"So if you want to MC out of ranger I would personally wait until after level 9. "
And for a Gloomstalker moving to fighter after 9 is probably a poor idea, because the level 11 ability is on average better than action surge (Particularly on a sharpshooter build where misses are bound to happen).
1 action surge is not as good as every round the ability that when "you miss with a weapon attack, you can make another weapon attack as part of the same action." That adds up quickly.
Nature's Veil is excellent, you get another spells known at 11th and another 3rd level spell slot.
Tireless does a good job of providing similar capability to second wind. The action economy isn't as good, but the effect is solid and can be done prefight:
"Tireless (10th Level) As an action, you can give yourself a number of temporary hit points equal to 1d8 + your Wisdom modifier (minimum of 1 temporary hit point). You can use this action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest. In addition, whenever you finish a short rest, your exhaustion level, if any, is decreased by 1."
18 Dex + Longbow + Sharpshooter: Average hit = 18.5 damage. That's what precision strike adds every time you turn a miss into a hit (less if you want battle field control). You get 4 dice per short rest. Probably a short rest every 2-3 battles, maybe 3-4 rounds per fight. Add an action surge in there each short rest, and the extra damage you're doing is far from trivial. Then you got +1 AC and bonus action healing.
According to the OP, getting all those things instead of going streight GS is "weakening" the character.
Ok. Take your proposed 8.75 rounds of combat and calculate what a gloomstalker/battle master is doing damage wise with one use of their 4 dice and action surge, then do the same math for a straight gloomstalker‘a damage. What is that difference divided by the 8.75 rounds? 3? 5? I’m not going to do the math because I don’t really care. But it’s not game breaking.
Multiclassing hyper focuses a build. If you want damage, go with a battle master dip. If you want almost as much damage and a lot more, straight gloomstalker is your road to success.
Under those variables, 12.69 extra damage per round if you use all your dice on Precision Attack, and all your dice turn a miss into a hit. We can round it down to 10 because things never go perfectly. Less if you use some of them for battle field control. You also get +1 AC through another fighting style and a bonus action heal. According to the OP this is "weakening" the Gloomstalker. Is that your position as well?
There’s no way that math is correct. Action surge gets you two extra attacks over the average combats and rounds you proposed. That’s an average of 11.55 extra damage each attack for 23.1 total. That’s 2 dice applied as well. Two more dice will bring the rest of your average damage up about 1.2 on two attacks each for a total of 2.4. That’s a grand total of 25.5. Divided by 8.5 total average rounds that’s a grand total of 3 more damage per round. Now, you do have some nova capability and +1 to your AC now, but no ASI, no speed increase, no extra spell slots and spells, and are a mile away from conjure animals, plant growth, and a 3rd level hail of thorns. I’ll take the ranger levels.
8.75 rounds of combat. 4 Inspiration die using precision attack (miss into a hit) + two more attacks from action surge. That makes 6 hits if they're all successful.
Damage per hit with longbow, 18 strength, and sharpshooter = 18.5
18.5 x 6 = 111
111/8.75 = 12.69
That way of doing the math is...generous.
With a longbow, 18 STR, and Sharpshooter: Average damage is objectively 18.5
Average rounds of combat per short rest (the example we both agreed to) is 8.75
You get 4 inspiration die per short rest. Each time you use one to turn a miss into a hit (Precision Attack), the inspiration die added 18.5 damage. That's 4 x 18.5
Action Surge gives you two additional attacks: 18.5 x 2
All together that's 18.5 x 6 = 111. Divided by number of rounds (8.75) = 12.69
Tell me where my math is wrong. Don't just say it's "generous."
I already added the caveat that that's if all inspiration die and extra attacks are successful.
18 Dex + Longbow + Sharpshooter: Average hit = 18.5 damage. That's what precision strike adds every time you turn a miss into a hit (less if you want battle field control). You get 4 dice per short rest. Probably a short rest every 2-3 battles, maybe 3-4 rounds per fight. Add an action surge in there each short rest, and the extra damage you're doing is far from trivial. Then you got +1 AC and bonus action healing.
According to the OP, getting all those things instead of going streight GS is "weakening" the character.
Ok. Take your proposed 8.75 rounds of combat and calculate what a gloomstalker/battle master is doing damage wise with one use of their 4 dice and action surge, then do the same math for a straight gloomstalker‘a damage. What is that difference divided by the 8.75 rounds? 3? 5? I’m not going to do the math because I don’t really care. But it’s not game breaking.
Multiclassing hyper focuses a build. If you want damage, go with a battle master dip. If you want almost as much damage and a lot more, straight gloomstalker is your road to success.
Under those variables, 12.69 extra damage per round if you use all your dice on Precision Attack, and all your dice turn a miss into a hit. We can round it down to 10 because things never go perfectly. Less if you use some of them for battle field control. You also get +1 AC through another fighting style and a bonus action heal. According to the OP this is "weakening" the Gloomstalker. Is that your position as well?
There’s no way that math is correct. Action surge gets you two extra attacks over the average combats and rounds you proposed. That’s an average of 11.55 extra damage each attack for 23.1 total. That’s 2 dice applied as well. Two more dice will bring the rest of your average damage up about 1.2 on two attacks each for a total of 2.4. That’s a grand total of 25.5. Divided by 8.5 total average rounds that’s a grand total of 3 more damage per round. Now, you do have some nova capability and +1 to your AC now, but no ASI, no speed increase, no extra spell slots and spells, and are a mile away from conjure animals, plant growth, and a 3rd level hail of thorns. I’ll take the ranger levels.
8.75 rounds of combat. 4 Inspiration die using precision attack (miss into a hit) + two more attacks from action surge. That makes 6 hits if they're all successful.
Damage per hit with longbow, 18 strength, and sharpshooter = 18.5
18.5 x 6 = 111
111/8.75 = 12.69
That way of doing the math is...generous.
With a longbow, 18 STR, and Sharpshooter: Average damage is objectively 18.5
Average rounds of combat per short rest (the example we both agreed to) is 8.75
You get 4 inspiration die per short rest. Each time you use one to turn a miss into a hit (Precision Attack), the inspiration die added 18.5 damage. That's 4 x 18.5
Action Surge gives you two additional attacks: 18.5 x 2
All together that's 18.5 x 6 = 111. Divided by number of rounds (8.75) = 12.69
Tell me where my math is wrong. Don't just say it's "generous."
I already added the caveat that that's if all inspiration die and extra attacks are successful.
1. They are called maneuver dice, not inspiration dice.
2. We are talking about dexterity, not strength.
3. You would lose an ASI going with battle master 3, so only a +3 modifier on each hit.
4. You can’t assume that each maneuver die will turn a miss into a hit. You have to add that extra 20.5% (4.5) from a maneuver die to the to-hit chance, which is also 5% lower than the gloomstalker because of the missed ASI.
5. So if you only look at best case scenario, which is what you are doing, the math comes out better than what I said. But you can’t just assume that an 8th level archer character is missing their shots 20% of the time and that 4d4’s will circumvent that completely. That’s not how to hit calculations are done.
You are missing our point Sean, you are still hyper focused on maximizing the damage to the exclusion of all else - that is fighter thinking because that is what fighters are all about. Rangers are NOT all about damage. They are about integration of damage, spells, and control (movement). Heck, I’ll grant that your battle master MC does more damage than the straight gloomstalker, what it doesn’t do as well is integrate damage across the battlefield including spell damage and foe control. Yes your BM has maneuvers that can do some of the control but then they can’t use the damage boost ones and your BM MC will always be behind the straight ranger in spell use and that’s really the point of why the OP was right that any MC weakens the ranger AS A RANGER. The character can still be a very powerful character but the more you delve into the other class the less of a ranger the character becomes and the more of the other class.
18 Dex + Longbow + Sharpshooter: Average hit = 18.5 damage. That's what precision strike adds every time you turn a miss into a hit (less if you want battle field control). You get 4 dice per short rest. Probably a short rest every 2-3 battles, maybe 3-4 rounds per fight. Add an action surge in there each short rest, and the extra damage you're doing is far from trivial. Then you got +1 AC and bonus action healing.
According to the OP, getting all those things instead of going streight GS is "weakening" the character.
Ok. Take your proposed 8.75 rounds of combat and calculate what a gloomstalker/battle master is doing damage wise with one use of their 4 dice and action surge, then do the same math for a straight gloomstalker‘a damage. What is that difference divided by the 8.75 rounds? 3? 5? I’m not going to do the math because I don’t really care. But it’s not game breaking.
Multiclassing hyper focuses a build. If you want damage, go with a battle master dip. If you want almost as much damage and a lot more, straight gloomstalker is your road to success.
Under those variables, 12.69 extra damage per round if you use all your dice on Precision Attack, and all your dice turn a miss into a hit. We can round it down to 10 because things never go perfectly. Less if you use some of them for battle field control. You also get +1 AC through another fighting style and a bonus action heal. According to the OP this is "weakening" the Gloomstalker. Is that your position as well?
There’s no way that math is correct. Action surge gets you two extra attacks over the average combats and rounds you proposed. That’s an average of 11.55 extra damage each attack for 23.1 total. That’s 2 dice applied as well. Two more dice will bring the rest of your average damage up about 1.2 on two attacks each for a total of 2.4. That’s a grand total of 25.5. Divided by 8.5 total average rounds that’s a grand total of 3 more damage per round. Now, you do have some nova capability and +1 to your AC now, but no ASI, no speed increase, no extra spell slots and spells, and are a mile away from conjure animals, plant growth, and a 3rd level hail of thorns. I’ll take the ranger levels.
8.75 rounds of combat. 4 Inspiration die using precision attack (miss into a hit) + two more attacks from action surge. That makes 6 hits if they're all successful.
Damage per hit with longbow, 18 strength, and sharpshooter = 18.5
18.5 x 6 = 111
111/8.75 = 12.69
That way of doing the math is...generous.
With a longbow, 18 STR, and Sharpshooter: Average damage is objectively 18.5
Average rounds of combat per short rest (the example we both agreed to) is 8.75
You get 4 inspiration die per short rest. Each time you use one to turn a miss into a hit (Precision Attack), the inspiration die added 18.5 damage. That's 4 x 18.5
Action Surge gives you two additional attacks: 18.5 x 2
All together that's 18.5 x 6 = 111. Divided by number of rounds (8.75) = 12.69
Tell me where my math is wrong. Don't just say it's "generous."
I already added the caveat that that's if all inspiration die and extra attacks are successful.
1. They are called maneuver dice, not inspiration dice.
2. We are talking about dexterity, not strength.
3. You would lose an ASI going with battle master 3, so only a +3 modifier on each hit.
4. You can’t assume that each maneuver die will turn a miss into a hit. You have to add that extra 20.5% (4.5) from a maneuver die to the to-hit chance, which is also 5% lower than the gloomstalker because of the missed ASI.
5. So if you only look at best case scenario, which is what you are doing, the math comes out better than what I said. But you can’t just assume that an 8th level archer character is missing their shots 20% of the time and that 4d4’s will circumvent that completely. That’s not how to hit calculations are done.
1. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
2. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
3. Human Variant taking sharpshooter at 1, then an ASI at 4 = 18 dexterity. So it's even possible with point buy, and most tables I've experienced allow something more generous. You're reaching here.
4. I literally added the caveat "IF they all turn a miss into a hit" and acknowledged they likely won't. Multiple times. So this is a deflection. Your math on the percent chance Precision Strike succeeds ONLY works if you use it on every miss, which is silly. You can choose to use it only if you miss by 1 or 2, or 1 through 3, etc.
5. I'll be happy to calculate it more precisely based on the average AC and accounting for misses. But please don't pretend I'm trying to pass off best case as the actual, when I explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged it's best case scenario. That is dishonest.
"So if you want to MC out of ranger I would personally wait until after level 9. "
And for a Gloomstalker moving to fighter after 9 is probably a poor idea, because the level 11 ability is on average better than action surge (Particularly on a sharpshooter build where misses are bound to happen).
1 action surge is not as good as every round the ability that when "you miss with a weapon attack, you can make another weapon attack as part of the same action." That adds up quickly.
Nature's Veil is excellent, you get another spells known at 11th and another 3rd level spell slot.
Tireless does a good job of providing similar capability to second wind. The action economy isn't as good, but the effect is solid and can be done prefight:
"Tireless (10th Level) As an action, you can give yourself a number of temporary hit points equal to 1d8 + your Wisdom modifier (minimum of 1 temporary hit point). You can use this action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest. In addition, whenever you finish a short rest, your exhaustion level, if any, is decreased by 1."
Depends on the game you're in to be honest.
If you have 1-2 combats between short rests commonly then fighter will be very very good for your offensive output/give you a healing effect without using a spell slot/another fighting style which could raise your AC by one. Hell you can use your action surge to cast conjure animals and still get your attack action in the first round which is massive for not only damage but area control.
If someone's gotta eat 8 attacks of opportunity they will think twice about moving.
You can also pick up a maneuver like ambush and increase your odds of going first.
I would actually go Assassin Rogue myself to get ADV on attacks on things that haven't acted /cunning action/sneak attack/expertise and potentially to CRIT on enemies
To me you get as much value, if not more depending on party comp, then what ranger gives you.
It's very dependant on play style, campaign, and party to be honest.
You are missing our point Sean, you are still hyper focused on maximizing the damage to the exclusion of all else - that is fighter thinking because that is what fighters are all about. Rangers are NOT all about damage. They are about integration of damage, spells, and control (movement). Heck, I’ll grant that your battle master MC does more damage than the straight gloomstalker, what it doesn’t do as well is integrate damage across the battlefield including spell damage and foe control. Yes your BM has maneuvers that can do some of the control but then they can’t use the damage boost ones and your BM MC will always be behind the straight ranger in spell use and that’s really the point of why the OP was right that any MC weakens the ranger AS A RANGER. The character can still be a very powerful character but the more you delve into the other class the less of a ranger the character becomes and the more of the other class.
Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. My position is not that staying in Gloomstalker is a bad idea. My contention is with the claim of the OP, that multiclassing GS "weakens" it.
Also, 3 levels of battle master improves defense (+1 AC), adds healing (second wind), damage (obviously), and adds battle field control options via BM maneuvers.
Can reasonable people still prefer to stay Gloomstalker? Of course. If you multi-class are you sacrificing some things to pay for what you gain? Obviously. But to say it "weakens" the Gloomstalker is a stretch.
By level 11, you have most of the gloomstalker's strongest abilities, and base ranger isn't getting anything that amazing past 10 except more spells and slots. But as a very martially focused ranger who already has amazing spells like ensnaring strike, holding out for higher level spells isn't clearly better than dipping into another martial class to increase your martial prowess.
Fighter is always good, barb or hex blade or war magic can be good if you have the stats.
Rogue can also be good. Assassin for advantage on all your attacks the first round, scout if you're going for a speedy archer build, or swashbuckler if you want the mobile feat and another stat to increase your initiative.
1. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
2. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
3. Human Variant taking sharpshooter at 1, then an ASI at 4 = 18 dexterity. So it's even possible with point buy, and most tables I've experienced allow something more generous. You're reaching here.
4. I literally added the caveat "IF they all turn a miss into a hit" and acknowledged they likely won't. Multiple times. So this is a deflection. Your math on the percent chance Precision Strike succeeds ONLY works if you use it on every miss, which is silly. You can choose to use it only if you miss by 1 or 2, or 1 through 3, etc.
5. I'll be happy to calculate it more precisely based on the average AC and accounting for misses. But please don't pretend I'm trying to pass off best case as the actual, when I explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged it's best case scenario. That is dishonest.
1. Whatever. I'm making sure we are talking about the same stuff and all on the same page.
2. Whatever. Same thing.
3. It's still a 1 point difference in math for 1 damage less on each hit and a 5% greater chance to miss than a straight gloomstalker. This is because the gloomstalker would get the level 8 ASI. It's not reaching. It's simple math. We are talking about how much more damage the multiclass is going to do on average than straight ranger. So that is part of the equation.
4. Not a deflection at all. But your math factors in turning 4 misses into hits 100% of the time, which creates the end result average number you came up with. I'm telling you that average DPR calculations can't assume best case scenarios. We need to decide on what kind of math we are going to use together, state that, and then do the calculations in tandem so we get accurate numbers. We are arguing because we are using different forms of measurement to measure different things.
5. I don't remember seeing you say that. I apologize. It is very much a best case scenario. I was under the impression that you were suggesting that this would be the common average kind of numbers expected, which is very much not the case.
I am playing a Gloomstalker, and multi classed it after level 5, which I regret.
First game in 5e, so that's my excuse.
What did you multi-cass into?
Echo knight - don't get me wrong, I totally enjoy playing it, and has loads of plusses, BUT if I understood the non-damage dealing strengths of the ranger beforehand, I would of stuck with Ranger throughout
1. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
2. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
3. Human Variant taking sharpshooter at 1, then an ASI at 4 = 18 dexterity. So it's even possible with point buy, and most tables I've experienced allow something more generous. You're reaching here.
4. I literally added the caveat "IF they all turn a miss into a hit" and acknowledged they likely won't. Multiple times. So this is a deflection. Your math on the percent chance Precision Strike succeeds ONLY works if you use it on every miss, which is silly. You can choose to use it only if you miss by 1 or 2, or 1 through 3, etc.
5. I'll be happy to calculate it more precisely based on the average AC and accounting for misses. But please don't pretend I'm trying to pass off best case as the actual, when I explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged it's best case scenario. That is dishonest.
1. Whatever. I'm making sure we are talking about the same stuff and all on the same page.
2. Whatever. Same thing.
3. It's still a 1 point difference in math for 1 damage less on each hit and a 5% greater chance to miss than a straight gloomstalker. This is because the gloomstalker would get the level 8 ASI. It's not reaching. It's simple math. We are talking about how much more damage the multiclass is going to do on average than straight ranger. So that is part of the equation.
4. Not a deflection at all. But your math factors in turning 4 misses into hits 100% of the time, which creates the end result average number you came up with. I'm telling you that average DPR calculations can't assume best case scenarios. We need to decide on what kind of math we are going to use together, state that, and then do the calculations in tandem so we get accurate numbers. We are arguing because we are using different forms of measurement to measure different things.
5. I don't remember seeing you say that. I apologize. It is very much a best case scenario. I was under the impression that you were suggesting that this would be the common average kind of numbers expected, which is very much not the case.
Seeing how I explicitly said I was giving best case, and acknowledged that best case seldom happens in reality, the only valid argument you made is that my comparison did not include an ASI increase. Which, turns a miss into a high once per 20 attacks, so we're not talking about big numbers here.
The overall point is the damage added by multi-classing is not trivial. Are you willing to concede it's not trivial, or do I need to calculate it all out while factoring in misses?
My overall thesis is that the OP is wrong. Multi-classing into fighter does not "weaken" the Gloomstalker. You gain extra damage, a lot of battlefield control options, +1 AC, and a bonus action heal. You can also use action surge to cast a 1 action spell, and still use all your attacks. Granted, it's not like you sacrifice nothing for those things. But it's a real stretch if someone wants to argue the GS features you delay "weaken" you - when you also factor the things you gain.
1. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
2. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
3. Human Variant taking sharpshooter at 1, then an ASI at 4 = 18 dexterity. So it's even possible with point buy, and most tables I've experienced allow something more generous. You're reaching here.
4. I literally added the caveat "IF they all turn a miss into a hit" and acknowledged they likely won't. Multiple times. So this is a deflection. Your math on the percent chance Precision Strike succeeds ONLY works if you use it on every miss, which is silly. You can choose to use it only if you miss by 1 or 2, or 1 through 3, etc.
5. I'll be happy to calculate it more precisely based on the average AC and accounting for misses. But please don't pretend I'm trying to pass off best case as the actual, when I explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged it's best case scenario. That is dishonest.
1. Whatever. I'm making sure we are talking about the same stuff and all on the same page.
2. Whatever. Same thing.
3. It's still a 1 point difference in math for 1 damage less on each hit and a 5% greater chance to miss than a straight gloomstalker. This is because the gloomstalker would get the level 8 ASI. It's not reaching. It's simple math. We are talking about how much more damage the multiclass is going to do on average than straight ranger. So that is part of the equation.
4. Not a deflection at all. But your math factors in turning 4 misses into hits 100% of the time, which creates the end result average number you came up with. I'm telling you that average DPR calculations can't assume best case scenarios. We need to decide on what kind of math we are going to use together, state that, and then do the calculations in tandem so we get accurate numbers. We are arguing because we are using different forms of measurement to measure different things.
5. I don't remember seeing you say that. I apologize. It is very much a best case scenario. I was under the impression that you were suggesting that this would be the common average kind of numbers expected, which is very much not the case.
Seeing how I explicitly said I was giving best case, and acknowledged that best case seldom happens in reality, the only valid argument you made is that my comparison did not include an ASI increase. Which, turns a miss into a high once per 20 attacks, so we're not talking about big numbers here.
The overall point is the damage added by multi-classing is not trivial. Are you willing to concede it's not trivial, or do I need to calculate it all out while factoring in misses?
My overall thesis is that the OP is wrong. Multi-classing into fighter does not "weaken" the Gloomstalker. You gain extra damage, a lot of battlefield control options, +1 AC, and a bonus action heal. You can also use action surge to cast a 1 action spell, and still use all your attacks. Granted, it's not like you sacrifice nothing for those things. But it's a real stretch if someone wants to argue the GS features you delay "weaken" you - when you also factor the things you gain.
I 100% agree with you that multiclassing, as we've been discussing, certainly does increase the single target weapon damage of the build.
I 100% agree with you that multiclassing, as we've been discussing, certainly does increase the single target weapon damage of the build.
Fair enough. Nuance is often lost in a discussion. As I make arguments for why the character is not weakened, it has been interpreted by some as me arguing that staying in Gloomstalker is "bad." I don't think that at all. From my perspective, maxing out damage from a GS/BM build is boring and repetitive. Just attack, attack, and throw precision attack dice at the near misses. Personally I would coordinate with my allies with things like tripping attack (advantage for the melee players), disarming attack (allies kick the weapon away as a free action), and things of that nature. I would mix in precision attack instead of spamming it, which means less damage.
I think the way GS is so front loaded is a good thing. I don't like lumbering through level after level while I wait for the abilities I really want.
Sean, I’m not trying to say the GS/BM MC isn’t a powerful build - it is. What I am trying to say is that all too often we the player have a particular mind set about how to play and what is best and that mindset informs our choices. Then if you start to whiteroom a question like the OP’s you tend to do so from your existing mindset not force yourself to reset and re-evaluate the way you would if actually were switching your standard character type - say from playing mostly fighters to playing a (lore/glamour/any subclass except valor) bard or sorceror suddenly what matters most changes and we should re-evaluate and change but often don’t. That I suspect leads to a lot of multiclassing. That “gear switching” is something I’ve had to do IRL repeatedly so I’m used to it and do it in game a lot. I see a lot posts here asking for help with MC characters and so much of it is really metagaming about the player’s ideas pretty much in a vacuum with very little about what the party and the campaign is like which makes it very much a white room exercise. I actual love playing MC characters but I recognize that the ones I like best are organic - they grew into their MC because of their lives in game, some may be backstory but much is based on in game events and my perception their reaction. But it forces me to switch mindsets every time I play a different character and those mindset switches force evaluations based on the character in the game and their (and their party’s) needs at the time. So if your a ranger and your party needs dpr then maybe you dip into fighter, if you need stealth you dip into rogue, if the party needs healing you dip into cleric or Druid. The ranger mindset of balance and integration and their mix of initial skills let’s them dive into a somewhat different roll to maintain the party integration. But at the same time the very act of MC makes them less of a ranger because they have (purposefully) surrendered their balance to maintain the party’s.
right now I have 3 rangers sort of in play and 2 are MC - an air genasi Fey wanderer6/storm sorceror 1, a wood elf ranger 2/draconic sorceror 2 and a L2 half elf ranger.
One more thing to think about is your party composition. Are all of the other “strikers” single target ones? Like fighters, paladins, and rogues? And/or is the party missing area of effect damage and/or control effects? A level 9+ ranger (any ranger) fills the area of effect and control role very handily. As fun as is may seem to be a single target destroyer of enemies, that might be overshadowed if there are 3 other members of the party doing that already.
Sean, I’m not trying to say the GS/BM MC isn’t a powerful build - it is. What I am trying to say is that all too often we the player have a particular mind set about how to play and what is best and that mindset informs our choices. Then if you start to whiteroom a question like the OP’s you tend to do so from your existing mindset not force yourself to reset and re-evaluate the way you would if actually were switching your standard character type - say from playing mostly fighters to playing a (lore/glamour/any subclass except valor) bard or sorceror suddenly what matters most changes and we should re-evaluate and change but often don’t. That I suspect leads to a lot of multiclassing. That “gear switching” is something I’ve had to do IRL repeatedly so I’m used to it and do it in game a lot. I see a lot posts here asking for help with MC characters and so much of it is really metagaming about the player’s ideas pretty much in a vacuum with very little about what the party and the campaign is like which makes it very much a white room exercise. I actual love playing MC characters but I recognize that the ones I like best are organic - they grew into their MC because of their lives in game, some may be backstory but much is based on in game events and my perception their reaction. But it forces me to switch mindsets every time I play a different character and those mindset switches force evaluations based on the character in the game and their (and their party’s) needs at the time. So if your a ranger and your party needs dpr then maybe you dip into fighter, if you need stealth you dip into rogue, if the party needs healing you dip into cleric or Druid. The ranger mindset of balance and integration and their mix of initial skills let’s them dive into a somewhat different roll to maintain the party integration. But at the same time the very act of MC makes them less of a ranger because they have (purposefully) surrendered their balance to maintain the party’s.
right now I have 3 rangers sort of in play and 2 are MC - an air genasi Fey wanderer6/storm sorceror 1, a wood elf ranger 2/draconic sorceror 2 and a L2 half elf ranger.
My mindset is that are objective mechanical consequences of the choices you make, both positive and negative. And then you also have subjective personal preferences. The key is to align the two as much as possible.
The argument that multi-classing a GS make it less "less of a Ranger" is vastly different than the proposition of the OP, that it weakens it. If done properly I don't think by an reasonable standard could it be said to be "weakened."
Is it less of a Ranger? Let's say at level eight you're 5 Gloomstalker and 3 Battle Master. From one perspective it's not even a question. You are factually three levels less of a Ranger, at least from a meta game standpoint. But from a flavor perspective that is subjective. A person's vision of a ranger could be a woodsy guy (or gal) who can do crazy trick shots with their bow, like trip attack or disarming attack. Consider someone like Robinhood for inspiration. Another person's vision may be less Roobinhood and more Eragon. In that case I would say staying ranger, or perhaps even dipping Druid is more thematic.
Back to the topic of weakening by multi-classing, most MC choices are most certainly weakening. The Gloomstalker multi-class just happens to well known as one of the few that works well, and for good reason.
Has the original poster circled back around yet and given us more information to talk about yet? Like what their goal(s) and function(s) are for the specific character?
Please don't tell me your GM let's people stack advantage. It's supposed to be a on/off mechanic, as well as disadvantage. You either have it or don't have it.
Please don't tell me your GM let's people stack advantage. It's supposed to be a on/off mechanic, as well as disadvantage. You either have it or don't have it.
Thread is almost a year old and I can not see what "triple" you are referring to.
Many people refer to elven accuracy as triple advantage, As you will always reroll the lower of the first two dice you rolled this is the same as rolling three dice and taking the highest.
If you have a DM whos changing the rules of surprise just because he knows you're about to Nova, thats a bad DM and you should probably try and find one who wont have to change rules to the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"So if you want to MC out of ranger I would personally wait until after level 9. "
And for a Gloomstalker moving to fighter after 9 is probably a poor idea, because the level 11 ability is on average better than action surge (Particularly on a sharpshooter build where misses are bound to happen).
1 action surge is not as good as every round the ability that when "you miss with a weapon attack, you can make another weapon attack as part of the same action." That adds up quickly.
Nature's Veil is excellent, you get another spells known at 11th and another 3rd level spell slot.
Tireless does a good job of providing similar capability to second wind. The action economy isn't as good, but the effect is solid and can be done prefight:
"Tireless (10th Level) As an action, you can give yourself a number of temporary hit points equal to 1d8 + your Wisdom modifier (minimum of 1 temporary hit point). You can use this action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest. In addition, whenever you finish a short rest, your exhaustion level, if any, is decreased by 1."
With a longbow, 18 STR, and Sharpshooter: Average damage is objectively 18.5
Average rounds of combat per short rest (the example we both agreed to) is 8.75
You get 4 inspiration die per short rest. Each time you use one to turn a miss into a hit (Precision Attack), the inspiration die added 18.5 damage. That's 4 x 18.5
Action Surge gives you two additional attacks: 18.5 x 2
All together that's 18.5 x 6 = 111. Divided by number of rounds (8.75) = 12.69
Tell me where my math is wrong. Don't just say it's "generous."
I already added the caveat that that's if all inspiration die and extra attacks are successful.
1. They are called maneuver dice, not inspiration dice.
2. We are talking about dexterity, not strength.
3. You would lose an ASI going with battle master 3, so only a +3 modifier on each hit.
4. You can’t assume that each maneuver die will turn a miss into a hit. You have to add that extra 20.5% (4.5) from a maneuver die to the to-hit chance, which is also 5% lower than the gloomstalker because of the missed ASI.
5. So if you only look at best case scenario, which is what you are doing, the math comes out better than what I said. But you can’t just assume that an 8th level archer character is missing their shots 20% of the time and that 4d4’s will circumvent that completely. That’s not how to hit calculations are done.
You are missing our point Sean, you are still hyper focused on maximizing the damage to the exclusion of all else - that is fighter thinking because that is what fighters are all about. Rangers are NOT all about damage. They are about integration of damage, spells, and control (movement). Heck, I’ll grant that your battle master MC does more damage than the straight gloomstalker, what it doesn’t do as well is integrate damage across the battlefield including spell damage and foe control. Yes your BM has maneuvers that can do some of the control but then they can’t use the damage boost ones and your BM MC will always be behind the straight ranger in spell use and that’s really the point of why the OP was right that any MC weakens the ranger AS A RANGER. The character can still be a very powerful character but the more you delve into the other class the less of a ranger the character becomes and the more of the other class.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
1. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
2. Nothing to do with math, so that's a deflection.
3. Human Variant taking sharpshooter at 1, then an ASI at 4 = 18 dexterity. So it's even possible with point buy, and most tables I've experienced allow something more generous. You're reaching here.
4. I literally added the caveat "IF they all turn a miss into a hit" and acknowledged they likely won't. Multiple times. So this is a deflection. Your math on the percent chance Precision Strike succeeds ONLY works if you use it on every miss, which is silly. You can choose to use it only if you miss by 1 or 2, or 1 through 3, etc.
5. I'll be happy to calculate it more precisely based on the average AC and accounting for misses. But please don't pretend I'm trying to pass off best case as the actual, when I explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged it's best case scenario. That is dishonest.
Depends on the game you're in to be honest.
If you have 1-2 combats between short rests commonly then fighter will be very very good for your offensive output/give you a healing effect without using a spell slot/another fighting style which could raise your AC by one. Hell you can use your action surge to cast conjure animals and still get your attack action in the first round which is massive for not only damage but area control.
If someone's gotta eat 8 attacks of opportunity they will think twice about moving.
You can also pick up a maneuver like ambush and increase your odds of going first.
I would actually go Assassin Rogue myself to get ADV on attacks on things that haven't acted /cunning action/sneak attack/expertise and potentially to CRIT on enemies
To me you get as much value, if not more depending on party comp, then what ranger gives you.
It's very dependant on play style, campaign, and party to be honest.
Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. My position is not that staying in Gloomstalker is a bad idea. My contention is with the claim of the OP, that multiclassing GS "weakens" it.
Also, 3 levels of battle master improves defense (+1 AC), adds healing (second wind), damage (obviously), and adds battle field control options via BM maneuvers.
Can reasonable people still prefer to stay Gloomstalker? Of course. If you multi-class are you sacrificing some things to pay for what you gain? Obviously. But to say it "weakens" the Gloomstalker is a stretch.
Depends on when you multiclass and into what.
By level 11, you have most of the gloomstalker's strongest abilities, and base ranger isn't getting anything that amazing past 10 except more spells and slots. But as a very martially focused ranger who already has amazing spells like ensnaring strike, holding out for higher level spells isn't clearly better than dipping into another martial class to increase your martial prowess.
Fighter is always good, barb or hex blade or war magic can be good if you have the stats.
Rogue can also be good. Assassin for advantage on all your attacks the first round, scout if you're going for a speedy archer build, or swashbuckler if you want the mobile feat and another stat to increase your initiative.
1. Whatever. I'm making sure we are talking about the same stuff and all on the same page.
2. Whatever. Same thing.
3. It's still a 1 point difference in math for 1 damage less on each hit and a 5% greater chance to miss than a straight gloomstalker. This is because the gloomstalker would get the level 8 ASI. It's not reaching. It's simple math. We are talking about how much more damage the multiclass is going to do on average than straight ranger. So that is part of the equation.
4. Not a deflection at all. But your math factors in turning 4 misses into hits 100% of the time, which creates the end result average number you came up with. I'm telling you that average DPR calculations can't assume best case scenarios. We need to decide on what kind of math we are going to use together, state that, and then do the calculations in tandem so we get accurate numbers. We are arguing because we are using different forms of measurement to measure different things.
5. I don't remember seeing you say that. I apologize. It is very much a best case scenario. I was under the impression that you were suggesting that this would be the common average kind of numbers expected, which is very much not the case.
Echo knight - don't get me wrong, I totally enjoy playing it, and has loads of plusses, BUT if I understood the non-damage dealing strengths of the ranger beforehand, I would of stuck with Ranger throughout
Seeing how I explicitly said I was giving best case, and acknowledged that best case seldom happens in reality, the only valid argument you made is that my comparison did not include an ASI increase. Which, turns a miss into a high once per 20 attacks, so we're not talking about big numbers here.
The overall point is the damage added by multi-classing is not trivial. Are you willing to concede it's not trivial, or do I need to calculate it all out while factoring in misses?
My overall thesis is that the OP is wrong. Multi-classing into fighter does not "weaken" the Gloomstalker. You gain extra damage, a lot of battlefield control options, +1 AC, and a bonus action heal. You can also use action surge to cast a 1 action spell, and still use all your attacks. Granted, it's not like you sacrifice nothing for those things. But it's a real stretch if someone wants to argue the GS features you delay "weaken" you - when you also factor the things you gain.
I 100% agree with you that multiclassing, as we've been discussing, certainly does increase the single target weapon damage of the build.
Fair enough. Nuance is often lost in a discussion. As I make arguments for why the character is not weakened, it has been interpreted by some as me arguing that staying in Gloomstalker is "bad." I don't think that at all. From my perspective, maxing out damage from a GS/BM build is boring and repetitive. Just attack, attack, and throw precision attack dice at the near misses. Personally I would coordinate with my allies with things like tripping attack (advantage for the melee players), disarming attack (allies kick the weapon away as a free action), and things of that nature. I would mix in precision attack instead of spamming it, which means less damage.
I think the way GS is so front loaded is a good thing. I don't like lumbering through level after level while I wait for the abilities I really want.
Sean, I’m not trying to say the GS/BM MC isn’t a powerful build - it is. What I am trying to say is that all too often we the player have a particular mind set about how to play and what is best and that mindset informs our choices. Then if you start to whiteroom a question like the OP’s you tend to do so from your existing mindset not force yourself to reset and re-evaluate the way you would if actually were switching your standard character type - say from playing mostly fighters to playing a (lore/glamour/any subclass except valor) bard or sorceror suddenly what matters most changes and we should re-evaluate and change but often don’t. That I suspect leads to a lot of multiclassing. That “gear switching” is something I’ve had to do IRL repeatedly so I’m used to it and do it in game a lot. I see a lot posts here asking for help with MC characters and so much of it is really metagaming about the player’s ideas pretty much in a vacuum with very little about what the party and the campaign is like which makes it very much a white room exercise. I actual love playing MC characters but I recognize that the ones I like best are organic - they grew into their MC because of their lives in game, some may be backstory but much is based on in game events and my perception their reaction. But it forces me to switch mindsets every time I play a different character and those mindset switches force evaluations based on the character in the game and their (and their party’s) needs at the time. So if your a ranger and your party needs dpr then maybe you dip into fighter, if you need stealth you dip into rogue, if the party needs healing you dip into cleric or Druid. The ranger mindset of balance and integration and their mix of initial skills let’s them dive into a somewhat different roll to maintain the party integration. But at the same time the very act of MC makes them less of a ranger because they have (purposefully) surrendered their balance to maintain the party’s.
right now I have 3 rangers sort of in play and 2 are MC - an air genasi Fey wanderer6/storm sorceror 1, a wood elf ranger 2/draconic sorceror 2 and a L2 half elf ranger.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
One more thing to think about is your party composition. Are all of the other “strikers” single target ones? Like fighters, paladins, and rogues? And/or is the party missing area of effect damage and/or control effects? A level 9+ ranger (any ranger) fills the area of effect and control role very handily. As fun as is may seem to be a single target destroyer of enemies, that might be overshadowed if there are 3 other members of the party doing that already.
My mindset is that are objective mechanical consequences of the choices you make, both positive and negative. And then you also have subjective personal preferences. The key is to align the two as much as possible.
The argument that multi-classing a GS make it less "less of a Ranger" is vastly different than the proposition of the OP, that it weakens it. If done properly I don't think by an reasonable standard could it be said to be "weakened."
Is it less of a Ranger? Let's say at level eight you're 5 Gloomstalker and 3 Battle Master. From one perspective it's not even a question. You are factually three levels less of a Ranger, at least from a meta game standpoint. But from a flavor perspective that is subjective. A person's vision of a ranger could be a woodsy guy (or gal) who can do crazy trick shots with their bow, like trip attack or disarming attack. Consider someone like Robinhood for inspiration. Another person's vision may be less Roobinhood and more Eragon. In that case I would say staying ranger, or perhaps even dipping Druid is more thematic.
Back to the topic of weakening by multi-classing, most MC choices are most certainly weakening. The Gloomstalker multi-class just happens to well known as one of the few that works well, and for good reason.
Has the original poster circled back around yet and given us more information to talk about yet? Like what their goal(s) and function(s) are for the specific character?
Triple what?...
Please don't tell me your GM let's people stack advantage. It's supposed to be a on/off mechanic, as well as disadvantage. You either have it or don't have it.
Thread is almost a year old and I can not see what "triple" you are referring to.
Many people refer to elven accuracy as triple advantage, As you will always reroll the lower of the first two dice you rolled this is the same as rolling three dice and taking the highest.
If you have a DM whos changing the rules of surprise just because he knows you're about to Nova, thats a bad DM and you should probably try and find one who wont have to change rules to the game.