparison as well.
It is true that rangers are partially skirmishers, but they are more similar to Paladins and Fighters than Rogues and Monks, IMO. If you want to do comparisons to rogues and monks, feel free to do so. They're probably not as relevant to the discussion, but could be worth talking about. Rogues will do more damage than Rangers almost all the time, though. I think monks will do on average less, but can do noticeable more than Rangers using their Ki points. Just some hypotheses, though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Bladesingers can choose to expend spell slots to reduce damage. Just like how Circle of the Moon druids can choose to expend spell slots to heal themselves. They don't have to.
You really don't get how choice can be empowering, do you? You act as if everything should be handed to you on a silver platter.
Right. Just like grading a ranger’s damage output completely within the confines of the parameters used for a fighter or paladin.
Yep.
Most ranger spell don’t need anything but a ranged weapon attack and a verbal component. The dagger gives them some big AoE options or the ability to draw a second weapon and beat down on a big single target that has hunter’s mark on it.
No, because Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers as each other, while Wizards, Sorcerers, and anyone else with fireball and AoE spells is completely different. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins attack one person each time they attack, while Fireball can damage more than a dozen creatures at once. This is comparing apples and oranges. Fighters are Fuji, Paladins are Granny Smith, and Rangers are a bruised unripe Red Delicious.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Incorrect. Rangers are the martial class that specializes in fighting many opponents at the same time. They are the martial AoE. Hunter rangers with a bow can take out small armies that would slaughter a paladin or fighter. Horde Breaker, Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Plant Growth, and Volley for the win.
Baseline rangers have the same AoE focus, just less so.
Okay, same thing as before. Let's ignore subclass features, assume a +3 to attacking score at level 1, increasing to +4 at level 5, and +5 at level 11. Average damage each turn, assuming you hit. Dexterity Paladin is Dexadin, and the Strength Ranger is the Stranger. The dexadin is using a rapier and shield, the stranger is using an strength based 1d8 one handed weapon and a shield, both using Dueling.
Level 1:
Dexadin 9.5 damage, AC of 16 (leather armor, shield)
Stranger 9.5, AC of 17-18 (scale mail, shield, Dex of 12-14)
Level 5:
Dexadin 21 damage (extra attack), AC of 18 (studded leather, shield)
Stranger 28 (hunter's mark, extra attack), AC of 19 (halfplate, shield), disdvantage on stealth
Level 11:
Dexadin 32 damage (improved divine smite), AC of 19 (studded leather armor
Stranger 30 damage, AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
Level 20:
Dexadin 32 damage, AC of 19
Stranger 30 damage (+wis mod with capstone), AC of 19, disadvantage on stealth
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
That's a specific subclass of them. They do get some AoE spells, but there are paladin and fighter subclasses that can do AoE effects as well (Conquest Paladins, Eldritch Knights, etc). Rangers are not AoE martial characters, they are martial half-casters with a few AoE spells and subclass features.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Bladesingers have to give up spell slots to survive in melee, as they only have a d6 hit dice. Their AC mostly makes up for it, but not against saving throw damaging effects. They do have to give it up in quite a lot of situations.
I like choice. I like how varied things can be. I don't want things handed on a silver platter, I actually want D&D to be a bit more complicated for character customization, but I do want Rangers, Paladins, Fighters, and other martial classes to be able to deal damage pretty much equally.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
"Good news, everyone!" -Professor Hubert Farnsworth
They can. They're all fine. You're ranting about nothing. And it's hilarious.
Paladins get subclass features that increase damage, too. Most Fighters get the same thing. Eldritch Knights get more combinations than Hunters do from their spells.
Stop calling me stupid, please. I know this system like the back of my hand.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
1. None of those are level 10.
2. Again, levels 11+ require the subclasses of the ranger for calculating damage. It’s different than fighters and paladins. Just as rogues are different in they have a steady climb in damage not a big jump at level 11.
3. Two points of damage is not...a lot. Definitely not enough to warrant this conversation.
4. For these calculations and any other, the improved divine smite ability literally locks the the paladin into melee only combat (which is were they should be), just as the ranger’s big AoE spells lock them into having at least an option for a ranger weapon attack.
5. Some huge percentage of gameplay takes place at levels 1-10. Something like 70%. So that’s something that should be taken into account, don’t you think?
A 3rd level smite does an average of 18 damage.
A 3rd level hail of thorns does an an average (assuming a 50% successful saving throw) of 24.75 damage to 2 targets and an average of 37.125 to 3 targets. That’s a noticeable difference.
What class is Professor Hubert Farnsworth?
I don't really agree on "Ranger, Fighter, and Paladins are in the same class of damage dealers". I think ranger is somewhat in between full frontline class such as Fighter and Paladins and skirmisher class such as rogue and monk.
I think we should bring rogue and monk into comparison as well.
Just because you forgot why you started this tangent doesn't mean I'm "ranting about nothing." The point was that pure fighting characters (rogues, fighters, barbarians) are automatically better than half-casters at fighting unless half-casters use their spells and other magic features to improve their combat capabilities. The same thing applies to Bladesinger Wizards, Hexblade/Bladepact Warlocks, and Swords/Valor/Whispers Bards. Bladesingers use spell slots to reduce damage, Blade cantrips, Shadow Blade, Tenser's Transformation, and other spells to improve their melee abilities. Hexblades/Bladepact Warlocks can use multiple spells and invocations to increase their martial capabilities. Blade/Whispers Bards can use bardic inspiration to increase damage.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
It is true that rangers are partially skirmishers, but they are more similar to Paladins and Fighters than Rogues and Monks, IMO. If you want to do comparisons to rogues and monks, feel free to do so. They're probably not as relevant to the discussion, but could be worth talking about. Rogues will do more damage than Rangers almost all the time, though. I think monks will do on average less, but can do noticeable more than Rangers using their Ki points. Just some hypotheses, though.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I'm done for today. I'm busy enough focusing on other things to not enjoy @Jounichi1983 constantly insulting my intelligence. Adios until tomorrow.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms