Copying 2000gp of poison for each arrow shot out of swift quiver is...broken. There's a reason they tried so hard to make it impossible to pump out money with crafting or creation effects. It doesn't matter you have to use it in combat and can't sell it, it's egregiously cheesy.
I think I got confused and posted a thought about swift quiver in the thread about hunter's mark. I can't tell what I did. My points hold over there, but I think I meant the swift quiver stuff for this thread. I was responding to both in quick succession and I guess I confused myself. I'll post it here too:
Swift quiver is a completely fine part of the ranger's kit. It's a logical fallacy to think that because it's not an amazing damage dealing option [compared to other classes] that it's not worth a spell slot on a ranger. The value of an option is heavily influenced by the rest of the kit. As one of the best single target damage options on a ranger it will have its uses. The ranger is not a single-target damage dealer by design, but being able to pull it off decently well when necessary has a lot of value.
It's like everyone is forgetting characters can have secondary roles. It's okay to be a back-up "whatever" in your group if your contributions in total lead to an effective party.
I just played in a campaign with a first time player on a switch-hitter ranger build. Fresh to the game his tactics were very simple, and the familiar in the group stepped on his scouting toes a lot. But he still always managed to be a super important glue player, filling in for melee or ranged. He provided goodberry for sustenance and pass without trace for stealth in a low resource, high danger campaign. He always managed to be clutch in some way (other than the two sessions where he couldn't roll above a 7, that was brutal).
I must have missed the part of this thread were someone discussed coping a poisoned arrow to allow all the shots with Swift Quiver to apply the poison damage. As far as I can tell nothing in this spell even hints at the possibility of doing this. The spell states that it creates nonmagical ammunition that fills the quiver, I don't see anything that says it's copying another arrow that may have been applied with poison only that it continually creates nonmagical ammunition. Pretty nonmagical ammunition does not do any kind of poison damage.
Copying 2000gp of poison for each arrow shot out of swift quiver is...broken. There's a reason they tried so hard to make it impossible to pump out money with crafting or creation effects. It doesn't matter you have to use it in combat and can't sell it, it's egregiously cheesy.
I think I got confused and posted a thought about swift quiver in the thread about hunter's mark. I can't tell what I did. My points hold over there, but I think I meant the swift quiver stuff for this thread. I was responding to both in quick succession and I guess I confused myself. I'll post it here too:
Swift quiver is a completely fine part of the ranger's kit. It's a logical fallacy to think that because it's not an amazing damage dealing option [compared to other classes] that it's not worth a spell slot on a ranger. The value of an option is heavily influenced by the rest of the kit. As one of the best single target damage options on a ranger it will have its uses. The ranger is not a single-target damage dealer by design, but being able to pull it off decently well when necessary has a lot of value.
It's like everyone is forgetting characters can have secondary roles. It's okay to be a back-up "whatever" in your group if your contributions in total lead to an effective party.
I just played in a campaign with a first time player on a switch-hitter ranger build. Fresh to the game his tactics were very simple, and the familiar in the group stepped on his scouting toes a lot. But he still always managed to be a super important glue player, filling in for melee or ranged. He provided goodberry for sustenance and pass without trace for stealth in a low resource, high danger campaign. He always managed to be clutch in some way (other than the two sessions where he couldn't roll above a 7, that was brutal).
Yes!!! Rangers can fill the gaps of a group wonderfully! Thank you!
Guess what a fighter does. That’s right! Damage.
Guess what a paladin does. That’s right! Damage and healing.
Saying a ranger is a “bad fighter” is like saying a ranger is a “bad druid”. They aren’t either, but they can do both.
Copying 2000gp of poison for each arrow shot out of swift quiver is...broken. There's a reason they tried so hard to make it impossible to pump out money with crafting or creation effects. It doesn't matter you have to use it in combat and can't sell it, it's egregiously cheesy.
I think I got confused and posted a thought about swift quiver in the thread about hunter's mark. I can't tell what I did. My points hold over there, but I think I meant the swift quiver stuff for this thread. I was responding to both in quick succession and I guess I confused myself. I'll post it here too:
Swift quiver is a completely fine part of the ranger's kit. It's a logical fallacy to think that because it's not an amazing damage dealing option [compared to other classes] that it's not worth a spell slot on a ranger. The value of an option is heavily influenced by the rest of the kit. As one of the best single target damage options on a ranger it will have its uses. The ranger is not a single-target damage dealer by design, but being able to pull it off decently well when necessary has a lot of value.
It's like everyone is forgetting characters can have secondary roles. It's okay to be a back-up "whatever" in your group if your contributions in total lead to an effective party.
I just played in a campaign with a first time player on a switch-hitter ranger build. Fresh to the game his tactics were very simple, and the familiar in the group stepped on his scouting toes a lot. But he still always managed to be a super important glue player, filling in for melee or ranged. He provided goodberry for sustenance and pass without trace for stealth in a low resource, high danger campaign. He always managed to be clutch in some way (other than the two sessions where he couldn't roll above a 7, that was brutal).
I must have missed the part of this thread were someone discussed coping a poisoned arrow to allow all the shots with Swift Quiver to apply the poison damage. As far as I can tell nothing in this spell even hints at the possibility of doing this. The spell states that it creates nonmagical ammunition that fills the quiver, I don't see anything that says it's copying another arrow that may have been applied with poison only that it continually creates nonmagical ammunition. Pretty nonmagical ammunition does not do any kind of poison damage.
Firstly this is a spell a transmutation spell gained at the same level as 9th level spells Or even steel wind strike. Interpreting "similar" as copying poison coating is not unreasonable.
Secondly the game already states several controls for abuse. Poisons must be acquired by dm granting access either through illegal sale or by actually finding a purple worm. If a wizard wants to use a transmuted poison they can't use it in the spell because of the magic restriction wording on both spells. There is also the destruction of the ammo used. It seems that they already accounted for poison but did not place a specific restriction in the spell.
Thirdly, the poison resistance/ immunity makes it only usable on certain iconic enemies that are in the vein of "understanding the enemy". This is on theme with the two classes that can get it. Rangers and bards. If it becomes a real problem a magic item can be given that grants resistance/immunity to the enemy.
Yes, some of the wotc team has stated that there is a danger of trading gold for damage.(note: that they have not added holy oil to 5e yet). Poisons are super powerful that's why the controls are in place but at the same time they are also a big part of the history and lore. I think that's a big part on why wizards is so quiet about ranger abilities. You have Schrodinger's cat style abilities that are simultaneously supper powerful and incredibly weak depending on how its observed.
I promise this will be my last rant on poisons in this post any further discussion on poison should be made to a new thread.
I just realized from another post. Swift quiver does not require the attack action to trigger the bonus action 2 attacks. You could cast an action spell (as long as concentration is covered) then make two attacks. Conjure volley + the two BA attacks is perfectly valid.
Just imagine a level 20 fighter (if you ever get there) that goes into archery with the ring of spell storing... I mean... If you've got a level 17 ranger then you'll be there eventually with luck (if you have either a ranger or bard in your group). End game is the only use for that spell. Sure lvl 10 bard sounds nice, but 5 levels into Gloomstalker ranger and then going into rouge will do you more damage in the end.
Copying 2000gp of poison for each arrow shot out of swift quiver is...broken. There's a reason they tried so hard to make it impossible to pump out money with crafting or creation effects. It doesn't matter you have to use it in combat and can't sell it, it's egregiously cheesy.
I think I got confused and posted a thought about swift quiver in the thread about hunter's mark. I can't tell what I did. My points hold over there, but I think I meant the swift quiver stuff for this thread. I was responding to both in quick succession and I guess I confused myself. I'll post it here too:
Swift quiver is a completely fine part of the ranger's kit. It's a logical fallacy to think that because it's not an amazing damage dealing option [compared to other classes] that it's not worth a spell slot on a ranger. The value of an option is heavily influenced by the rest of the kit. As one of the best single target damage options on a ranger it will have its uses. The ranger is not a single-target damage dealer by design, but being able to pull it off decently well when necessary has a lot of value.
It's like everyone is forgetting characters can have secondary roles. It's okay to be a back-up "whatever" in your group if your contributions in total lead to an effective party.
I just played in a campaign with a first time player on a switch-hitter ranger build. Fresh to the game his tactics were very simple, and the familiar in the group stepped on his scouting toes a lot. But he still always managed to be a super important glue player, filling in for melee or ranged. He provided goodberry for sustenance and pass without trace for stealth in a low resource, high danger campaign. He always managed to be clutch in some way (other than the two sessions where he couldn't roll above a 7, that was brutal).
I must have missed the part of this thread were someone discussed coping a poisoned arrow to allow all the shots with Swift Quiver to apply the poison damage. As far as I can tell nothing in this spell even hints at the possibility of doing this. The spell states that it creates nonmagical ammunition that fills the quiver, I don't see anything that says it's copying another arrow that may have been applied with poison only that it continually creates nonmagical ammunition. Pretty nonmagical ammunition does not do any kind of poison damage.
Firstly this is a spell a transmutation spell gained at the same level as 9th level spells Or even steel wind strike. Interpreting "similar" as copying poison coating is not unreasonable.
Secondly the game already states several controls for abuse. Poisons must be acquired by dm granting access either through illegal sale or by actually finding a purple worm. If a wizard wants to use a transmuted poison they can't use it in the spell because of the magic restriction wording on both spells. There is also the destruction of the ammo used. It seems that they already accounted for poison but did not place a specific restriction in the spell.
Thirdly, the poison resistance/ immunity makes it only usable on certain iconic enemies that are in the vein of "understanding the enemy". This is on theme with the two classes that can get it. Rangers and bards. If it becomes a real problem a magic item can be given that grants resistance/immunity to the enemy.
Yes, some of the wotc team has stated that there is a danger of trading gold for damage.(note: that they have not added holy oil to 5e yet). Poisons are super powerful that's why the controls are in place but at the same time they are also a big part of the history and lore. I think that's a big part on why wizards is so quiet about ranger abilities. You have Schrodinger's cat style abilities that are simultaneously supper powerful and incredibly weak depending on how its observed.
I promise this will be my last rant on poisons in this post any further discussion on poison should be made to a new thread.
Reviving the old thread because the new context of the 2024 version Supports that 2014 Poision arrows were duplicated and wotc wanted it nerfed.
Copying 2000gp of poison for each arrow shot out of swift quiver is...broken. There's a reason they tried so hard to make it impossible to pump out money with crafting or creation effects. It doesn't matter you have to use it in combat and can't sell it, it's egregiously cheesy.
I think I got confused and posted a thought about swift quiver in the thread about hunter's mark. I can't tell what I did. My points hold over there, but I think I meant the swift quiver stuff for this thread. I was responding to both in quick succession and I guess I confused myself. I'll post it here too:
It's like everyone is forgetting characters can have secondary roles. It's okay to be a back-up "whatever" in your group if your contributions in total lead to an effective party.
I just played in a campaign with a first time player on a switch-hitter ranger build. Fresh to the game his tactics were very simple, and the familiar in the group stepped on his scouting toes a lot. But he still always managed to be a super important glue player, filling in for melee or ranged. He provided goodberry for sustenance and pass without trace for stealth in a low resource, high danger campaign. He always managed to be clutch in some way (other than the two sessions where he couldn't roll above a 7, that was brutal).
I must have missed the part of this thread were someone discussed coping a poisoned arrow to allow all the shots with Swift Quiver to apply the poison damage. As far as I can tell nothing in this spell even hints at the possibility of doing this. The spell states that it creates nonmagical ammunition that fills the quiver, I don't see anything that says it's copying another arrow that may have been applied with poison only that it continually creates nonmagical ammunition. Pretty nonmagical ammunition does not do any kind of poison damage.
Yes!!! Rangers can fill the gaps of a group wonderfully! Thank you!
Guess what a fighter does. That’s right! Damage.
Guess what a paladin does. That’s right! Damage and healing.
Saying a ranger is a “bad fighter” is like saying a ranger is a “bad druid”. They aren’t either, but they can do both.
Firstly this is a spell a transmutation spell gained at the same level as 9th level spells Or even steel wind strike. Interpreting "similar" as copying poison coating is not unreasonable.
Secondly the game already states several controls for abuse. Poisons must be acquired by dm granting access either through illegal sale or by actually finding a purple worm. If a wizard wants to use a transmuted poison they can't use it in the spell because of the magic restriction wording on both spells. There is also the destruction of the ammo used. It seems that they already accounted for poison but did not place a specific restriction in the spell.
Thirdly, the poison resistance/ immunity makes it only usable on certain iconic enemies that are in the vein of "understanding the enemy". This is on theme with the two classes that can get it. Rangers and bards. If it becomes a real problem a magic item can be given that grants resistance/immunity to the enemy.
Yes, some of the wotc team has stated that there is a danger of trading gold for damage.(note: that they have not added holy oil to 5e yet). Poisons are super powerful that's why the controls are in place but at the same time they are also a big part of the history and lore. I think that's a big part on why wizards is so quiet about ranger abilities. You have Schrodinger's cat style abilities that are simultaneously supper powerful and incredibly weak depending on how its observed.
I promise this will be my last rant on poisons in this post any further discussion on poison should be made to a new thread.
I just realized from another post. Swift quiver does not require the attack action to trigger the bonus action 2 attacks. You could cast an action spell (as long as concentration is covered) then make two attacks. Conjure volley + the two BA attacks is perfectly valid.
Oh jeez I never noticed that either. That makes it just that much better!
Just imagine a level 20 fighter (if you ever get there) that goes into archery with the ring of spell storing... I mean... If you've got a level 17 ranger then you'll be there eventually with luck (if you have either a ranger or bard in your group). End game is the only use for that spell. Sure lvl 10 bard sounds nice, but 5 levels into Gloomstalker ranger and then going into rouge will do you more damage in the end.
Reviving the old thread because the new context of the 2024 version Supports that 2014 Poision arrows were duplicated and wotc wanted it nerfed.