I am a little confused about the Crit damage and calculation.
Is crit damage 2d8+15+2d6 = 31?? What did I miss in my calculation???
Since it is 14.26% chance of critical out of 93.6% hit. Shouldn't the 0.936*0.1426 = 0.1335. Shouldn't the Weighted damage (expected damage value) is 26.5*0.936+38*0.1335 = 29.88?? or even 26.5*0.936+31*0.1335 = 28.94?? If I remember correctly, the total percentage in weighted damage (expected value) shouldn't be over 100%. Shouldn't we need to use the hit change without crit for the normal damage part and add the crit damage with crit chance? For example, the weighted damage (expected value) for a normal attack is 19.5*0.55+24*0.05 = 11.925
The same question applies to all the Weighted damage calculations. Since ranger needs to hit 1st in order to crit, should we separated the normal hit and crit hit for the calculation? If we don't multiply, it is saying we can crit hit even we miss the target.
Math is a liar that will say whatever you want it to, don’t sweat it. Suffice to say, giving Hunters with Elven Accuracy advantage on their entire Volley from hiding bumps their hit chance like 30%, so increases DPR a lot in that way, but the increased risk of crits is only worth like 2 or 3 damage per round at most.
There's a lot of "what-if" going on here, but RAW the answer is that only the first attack roll would get advantage.
The rules for Unseen Attackers and Targets state that "when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses." It does not say when you take the Attack action. Taking the Attack action allows you to make an attack, but they are still distinct things; this is why the Extra Attack class feature allows you to make two attacks as part of one Attack action. Any time you roll to hit (that is, rolling a d20 + modifiers against a target's AC) you are making an attack, and doing so ends being hidden.
In the case of Volley, you are able to make many attack rolls as part of one Volley action, but only the first will have advantage; after that, you are no longer hidden.
The definition of “volley” is “simultaneous discharge of a number of missile weapons” (source: Miriam Webster) and the description says “A ranged attack against any number of creatures”. Note the singular use of “attack” there. With those two things in mind, I would say the advantage is for all of the shots in Volley. This is not Extra Attack and is worded completely differently from that feature. also, the revealing of your location In unseen creature specifically says after your “attack” not “attack roll”. Given it uses both terms elsewhere in the rule, it seems intentional that the revealing is done after the attack is complete, regardless of how many rolls are made
I’d caution against reading that meaning into the singular number of attack. In this context it would be quite common to use such language to make clear that’s only one attack per creature (for example, “three attacks against three targets” could mean nine attacks total; there’s ambiguity). Each target receives a separate attack roll, so I think it’s extremely reasonable to say they’re separate attacks.
That said, since the attacker is hidden when every attack is made, I think I personally would allow advantage on all the rolls. I can understand the opposing view, though.
Making an attack roll is an attack. Volley says "you make a separate attack roll for each target." Once you've made an attack, you are no longer hidden. If you want to play it otherwise that's fine, but the RAW is quite clear.
The rules for Making and Attack literally say "If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack."
If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack.
The language you are pointing at does not adequately split the hair of whether "the attack" is the entire Volley, or the individual arrows within the Volley.
The language of Volley is also unclear:
Volley
You can use your action to make a ranged attack against any number of creatures within 10 feet of a point you can see within your weapon’s range. You must have ammunition for each target, as normal, and you make a separate attack roll for each target.
Is it "a ranged attack" meaning the Volley is a single attack with multiple attack rolls and targets, or any number of "a ranged attack"s seperately? "A X" doesn't always require it be read as singular, but it can. Even if the language you quoted in 9 means what it means, Volley could be a specific exception, blah blah...
It's ambiguous and up to interpretation whether Volley is one attack with multiple targets, or multiple attacks with one action. Reasonable minds will differ.
Yes, it does. Volley says "make a separate attack roll for each target," Making an Attack says "if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack." 1 + 1 = 2.
Volley is not an attack, it is an action that allows you to make several attack rolls against multiple creatures. Each attack roll that it allows you to do is an individual attack, because, well, reread the first line.
I suppose I can see the ambiguity in the phrase "you can use your action to make a ranged attack against any number of creatures," but it doesn't take much digging to get to the bottom of what the rules surrounding the ability actually are.
Volley is not an attack? But, "the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack."?
Volley is no more an attack than the Attack action is an attack; they are actions that allow you to make (an) attack roll(s), which are attacks. Attacks are not actions, they are the result of actions.
I am a little confused about the Crit damage and calculation.
Is crit damage 2d8+15+2d6 = 31?? What did I miss in my calculation???
Since it is 14.26% chance of critical out of 93.6% hit. Shouldn't the 0.936*0.1426 = 0.1335. Shouldn't the Weighted damage (expected damage value) is 26.5*0.936+38*0.1335 = 29.88?? or even 26.5*0.936+31*0.1335 = 28.94?? If I remember correctly, the total percentage in weighted damage (expected value) shouldn't be over 100%. Shouldn't we need to use the hit change without crit for the normal damage part and add the crit damage with crit chance? For example, the weighted damage (expected value) for a normal attack is 19.5*0.55+24*0.05 = 11.925
The same question applies to all the Weighted damage calculations. Since ranger needs to hit 1st in order to crit, should we separated the normal hit and crit hit for the calculation? If we don't multiply, it is saying we can crit hit even we miss the target.
I adjusted the numbers - you noticed a small error. The increase in damage is corrected now.
Volley is not an attack? But, "the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack."?
Volley is not an attack at all. It’s an action, that allows X number of attacks. Exactly like Extra Attacks.
Except it’s neither worded the same way nor has the same name, both of which are important if you are comparing abilities in D&D
Gonna delete a bunch of my posts and eat crow. Whirlwind and Volley are actually attacks, as per Sage Advice. Hunters here I come. 🙂 haha
First off, source? I can't find any Sage Advice referring to Volley. If there is something saying that, that's absolute nonsense. A good reminder that Sage Advice is not part of the Core Rules, at the very least.
All I can find that you may be referring to is this, and yeah, it's nonsense:
Can a ranger move between the attack rolls of the Whirlwind Attack feature?
No. Whirlwind Attack is unusual, in that it’s a single attack with multiple attack rolls. In most other instances, an attack has one attack roll. The rule on moving between attacks (PHB , "Moving Between Attacks") lets you move between weapon attacks, not between the attack rolls of an exceptional feature like Whirlwind Attack.
Whirlwind Attack is not a "single attack with multiple attack rolls," it is an action that allows you to make multiple attacks. There's really no reason you couldn't move between the attacks, but you couldn't go far, because the targets have to be within 5 feet of your starting position.
Volley is not an attack? But, "the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack."?
Volley is not an attack at all. It’s an action, that allows X number of attacks. Exactly like Extra Attacks.
Except it’s neither worded the same way nor has the same name, both of which are important if you are comparing abilities in D&D
Gonna delete a bunch of my posts and eat crow. Whirlwind and Volley are actually attacks, as per Sage Advice. Hunters here I come. 🙂 haha
First off, source? I can't find any Sage Advice referring to Volley. If there is something saying that, that's absolute nonsense. A good reminder that Sage Advice is not part of the Core Rules, at the very least.
All I can find that you may be referring to is this, and yeah, it's nonsense:
Can a ranger move between the attack rolls of the Whirlwind Attack feature?
No. Whirlwind Attack is unusual, in that it’s a single attack with multiple attack rolls. In most other instances, an attack has one attack roll. The rule on moving between attacks (PHB , "Moving Between Attacks") lets you move between weapon attacks, not between the attack rolls of an exceptional feature like Whirlwind Attack.
Whirlwind Attack is not a "single attack with multiple attack rolls," it is an action that allows you to make multiple attacks.
Yeah, it says Whirlwind is an “attack”. So it’s one attack. Kinda nonsense, but they needed to restrict movement between attacks so they had to justify it that way. But yeah, hunters get some crazy damage RAW. I’d likely rule it differently at my tables, but that’s kinda crazy.
Well Sage Advice is wrong. Again, it's important to note that it is not part of the core rules; it is simply official advice on how to interpret rules, and they can be (and are, surprisingly often) wrong.
Whirlwind Attack is a feature that allows you to use your action to make multiple attacks, not an attack in and of itself. There's no reason - at least in the core rules - that you couldn't move between the attacks of it, but you couldn't go far as it does stipulate the targets need to be within 5 feet of where you were when you took the action.
Edit: I should clarify something because I am using incorrect terminology; Volley and Whirlwind Attack are not actually actions as I've been saying, that's just an easier way to get my point across. Technically they are features that allow you to use your action for special things. It's a pretty moot point because it amounts to the exact same thing, but I just wanted to nip anyone throwing that at me in the bud.
Jay, I agree that Sage Advice brings little to the table as far as being "the rule." But it does demonstrate that reasonable minds are differing on whether "the attack" is the [feature/ability/action] that makes the rolls, or the rolls themselves. I just don't think there's written PHB text that is going to clear that up either way.
And again, the math (as easily manipulated as it is) shows, a Sharpshooter-Elven Accuracy-Hidden Hunter with Volley does decent damage if all the attacks are made with advantage instead of just the first one, but it certainly isn't game-breaking. A ranged Fighter with Sharpshooter and Elven Accuracy at that level would do as much or more by being able to make a consistent 4 attacks per round (or even 8 with Action Surge), against multiple or single targets, not just when the DM clumps them. The Hunter will do more damage with an all-advantage-Volley than he will with an advantage-on-only-the-first-roll-Volley, but the Hunter won't necessarily do more damage than other Bow users or ranged attack users, so its not like this is presenting some sort of looming danger to the balance of the game?
But it does demonstrate that reasonable minds are differing on whether "the attack" is the [feature/ability/action] that makes the rolls, or the rolls themselves.
I don't know how "if there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack" doesn't clarify this for you; this line clearly indicates that "attack roll" and "attack" are synonymous in 5e, and it's straight out of the PHB. Volley is not an attack roll, so it is not an attack; it is a feature that allows you to use your action to make attack rolls (AKA attacks) against multiple targets. Just like the Attack action is not an attack, it is an action that lets you make an attack (or multiple if you have Extra Attack).
I'm not saying it would be the end of the world to allow it... I'm just trying to get to the bottom of the rules, and I can't find anything concrete (outside Sage Advice) that proves me wrong.
Edit: I guess I can actually see the confusion in the line I quoted. "If there's ever any question where something you're doing counts as an attack," and the "something you're doing" could be interpreted as the Volley feature. However, the existence of the Attack action clearly shows that this is not the case, because the Attack action is the "something you're doing" and it is not an attack, it just results in them. Same as Volley.
You're not going to find anything that proves you wrong. But you're also not going to find anything that proves you right, because Volley describes itself as "a ranged attack against any number of creatures within 10 feet of a point you can see." Both interpretations have support, at least as far as Volley is concerned.
I do agree that the Attack Action isn't an attack, its an action you take that allows you to make one or more attacks. And I agree with you that by extension, if the Attack Action is an action that enables attacks, why wouldn't Volley or other actions that grant multiple attack rolls be the same? But the text of Volley doesn't necessarily agree with that (very reasonable) interpretation.
The difference is that, with Volley, “something I’m doing” is firing a bunch of arrows from my bow at the same time. The separate attack rolls of the Attack action are conceptually separate attacks and mechanically separate attacks. The separate attack rolls of Whirlwind Attack and Volley are conceptually one attack and mechanically... well, that’s the question we’re trying to answer.
The answer may well be that they’re mechanically separate as well, but I don’t think it’s appropriate to just ignore the conceptual difference between an Attack action with Extra Attack and these ranger features.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am a little confused about the Crit damage and calculation.
Since it is 14.26% chance of critical out of 93.6% hit. Shouldn't the 0.936*0.1426 = 0.1335. Shouldn't the Weighted damage (expected damage value) is 26.5*0.936+38*0.1335 = 29.88?? or even 26.5*0.936+31*0.1335 = 28.94??If I remember correctly, the total percentage in weighted damage (expected value) shouldn't be over 100%. Shouldn't we need to use the hit change without crit for the normal damage part and add the crit damage with crit chance? For example, the weighted damage (expected value) for a normal attack is 19.5*0.55+24*0.05 = 11.925Math is a liar that will say whatever you want it to, don’t sweat it. Suffice to say, giving Hunters with Elven Accuracy advantage on their entire Volley from hiding bumps their hit chance like 30%, so increases DPR a lot in that way, but the increased risk of crits is only worth like 2 or 3 damage per round at most.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The definition of “volley” is “simultaneous discharge of a number of missile weapons” (source: Miriam Webster) and the description says “A ranged attack against any number of creatures”. Note the singular use of “attack” there. With those two things in mind, I would say the advantage is for all of the shots in Volley. This is not Extra Attack and is worded completely differently from that feature.
also, the revealing of your location In unseen creature specifically says after your “attack” not “attack roll”. Given it uses both terms elsewhere in the rule, it seems intentional that the revealing is done after the attack is complete, regardless of how many rolls are made
I’d caution against reading that meaning into the singular number of attack. In this context it would be quite common to use such language to make clear that’s only one attack per creature (for example, “three attacks against three targets” could mean nine attacks total; there’s ambiguity). Each target receives a separate attack roll, so I think it’s extremely reasonable to say they’re separate attacks.
That said, since the attacker is hidden when every attack is made, I think I personally would allow advantage on all the rolls. I can understand the opposing view, though.
Making an attack roll is an attack. Volley says "you make a separate attack roll for each target." Once you've made an attack, you are no longer hidden. If you want to play it otherwise that's fine, but the RAW is quite clear.
The rules for Making and Attack literally say "If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack."
The language you are pointing at does not adequately split the hair of whether "the attack" is the entire Volley, or the individual arrows within the Volley.
The language of Volley is also unclear:
Is it "a ranged attack" meaning the Volley is a single attack with multiple attack rolls and targets, or any number of "a ranged attack"s seperately? "A X" doesn't always require it be read as singular, but it can. Even if the language you quoted in 9 means what it means, Volley could be a specific exception, blah blah...
It's ambiguous and up to interpretation whether Volley is one attack with multiple targets, or multiple attacks with one action. Reasonable minds will differ.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yes, it does. Volley says "make a separate attack roll for each target," Making an Attack says "if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack." 1 + 1 = 2.
Volley is not an attack, it is an action that allows you to make several attack rolls against multiple creatures. Each attack roll that it allows you to do is an individual attack, because, well, reread the first line.
I suppose I can see the ambiguity in the phrase "you can use your action to make a ranged attack against any number of creatures," but it doesn't take much digging to get to the bottom of what the rules surrounding the ability actually are.
Volley is not an attack? But, "the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack."?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Volley is no more an attack than the Attack action is an attack; they are actions that allow you to make (an) attack roll(s), which are attacks. Attacks are not actions, they are the result of actions.
I adjusted the numbers - you noticed a small error. The increase in damage is corrected now.
Except it’s neither worded the same way nor has the same name, both of which are important if you are comparing abilities in D&D
Gonna delete a bunch of my posts and eat crow. Whirlwind and Volley are actually attacks, as per Sage Advice. Hunters here I come. 🙂 haha
First off, source? I can't find any Sage Advice referring to Volley. If there is something saying that, that's absolute nonsense. A good reminder that Sage Advice is not part of the Core Rules, at the very least.
All I can find that you may be referring to is this, and yeah, it's nonsense:
Can a ranger move between the attack rolls of the Whirlwind Attack feature?
No. Whirlwind Attack is unusual, in that it’s a single attack with multiple attack rolls. In most other instances, an attack has one attack roll. The rule on moving between attacks (PHB , "Moving Between Attacks") lets you move between weapon attacks, not between the attack rolls of an exceptional feature like Whirlwind Attack.
Whirlwind Attack is not a "single attack with multiple attack rolls," it is an action that allows you to make multiple attacks. There's really no reason you couldn't move between the attacks, but you couldn't go far, because the targets have to be within 5 feet of your starting position.
Yeah, it says Whirlwind is an “attack”. So it’s one attack. Kinda nonsense, but they needed to restrict movement between attacks so they had to justify it that way. But yeah, hunters get some crazy damage RAW. I’d likely rule it differently at my tables, but that’s kinda crazy.
Well Sage Advice is wrong. Again, it's important to note that it is not part of the core rules; it is simply official advice on how to interpret rules, and they can be (and are, surprisingly often) wrong.
Whirlwind Attack is a feature that allows you to use your action to make multiple attacks, not an attack in and of itself. There's no reason - at least in the core rules - that you couldn't move between the attacks of it, but you couldn't go far as it does stipulate the targets need to be within 5 feet of where you were when you took the action.
Edit: I should clarify something because I am using incorrect terminology; Volley and Whirlwind Attack are not actually actions as I've been saying, that's just an easier way to get my point across. Technically they are features that allow you to use your action for special things. It's a pretty moot point because it amounts to the exact same thing, but I just wanted to nip anyone throwing that at me in the bud.
Jay, I agree that Sage Advice brings little to the table as far as being "the rule." But it does demonstrate that reasonable minds are differing on whether "the attack" is the [feature/ability/action] that makes the rolls, or the rolls themselves. I just don't think there's written PHB text that is going to clear that up either way.
And again, the math (as easily manipulated as it is) shows, a Sharpshooter-Elven Accuracy-Hidden Hunter with Volley does decent damage if all the attacks are made with advantage instead of just the first one, but it certainly isn't game-breaking. A ranged Fighter with Sharpshooter and Elven Accuracy at that level would do as much or more by being able to make a consistent 4 attacks per round (or even 8 with Action Surge), against multiple or single targets, not just when the DM clumps them. The Hunter will do more damage with an all-advantage-Volley than he will with an advantage-on-only-the-first-roll-Volley, but the Hunter won't necessarily do more damage than other Bow users or ranged attack users, so its not like this is presenting some sort of looming danger to the balance of the game?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I don't know how "if there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack" doesn't clarify this for you; this line clearly indicates that "attack roll" and "attack" are synonymous in 5e, and it's straight out of the PHB. Volley is not an attack roll, so it is not an attack; it is a feature that allows you to use your action to make attack rolls (AKA attacks) against multiple targets. Just like the Attack action is not an attack, it is an action that lets you make an attack (or multiple if you have Extra Attack).
I'm not saying it would be the end of the world to allow it... I'm just trying to get to the bottom of the rules, and I can't find anything concrete (outside Sage Advice) that proves me wrong.
Edit: I guess I can actually see the confusion in the line I quoted. "If there's ever any question where something you're doing counts as an attack," and the "something you're doing" could be interpreted as the Volley feature. However, the existence of the Attack action clearly shows that this is not the case, because the Attack action is the "something you're doing" and it is not an attack, it just results in them. Same as Volley.
You're not going to find anything that proves you wrong. But you're also not going to find anything that proves you right, because Volley describes itself as "a ranged attack against any number of creatures within 10 feet of a point you can see." Both interpretations have support, at least as far as Volley is concerned.
I do agree that the Attack Action isn't an attack, its an action you take that allows you to make one or more attacks. And I agree with you that by extension, if the Attack Action is an action that enables attacks, why wouldn't Volley or other actions that grant multiple attack rolls be the same? But the text of Volley doesn't necessarily agree with that (very reasonable) interpretation.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yeah, fair enough.
The difference is that, with Volley, “something I’m doing” is firing a bunch of arrows from my bow at the same time. The separate attack rolls of the Attack action are conceptually separate attacks and mechanically separate attacks. The separate attack rolls of Whirlwind Attack and Volley are conceptually one attack and mechanically... well, that’s the question we’re trying to answer.
The answer may well be that they’re mechanically separate as well, but I don’t think it’s appropriate to just ignore the conceptual difference between an Attack action with Extra Attack and these ranger features.