Once again, rangers, and for this conversation, paladins, need to account for their subclass abilities as well as the base class features at tier 3 and especially tier 4, just like you did for the zealot). The idea of level 20 having to, on it's very own, provide some kind of special "capstone" ability is not something the game design of classes supports in 5E. We have to weigh the features (subclass and class) of all of the tier 4 abilities all together, and even tier 3. If we look at what your top ranked classes (based on their "capstone" ability) gets throughout tier 4, and to some degree tier 3, we see that they probably need a solid level 20 ability to balance out that spread of levels. I'm not saying they get nothing, but I am saying it's a spread of balance.
Also, I really think rangers are balanced around their specific spells they have access to. I know this could be said for all spellcasters, and some don't like that specific spells should balance a class or subclass at all, but I don't think that is avoidable in this edition (so far). JC has even said that spells for rangers are more like class features for them. So things like a 4th or 5th level hail of thorns against a group of enemies, a 5th level conjure animals, plant growth, conjure woodland beings, pass without trace, fog cloud (paired with feral senses is murder!), and conjure volley all count towards the ranger class's balance at higher levels for me.
The spells and spell slots at tiers 3 and 4 mesh well with FE, vanish, the level 15 subclass ability, feral senses, and foe slayer. Much of what a ranger (especially the handbook ranger) does involves "striking" and the thematic mechanics of FE and NE, so foe slayer is a great compliment to all of this. If you are playing the type of game where the world emersion is less important than heroic combat, then the Tasha's favored foe is even stronger for this favored foe engine.
The favored foe math is strong. If you look at to-hit ratios it really packs a punch greater than it reads.
I should run my one line comments through the Frank filter before i make them public.
LOL! I’m sorry. I’ll back off. I get very excited about rangers.
Not at all, you correct my miss-assumption more often than not, a plus 5 on attacks or damage on a large number of options is actually much better than I'd given it credit for
I actually think it does, if you use revised ranger I think it definitely does. Every Gloomstalker build I see multi classes heavily into fighter or rogue most even both. I have a problem with that. I don’t want to compare what you get from multiclassing because that’s been discussed so much, I want to point out what straight Gloomstalker does get.
•3 levels straight ranger>gloomstalker gets you (revised) favored foe which is no a bonus action concentration ability that adds damage when you hit hat scales with level. You get to double one of your proficiencies and learn two languages. You get free 5 bonus spells at 3 5 9 13 and 17. You get a fighting style. Then you get darkvision or extra darkvision, and you’re invisible to creatures who use darkvision to see you. Also, dread ambusher on your first turn extra attack, if that hits as 1d8. You also add your wisdom bonus to initiative rolls.
•5 straight ranger you get extra attack, 3 attacks on your 1st round. You also get pass without a trace here and rope trick from gloomstalker magic. Banging spells.
•level 6 revised ranger you’re getting +5 walk speed plus a climb\swim speed.
•level 7 you get wisdom save prof so you have prof in str dex and wis saves now, very solid.
•level 8 you gain another ASI ofc, if your an elf this is likely 20 dex for +7 to hit with archery fighting style (add a +1 bow and bracers of archery and do the math) You also get fleet of foot, non magical difficult terrain doesn’t slow you and you have advantage on saves against spells that use plants to slow you
•Lvl 9 you’re getting fear and protection from energy two huge spells, fear is really solid.
•lvl 10 revised you get 1d8+wis temp ho as an action and you can do it equal to prof bonus plus you can lose a level of exhaustion on a short rest. You can also go invisible as a bonus action a number of times equal to your prof bonus. The ability to lose exhaustion levels on a short rest is one of my favorites
•11 you get to make another attack if you miss on each of your turns,, this is so good it’s crazy.
•12 another ASI for maybe sharpshooter
•13 you get greater invisibility, this is wildly powerful for gloomstalker
And the list gets better from here for full ranger, so am I crazy? I think this is a strong build, I think multiclassing weakens it over all even with action surge/sneak attack etc. Opinions? I wanna know how you feel it’s subjective and based on your campaign but I think overall straight Gloomstalker is one of the strongest builds in the game.
Edit: I’ve probably missed some cool features im just kind of going off a friends character sheet who went full gloomstalker.
If you go 5 gloomstalker + 3 battle master fighter you get another fighting style, second wind, action surge, and inspiration dice. Combining the sharpshooter feat with precision attack is freaking brutal, and there's a lot of other great BM maneuvers that add an effect, plus extra damage as a cherry on top.
Don't get me wrong, going straight gloomstalker is still a very solid choice, but I think you're overrating some of those higher level abilities. The vast majority of multi-class options are weakening, and but there are a few that aren't. The right mix of gloomstalker with fighter or rogue is one of the choices that actually makes sense.
The problem here is that many folks consider any ranger just another martial and try to compare it to a fighter or turn it into a fighter so the builds aren’t gloomstalker builds they are fighter builds with a gloomstalker ( or other ranger subclass) add on. Much of this is because a lot of folks don’t seem to understand what a ranger really is and what they are meant to do - perhaps because there is very little in 5e that really goes into outdoor activities, exploration of wildernesses and survival well away from civilization. And that is where the ranger is at their best. When you think ranger you need to think not so much warrior as mountain man from the American west from 1760 to 1880. Adept at travel, survival and working in the wilds and escaping notice by hostile while doing so. Quite capable when they have to fight but not going out looking for fights like a warrior. They prefer missile to melee, in D&D they are adept at magic in a way no warrior is even if they are not as adept as full casters. Their martial skills make them superior to straight casters when the blades come out and their spells allow them to control the battlefield in a way tanks and damage hogs can’t as well as giving them edges in combat both melee and missile. When you say they loose damage above L6 it is only in control comparison to the min/maxers nova builds. They are meant to be strikers not tanks or damage hogs. Using their spells to move around the battle field blocking access to squishiest, skipping past the foes efforts at battlefield field control to disrupt major minions, spellcasters and begs so your mages aren’t getting counterspelled to death, so your tanks and damage hogs can do their things. Properly played they are very powerful and make a party much stronger - even in dungeons. Multiclassing out to turn them into fighters is really doing them a disservice. The ranger is a loner that has come in from the wilds where he was by himself and had to be able to survive on his own and handle almost anything on his own without help - and he has the skills and abilities to do so. He is a multiclass all by himself - a little bit fighter, a little bit mage, a little Druid/cleric and even a touch of rogue. No he isn’t as good as the best single class character for any of these but they are each basically one trick ponies while he is skilled in all of them. Please play him that way and the ranger will grow on you and you may change your mind about wanting to multiclass away from him after a few levels. You think those L4/5 spells aren’t that strong? Have you played them yet or did you just look and say well it’s not fireball so it’s pretty useless? Those L10 and above class and subclass abilities aren’t generating a ton of damage and the number of attacks that a fighter could do? You might be right but can your fighter hit 3 different foes covering 30+feet for enough damage to force con saves on the casters and doing it without drawing any AoO in the process then end up in position to force at least some minions to turn around to head for him giving you AoO. You want to mark the ranger a bit better in a fight take 2 levels of fighter and get your second fighting style, second wind and action serve then go back to ranger you lose the L19 ASI and L20 Foe slayer but maybe it’s worth it to get a nova round, 3-12 HP back once and great weapon fighting (about the only fighter fighting style the ranger doesn’t get) anything more and your back to building a fighter with a few ranger abilities.
I find maximizing damage to have a pretty clear ceiling fairly quickly. I understand it’s great to take out an enemy in terms of action economy and turning the tide of battle, but in a game where every class and subclass is designed to be affective in combat it is not necessary for everyone to be hyper effective at dealing damage. A quick search on the internet will show you dozens and dozens of articles and videos of people recommending dungeon masters use enemy hit points as a tool to adjust in combat. They literally recommend to increase or decrease monster hit points to suit the story, narrative, and fun of the encounter. If everyone plays a character that just deals a lot of damage it is literally one of the easiest things for a dungeon master to do to compensate for that. Building a character that focuses on single target nova damage is easily done, in many different effective ways, but what you sacrifice to do that is real. Gaining the ability to divine smite, add an occasional maneuver die, a couple dice of sneak attack, or even action surge might raise your average damage three or four points over the adventuring day. So while that is good, is it the most ideal, tactically superior, or even fun route to go? Maybe. That’s up to you and your interactions at your table.
Going to only 5 as a gloom stalker just doesn't make sense to me. Iron Mind fixes the biggest weakness of a martial build.
At some point as you go up in levels, damage becomes secondary to fixing weaknesses. Going to fighter pushes fixing that part out really, really far.
So at level 3 when the fighter chooses Battle Master, would it be stronger or weaker if instead of getting Battle Master Maneuvers, it gets proficiency in wisdom saving throws? And by how much?
Sean, at L3 you are just getting the basic subclass features notice the gloomstalker doesn’t get the wisdom proficiency until later either. Giving any martial class wisdom save proficiency at L 6/7 is going to make it stronger by taking away one of its greatest weaknesses - poor wisdom saves even if you have no stat bonus you have +3 to the save which is a big help. Trying to move it to L3 is strawhorse troll.
Sean, at L3 you are just getting the basic subclass features notice the gloomstalker doesn’t get the wisdom proficiency until later either. Giving any martial class wisdom save proficiency at L 6/7 is going to make it stronger by taking away one of its greatest weaknesses - poor wisdom saves even if you have no stat bonus you have +3 to the save which is a big help. Trying to move it to L3 is strawhorse troll.
You're not getting the point. Let's say you take Gloomstalker to 5. Okay, that's where you're at now, and for the next three levels...
Option 1: Fighter BM 3
You gain an additional fighting style, Second Wind, Action Surge, and Battle Master maneuvers
Option 2: Gloomstalker +3 more levels
You gain +5 walking speed, proficiency in wisdom saves, an ASI
Multiclassing generally does weaken builds, but if you do it right, the DPS for Gloomstalkers can be vicious.
I'm a Gloomstalker 5/ Forge Cleric 2 - usually ranged, but I get into melee with dual shortswords about half the time. The domain spells for Forge (Searing Smite and Magic Weapon in particular) complement rangers very nicely, as they have the benefit of being bonus actions. Also, giving a ranger access to Spiritual Weapon is kind of a recipe for insane DPS since it isn't concentration AND they can still use their attack action when they cast it. Plus, going from half-caster to full-caster allows for decent damage scaling from spells like Guiding Bolt, Searing Smite, and Inflict Wounds.
Basically, my ranger/cleric always the biggest threat on the battlefield. And since I usually cast Zephyr Strike, she also is very mobile and very hard to hit.
You would need 3 levels of Forge Cleric for those spells.
A fellow player in a game I am in who rolled for stats just took Resilient Wisdom for his fighter at level 4 because he was already at 18 in Str. Fighter gets indomitable at level 9 which is the class's way of dealing with save weakness. When you multi to fighter after Gloom 5 though you push that out further than most campaigns run to.
For a direct comparison, if we compare 5/2 to 7/0 the comparison is: Marginal improvement with a second fighting style (your first should be doing the heavy lifting) Second wind (bonus action healing) Action Surge (better nova damage) vs. Proficiency in wisdom saves (shores up the biggest martial weakness) Extra spells known and spell slot With Tasha's you also picked up 5ft of movement and a swimming and climbing speed
The spells and movement in my view make up for second wind and the fighting style and most of the action surge. Wisdom saves puts you over the top.
If we then compare the level 8 of Ranger vs. level 3 fighter, I will take an ASI/feat and land's stride over the battle master maneuvers. Level 9 Vs. Fighter 4 I will take 2 3rd level spells over a feat/ASI Level 10 Vs. Fighter 5 I will take bonus action invisible over the nothing I get with fighter Level 11 vs. Fighter 6 Another level 3 spell and Stalker's Flurry vs. an ASI. I probably go with the Ranger again. Level 12 vs. Fighter 7 An ASI vs. Know your enemy Level 13 vs. Fighter 8 4th level spells! (as a gloom stalker that is greater invisibility) vs. an ASI This just keeps going. The main advantage of going with the fighter is simple weapon damage and nova damage. I just don't think the maneuvers compare to higher level Ranger spells, and the other toys the Ranger gets just add to the difference. In general, I think when comparisons to the other martials happen people vastly underrate the power of Ranger spells.
Sean, at L3 you are just getting the basic subclass features notice the gloomstalker doesn’t get the wisdom proficiency until later either. Giving any martial class wisdom save proficiency at L 6/7 is going to make it stronger by taking away one of its greatest weaknesses - poor wisdom saves even if you have no stat bonus you have +3 to the save which is a big help. Trying to move it to L3 is strawhorse troll.
You're not getting the point. Let's say you take Gloomstalker to 5. Okay, that's where you're at now, and for the next three levels...
Option 1: Fighter BM 3
You gain an additional fighting style, Second Wind, Action Surge, and Battle Master maneuvers
Option 2: Gloomstalker +3 more levels
You gain +5 walking speed, proficiency in wisdom saves, an ASI
Is option 1 a stronger or weaker choice?
I think Elfdope (see above) is on to something with the spells. Not only do you get more spells and more spell slots (1st and 2nd level), along with everything else you mentioned, you are even closer to 3rd level spells and spell slots! To each their own, but a few more points of average damage over an entire day of adventuring is in no way shape or form a good substitute for 3rd level ranger spells, in my mind anyway. On top of that, as a single martial class at levels 5 through 10 rangers are one of the hardest hitting options available over an adventuring day.
A fellow player in a game I am in who rolled for stats just took Resilient Wisdom for his fighter at level 4 because he was already at 18 in Str. Fighter gets indomitable at level 9 which is the class's way of dealing with save weakness. When you multi to fighter after Gloom 5 though you push that out further than most campaigns run to.
For a direct comparison, if we compare 5/2 to 7/0 the comparison is: Marginal improvement with a second fighting style (your first should be doing the heavy lifting) Second wind (bonus action healing) Action Surge (better nova damage) vs. Proficiency in wisdom saves (shores up the biggest martial weakness) Extra spells known and spell slot With Tasha's you also picked up 5ft of movement and a swimming and climbing speed
The spells and movement in my view make up for second wind and the fighting style and most of the action surge. Wisdom saves puts you over the top.
If we then compare the level 8 of Ranger vs. level 3 fighter, I will take an ASI/feat and land's stride over the battle master maneuvers. Level 9 Vs. Fighter 4 I will take 2 3rd level spells over a feat/ASI Level 10 Vs. Fighter 5 I will take bonus action invisible over the nothing I get with fighter Level 11 vs. Fighter 6 Another level 3 spell and Stalker's Flurry vs. an ASI. I probably go with the Ranger again. Level 12 vs. Fighter 7 An ASI vs. Know your enemy Level 13 vs. Fighter 8 4th level spells! (as a gloom stalker that is greater invisibility) vs. an ASI This just keeps going. The main advantage of going with the fighter is simple weapon damage and nova damage. I just don't think the maneuvers compare to higher level Ranger spells, and the other toys the Ranger gets just add to the difference. In general, I think when comparisons to the other martials happen people vastly underrate the power of Ranger spells.
Then again I love Rangers.
First, on taking two levels: I agree that taking 3-4 levels of fighter (in this case) is much better than only taking 2. But even then it is well worth it. I'll address some of what you said.
To start, proficiency in wisdom saves ONLY impacts the game when all of the following conditions are met: 1. A wisdom save must be rolled. 2. The roll was successful, and 3. It was only successful by a small enough margin that your proficiency bonus made the difference. In fairness, if a wisdom save fails there can be bad consequences. Still, if you show me his build I can pick a feat that would have been far more impactful.
The second fighting style I would likely pick is Defensive, +1 AC. If you already have high AC (which a fighter should), a single point is more impactful than most people realize. From level 5 to 7 you've picked up a single extra spell slot, and no additional spell level. You're a half caster.
All things considered, I still think what you gain from 5 to 7 is more if 2 of the levels are fighter. But when you go just one more level into fighter, and now you're a Battle Master on top, and it's not even close. At the very least it is well worth it to dip 3-4 levels into BM fighter than go straight Gloomstalker. I would need to deep dive to give you my opinion on the effects of staying into fighter longer for various intervals.
A side note: Even (IF) at a certain high level, say, level 13 (as an example), it's finally worth it to stay in GS, most games are wrapping up or have wrapped up by then.
After what I showed you in my previous post, do you agree or disagree that at Level 8, having 3 levels of Battle Master is a stronger build than having 8 straight levels of GS?
Sean, at L3 you are just getting the basic subclass features notice the gloomstalker doesn’t get the wisdom proficiency until later either. Giving any martial class wisdom save proficiency at L 6/7 is going to make it stronger by taking away one of its greatest weaknesses - poor wisdom saves even if you have no stat bonus you have +3 to the save which is a big help. Trying to move it to L3 is strawhorse troll.
You're not getting the point. Let's say you take Gloomstalker to 5. Okay, that's where you're at now, and for the next three levels...
Option 1: Fighter BM 3
You gain an additional fighting style, Second Wind, Action Surge, and Battle Master maneuvers
Option 2: Gloomstalker +3 more levels
You gain +5 walking speed, proficiency in wisdom saves, an ASI
Is option 1 a stronger or weaker choice?
I think Elfdope (see above) is on to something with the spells. Not only do you get more spells and more spell slots (1st and 2nd level), along with everything else you mentioned, you are even closer to 3rd level spells and spell slots! To each their own, but a few more points of average damage over an entire day of adventuring is in no way shape or form a good substitute for 3rd level ranger spells, in my mind anyway. On top of that, as a single martial class at levels 5 through 10 rangers are one of the hardest hitting options available over an adventuring day.
It's a lot more than just extra damage, and the extra damage is a LOT more than a few. Precision Strike alone is adding a ton of damage, plus you get all the effects.
It's important to say again, I am not saying going straight Gloomstalker is bad or weak. And if you want to be more spell-casty, then that's the way to do it. I'm disagreeing with the thesis of the OP, "multiclassing gloomstalker weakens it." It surely does not.
A fellow player in a game I am in who rolled for stats just took Resilient Wisdom for his fighter at level 4 because he was already at 18 in Str. Fighter gets indomitable at level 9 which is the class's way of dealing with save weakness. When you multi to fighter after Gloom 5 though you push that out further than most campaigns run to.
For a direct comparison, if we compare 5/2 to 7/0 the comparison is: Marginal improvement with a second fighting style (your first should be doing the heavy lifting) Second wind (bonus action healing) Action Surge (better nova damage) vs. Proficiency in wisdom saves (shores up the biggest martial weakness) Extra spells known and spell slot With Tasha's you also picked up 5ft of movement and a swimming and climbing speed
The spells and movement in my view make up for second wind and the fighting style and most of the action surge. Wisdom saves puts you over the top.
If we then compare the level 8 of Ranger vs. level 3 fighter, I will take an ASI/feat and land's stride over the battle master maneuvers. Level 9 Vs. Fighter 4 I will take 2 3rd level spells over a feat/ASI Level 10 Vs. Fighter 5 I will take bonus action invisible over the nothing I get with fighter Level 11 vs. Fighter 6 Another level 3 spell and Stalker's Flurry vs. an ASI. I probably go with the Ranger again. Level 12 vs. Fighter 7 An ASI vs. Know your enemy Level 13 vs. Fighter 8 4th level spells! (as a gloom stalker that is greater invisibility) vs. an ASI This just keeps going. The main advantage of going with the fighter is simple weapon damage and nova damage. I just don't think the maneuvers compare to higher level Ranger spells, and the other toys the Ranger gets just add to the difference. In general, I think when comparisons to the other martials happen people vastly underrate the power of Ranger spells.
Then again I love Rangers.
First, on taking two levels: I agree that taking 3-4 levels of fighter (in this case) is much better than only taking 2. But even then it is well worth it. I'll address some of what you said.
To start, proficiency in wisdom saves ONLY impacts the game when all of the following conditions are met: 1. A wisdom save must be rolled. 2. The roll was successful, and 3. It was only successful by a small enough margin that your proficiency bonus made the difference. In fairness, if a wisdom save fails there can be bad consequences. Still, if you show me his build I can pick a feat that would have been far more impactful.
The second fighting style I would likely pick is Defensive, +1 AC. If you already have high AC (which a fighter should), a single point is more impactful than most people realize. From level 5 to 7 you've picked up a single extra spell slot, and no additional spell level. You're a half caster.
All things considered, I still think what you gain from 5 to 7 is more if 2 of the levels are fighter. But when you go just one more level into fighter, and now you're a Battle Master on top, and it's not even close. At the very least it is well worth it to dip 3-4 levels into BM fighter than go straight Gloomstalker. I would need to deep dive to give you my opinion on the effects of staying into fighter longer for various intervals.
A side note: Even (IF) at a certain high level, say, level 13 (as an example), it's finally worth it to stay in GS, most games are wrapping up or have wrapped up by then.
After what I showed you in my previous post, do you agree or disagree that at Level 8, having 3 levels of Battle Master is a stronger build than having 8 straight levels of GS?
Sean, at L3 you are just getting the basic subclass features notice the gloomstalker doesn’t get the wisdom proficiency until later either. Giving any martial class wisdom save proficiency at L 6/7 is going to make it stronger by taking away one of its greatest weaknesses - poor wisdom saves even if you have no stat bonus you have +3 to the save which is a big help. Trying to move it to L3 is strawhorse troll.
You're not getting the point. Let's say you take Gloomstalker to 5. Okay, that's where you're at now, and for the next three levels...
Option 1: Fighter BM 3
You gain an additional fighting style, Second Wind, Action Surge, and Battle Master maneuvers
Option 2: Gloomstalker +3 more levels
You gain +5 walking speed, proficiency in wisdom saves, an ASI
Is option 1 a stronger or weaker choice?
I think Elfdope (see above) is on to something with the spells. Not only do you get more spells and more spell slots (1st and 2nd level), along with everything else you mentioned, you are even closer to 3rd level spells and spell slots! To each their own, but a few more points of average damage over an entire day of adventuring is in no way shape or form a good substitute for 3rd level ranger spells, in my mind anyway. On top of that, as a single martial class at levels 5 through 10 rangers are one of the hardest hitting options available over an adventuring day.
It's a lot more than just extra damage, and the extra damage is a LOT more than a few. Precision Strike alone is adding a ton of damage, plus you get all the effects.
It's important to say again, I am not saying going straight Gloomstalker is bad or weak. And if you want to be more spell-casty, then that's the way to do it. I'm disagreeing with the thesis of the OP, "multiclassing gloomstalker weakens it." It surely does not.
Yeah. Our mileage may vary. 10,000 variables and all that. But a few maneuver dice and action surge, when stretched out over three, five, or even seven battles, averages out to a few extra points of damage per round. It sounds like we agree that neither are hard and fast good or bad, it’s more direction, role, and fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I should run my one line comments through the Frank filter before i make them public.
LOL! I’m sorry. I’ll back off. I get very excited about rangers.
Not at all, you correct my miss-assumption more often than not, a plus 5 on attacks or damage on a large number of options is actually much better than I'd given it credit for
The real trick there is +5 to hit, yes +5 damage is nice but by level 20 5 more points of damage isn’t huge, +5 to hit ? Now that is significant!
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
That, and you can apply it as needed, when needed.
If you go 5 gloomstalker + 3 battle master fighter you get another fighting style, second wind, action surge, and inspiration dice. Combining the sharpshooter feat with precision attack is freaking brutal, and there's a lot of other great BM maneuvers that add an effect, plus extra damage as a cherry on top.
Don't get me wrong, going straight gloomstalker is still a very solid choice, but I think you're overrating some of those higher level abilities. The vast majority of multi-class options are weakening, and but there are a few that aren't. The right mix of gloomstalker with fighter or rogue is one of the choices that actually makes sense.
The problem here is that many folks consider any ranger just another martial and try to compare it to a fighter or turn it into a fighter so the builds aren’t gloomstalker builds they are fighter builds with a gloomstalker ( or other ranger subclass) add on. Much of this is because a lot of folks don’t seem to understand what a ranger really is and what they are meant to do - perhaps because there is very little in 5e that really goes into outdoor activities, exploration of wildernesses and survival well away from civilization. And that is where the ranger is at their best. When you think ranger you need to think not so much warrior as mountain man from the American west from 1760 to 1880. Adept at travel, survival and working in the wilds and escaping notice by hostile while doing so. Quite capable when they have to fight but not going out looking for fights like a warrior. They prefer missile to melee, in D&D they are adept at magic in a way no warrior is even if they are not as adept as full casters. Their martial skills make them superior to straight casters when the blades come out and their spells allow them to control the battlefield in a way tanks and damage hogs can’t as well as giving them edges in combat both melee and missile. When you say they loose damage above L6 it is only in control comparison to the min/maxers nova builds. They are meant to be strikers not tanks or damage hogs. Using their spells to move around the battle field blocking access to squishiest, skipping past the foes efforts at battlefield field control to disrupt major minions, spellcasters and begs so your mages aren’t getting counterspelled to death, so your tanks and damage hogs can do their things. Properly played they are very powerful and make a party much stronger - even in dungeons. Multiclassing out to turn them into fighters is really doing them a disservice. The ranger is a loner that has come in from the wilds where he was by himself and had to be able to survive on his own and handle almost anything on his own without help - and he has the skills and abilities to do so. He is a multiclass all by himself - a little bit fighter, a little bit mage, a little Druid/cleric and even a touch of rogue. No he isn’t as good as the best single class character for any of these but they are each basically one trick ponies while he is skilled in all of them. Please play him that way and the ranger will grow on you and you may change your mind about wanting to multiclass away from him after a few levels. You think those L4/5 spells aren’t that strong? Have you played them yet or did you just look and say well it’s not fireball so it’s pretty useless? Those L10 and above class and subclass abilities aren’t generating a ton of damage and the number of attacks that a fighter could do? You might be right but can your fighter hit 3 different foes covering 30+feet for enough damage to force con saves on the casters and doing it without drawing any AoO in the process then end up in position to force at least some minions to turn around to head for him giving you AoO. You want to mark the ranger a bit better in a fight take 2 levels of fighter and get your second fighting style, second wind and action serve then go back to ranger you lose the L19 ASI and L20 Foe slayer but maybe it’s worth it to get a nova round, 3-12 HP back once and great weapon fighting (about the only fighter fighting style the ranger doesn’t get) anything more and your back to building a fighter with a few ranger abilities.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Going to only 5 as a gloom stalker just doesn't make sense to me. Iron Mind fixes the biggest weakness of a martial build.
At some point as you go up in levels, damage becomes secondary to fixing weaknesses. Going to fighter pushes fixing that part out really, really far.
I find maximizing damage to have a pretty clear ceiling fairly quickly. I understand it’s great to take out an enemy in terms of action economy and turning the tide of battle, but in a game where every class and subclass is designed to be affective in combat it is not necessary for everyone to be hyper effective at dealing damage. A quick search on the internet will show you dozens and dozens of articles and videos of people recommending dungeon masters use enemy hit points as a tool to adjust in combat. They literally recommend to increase or decrease monster hit points to suit the story, narrative, and fun of the encounter. If everyone plays a character that just deals a lot of damage it is literally one of the easiest things for a dungeon master to do to compensate for that. Building a character that focuses on single target nova damage is easily done, in many different effective ways, but what you sacrifice to do that is real. Gaining the ability to divine smite, add an occasional maneuver die, a couple dice of sneak attack, or even action surge might raise your average damage three or four points over the adventuring day. So while that is good, is it the most ideal, tactically superior, or even fun route to go? Maybe. That’s up to you and your interactions at your table.
So at level 3 when the fighter chooses Battle Master, would it be stronger or weaker if instead of getting Battle Master Maneuvers, it gets proficiency in wisdom saving throws? And by how much?
Sean, at L3 you are just getting the basic subclass features notice the gloomstalker doesn’t get the wisdom proficiency until later either. Giving any martial class wisdom save proficiency at L 6/7 is going to make it stronger by taking away one of its greatest weaknesses - poor wisdom saves even if you have no stat bonus you have +3 to the save which is a big help. Trying to move it to L3 is strawhorse troll.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
You're not getting the point. Let's say you take Gloomstalker to 5. Okay, that's where you're at now, and for the next three levels...
Option 1: Fighter BM 3
You gain an additional fighting style, Second Wind, Action Surge, and Battle Master maneuvers
Option 2: Gloomstalker +3 more levels
You gain +5 walking speed, proficiency in wisdom saves, an ASI
Is option 1 a stronger or weaker choice?
You would need 3 levels of Forge Cleric for those spells.
A fellow player in a game I am in who rolled for stats just took Resilient Wisdom for his fighter at level 4 because he was already at 18 in Str. Fighter gets indomitable at level 9 which is the class's way of dealing with save weakness. When you multi to fighter after Gloom 5 though you push that out further than most campaigns run to.
For a direct comparison, if we compare 5/2 to 7/0 the comparison is:
Marginal improvement with a second fighting style (your first should be doing the heavy lifting)
Second wind (bonus action healing)
Action Surge (better nova damage)
vs.
Proficiency in wisdom saves (shores up the biggest martial weakness)
Extra spells known and spell slot
With Tasha's you also picked up 5ft of movement and a swimming and climbing speed
The spells and movement in my view make up for second wind and the fighting style and most of the action surge. Wisdom saves puts you over the top.
If we then compare the level 8 of Ranger vs. level 3 fighter, I will take an ASI/feat and land's stride over the battle master maneuvers.
Level 9 Vs. Fighter 4 I will take 2 3rd level spells over a feat/ASI
Level 10 Vs. Fighter 5 I will take bonus action invisible over the nothing I get with fighter
Level 11 vs. Fighter 6 Another level 3 spell and Stalker's Flurry vs. an ASI. I probably go with the Ranger again.
Level 12 vs. Fighter 7 An ASI vs. Know your enemy
Level 13 vs. Fighter 8 4th level spells! (as a gloom stalker that is greater invisibility) vs. an ASI
This just keeps going. The main advantage of going with the fighter is simple weapon damage and nova damage. I just don't think the maneuvers compare to higher level Ranger spells, and the other toys the Ranger gets just add to the difference. In general, I think when comparisons to the other martials happen people vastly underrate the power of Ranger spells.
Then again I love Rangers.
What did you multi-cass into?
I think Elfdope (see above) is on to something with the spells. Not only do you get more spells and more spell slots (1st and 2nd level), along with everything else you mentioned, you are even closer to 3rd level spells and spell slots! To each their own, but a few more points of average damage over an entire day of adventuring is in no way shape or form a good substitute for 3rd level ranger spells, in my mind anyway. On top of that, as a single martial class at levels 5 through 10 rangers are one of the hardest hitting options available over an adventuring day.
First, on taking two levels: I agree that taking 3-4 levels of fighter (in this case) is much better than only taking 2. But even then it is well worth it. I'll address some of what you said.
To start, proficiency in wisdom saves ONLY impacts the game when all of the following conditions are met: 1. A wisdom save must be rolled. 2. The roll was successful, and 3. It was only successful by a small enough margin that your proficiency bonus made the difference. In fairness, if a wisdom save fails there can be bad consequences. Still, if you show me his build I can pick a feat that would have been far more impactful.
The second fighting style I would likely pick is Defensive, +1 AC. If you already have high AC (which a fighter should), a single point is more impactful than most people realize. From level 5 to 7 you've picked up a single extra spell slot, and no additional spell level. You're a half caster.
All things considered, I still think what you gain from 5 to 7 is more if 2 of the levels are fighter. But when you go just one more level into fighter, and now you're a Battle Master on top, and it's not even close. At the very least it is well worth it to dip 3-4 levels into BM fighter than go straight Gloomstalker. I would need to deep dive to give you my opinion on the effects of staying into fighter longer for various intervals.
A side note: Even (IF) at a certain high level, say, level 13 (as an example), it's finally worth it to stay in GS, most games are wrapping up or have wrapped up by then.
After what I showed you in my previous post, do you agree or disagree that at Level 8, having 3 levels of Battle Master is a stronger build than having 8 straight levels of GS?
It's a lot more than just extra damage, and the extra damage is a LOT more than a few. Precision Strike alone is adding a ton of damage, plus you get all the effects.
It's important to say again, I am not saying going straight Gloomstalker is bad or weak. And if you want to be more spell-casty, then that's the way to do it. I'm disagreeing with the thesis of the OP, "multiclassing gloomstalker weakens it." It surely does not.
Disagree.
Yeah. Our mileage may vary. 10,000 variables and all that. But a few maneuver dice and action surge, when stretched out over three, five, or even seven battles, averages out to a few extra points of damage per round. It sounds like we agree that neither are hard and fast good or bad, it’s more direction, role, and fun.