I'm working with this build concept for a high-level campaign, and I'm interested to hear the community's thoughts. It's already DM-approved, but I'm fairly certain it works RAW despite its strangeness. The important factors are
Ranger 5/Rogue X (4+)
Crossbow Expert
Dual Wielder
Vex and Nick Weapon Masteries
a hand crossbow and a ton of daggers
Per Enhanced Dual Wielding in the Dual Wielder feat, the bonus action attack "must be a Melee weapon that lacks the Two-Handed property," so that would have to be the dagger, but daggers also have the Thrown property, so from melee out to 20 feet away you can shoot your crossbow, then throw a dagger, then shoot your crossbow with the attack granted by the Light property (now moved into your attack action by your dagger's Nick), then throw another dagger as a bonus action. If your crossbow bolts hit, they'll grant advantage on the dagger strikes which will proc Sneak Attack. They don't necessarily need to be in that order as long as 2 of the attacks are dagger strikes and one of those is the bonus action, but that order of events makes most sense in my head from a functional/visual perspective which matters to me, personally. In fact, if you need your bonus action for something else, you could still shoot twice then attack with the dagger to make sure you still get 2 attacks with advantage. This option works without the Dual Weilder feat, but the Enhanced Dual Wielding bonus action attack just makes that Sneak Attack more reliable. That's both a better damage buff and less costly than the Ranger spells you might use instead with your bonus action, and it doesn't take away the option to use the Ranger spells when you think their secondary effects could be beneficial. When necessary, the Rogue's Cunning Strike Withdraw also works very nicely with this build that wants to keep medium range but still use their Bonus Action for damage rather than Cunning Action.
I'm also going with
Archery fighting style- To Hit is just superior to the damage bump you'd get from Two-Weapon or Thrown Weapon Fighting Styles
Gloomstalker, though I was tempted by Fey Wanderer. If it were a more story-driven campaign I would reconsider, but this is for an intentionally low effort game where we're encouraged to be murder hobos (it's more for the sake of getting together and gaming than telling a story, mostly combat encounters with a bit of justification).
Assassin is the obvious choice for the edgiest murderer who couldn't decide if they wanted to shoot you or stab you, and we all know its synergy with Gloomstalker is still significant in 2024 even if less than previously, but if I were going with the Fey Wanderer option, I would be very tempted to go Arcane Trickster and take only spells that don't rely on INT score. The flavor synergy is as obvious as it is delightful, but continuing spell scaling would also make those bonus action Ranger spells more tempting. Great choice if you read the paragraph above and said "nah, thanks, I'll just do Crossbow Expert." Also a great choice if you don't want to be an edgelord, but hey, edging is fun!
If you wanna be extra edgy and your DM is extra cool, the rules flubs that allow this to work with a pistol instead of a crossbow (with Gunner instead of Crossbow Expert) are pretty minor. You'd actually do slightly less damage on average that way because Gunner lacks the Dual Wielding feature that Crossbow Expert has, but you can always just reflavor your crossbow as a pistol if your DM is worried it. Of course, it should go without saying to respect their setting: If a gun doesn't fit, it doesn't fit, and you should ask them before you try any of these shenanigans regardless, but again, I'm fairly certain the RAW interaction I named above holds water using hand crossbow/dagger (or hand crossbow/light hammer but that feels odd thematically. Maybe you have a reason)
I require the extra attack of the Light property be made with a Nick weapon to be part of the Attack action instead of a Bonus Action, so the Hand Crossbow wouldn't qualify.
So when you take the Attack action and attack with a Hand Crossbow, you can make the extra attack of the Light property with either;
a different Hand Crossbow as a Bonus Action adding your ability modifier to the damage
OR
a different Nick weapon as part of the Attack Action not adding your ability modifier to the damage
There's nothing requiring the Nick attack to happen after the baseline attack+extra attack; it could easily be in between. (Also, since their DM has approved it, they presumably disagree with your interpretation of Nick.) So the given attack order is entirely kosher.
Not sure why you think they need to be unequipping the hand crossbow to throw daggers.
I definitely see why you might rule that, but doing so wouldn't affect the damage output, and as I'm reading, RAW do not require this stipulation:
Nick states "When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action," and the Light property states "When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn. That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon." As I read, the Light weapon that procs the extra attack would have to be part of the Attack action, but the extra attack itself must be made with another weapon, and Nick just moves that to the Action instead of the BA. I'm not finding any verbiage indicating that this attack must be made with a Nick weapon. Again, this doesn't really affect your damage, and as I'm seeing it, the rules allow for either choice, but I just find shoot, throw, shoot, throw to make more sense from a "realism adjacent" perspective, and the idea of someone who shoots you just so they can stab you better is just hilariously fun to me.
The key here is understanding Nick - it moves the bonus action light weapon attack into the attack action, BUT, the Nick attack must be with the Nick weapon. Because the PC is a L5 ranger they also get the extra attack in their attack action for a total of 3 attacks in the attack action and a they still have a free bonus action thanks to dual wielding. Personally I would go: R1: BA- Hunters mark, AA: Hand xbow, hand xbow, dagger(Nick attack). This way you get an extra D6 on each hit. Then (assuming they don’t lose concentration on HM)- R2+: AA: Hxb, dagger, h b; then BA: dagger. This provides the possibility of advantage ( from vex) on each dagger attack and provides the extra D6 damage from HM on each attack that hits..
The fly in the ointment with all of this is that hand xbow shave the loading property so you only get one attack with it each round - so I’m assuming the DM has Over ruled that to allow this. otherwise you only get 1 xbow attack and all others are dagger attacks which don’t get the +2 to hit from archery fighting style
The fly in the ointment with all of this is that hand xbow shave the loading property so you only get one attack with it each round
Crossbow Expert still waives the Loading property on all crossbows
Ignore Loading. You ignore the Loading property of the Hand Crossbow, Heavy Crossbow, and Light Crossbow (all called crossbows elsewhere in this feat). If you’re holding one of them, you can load a piece of ammunition into it even if you lack a free hand.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The key here is understanding Nick - it moves the bonus action light weapon attack into the attack action, BUT, the Nick attack must be with the Nick weapon.
This is a matter of dispute, and it's not well-supported either way by the rules. (It's my preferred interpretation, but I still consider it a table ruling.)
There are reasonable arguments for both Nick on the enabling weapon, and Nick on the additional attack weapon.
There are also arguments for Nick on either one of the two.
(The arguments for it working as long as you have the mastery, even if you don't use a nick weapon at all are not, IMO, good.)
I'm working with this build concept for a high-level campaign, and I'm interested to hear the community's thoughts. It's already DM-approved, but I'm fairly certain it works RAW despite its strangeness. The important factors are
Per Enhanced Dual Wielding in the Dual Wielder feat, the bonus action attack "must be a Melee weapon that lacks the Two-Handed property," so that would have to be the dagger, but daggers also have the Thrown property, so from melee out to 20 feet away you can shoot your crossbow, then throw a dagger, then shoot your crossbow with the attack granted by the Light property (now moved into your attack action by your dagger's Nick), then throw another dagger as a bonus action. If your crossbow bolts hit, they'll grant advantage on the dagger strikes which will proc Sneak Attack. They don't necessarily need to be in that order as long as 2 of the attacks are dagger strikes and one of those is the bonus action, but that order of events makes most sense in my head from a functional/visual perspective which matters to me, personally. In fact, if you need your bonus action for something else, you could still shoot twice then attack with the dagger to make sure you still get 2 attacks with advantage. This option works without the Dual Weilder feat, but the Enhanced Dual Wielding bonus action attack just makes that Sneak Attack more reliable. That's both a better damage buff and less costly than the Ranger spells you might use instead with your bonus action, and it doesn't take away the option to use the Ranger spells when you think their secondary effects could be beneficial. When necessary, the Rogue's Cunning Strike Withdraw also works very nicely with this build that wants to keep medium range but still use their Bonus Action for damage rather than Cunning Action.
I'm also going with
Thoughts?
I require the extra attack of the Light property be made with a Nick weapon to be part of the Attack action instead of a Bonus Action, so the Hand Crossbow wouldn't qualify.
So when you take the Attack action and attack with a Hand Crossbow, you can make the extra attack of the Light property with either;
a different Hand Crossbow as a Bonus Action adding your ability modifier to the damage
OR
a different Nick weapon as part of the Attack Action not adding your ability modifier to the damage
So RAW for me in order to make four attacks would go down like this;
There's nothing requiring the Nick attack to happen after the baseline attack+extra attack; it could easily be in between. (Also, since their DM has approved it, they presumably disagree with your interpretation of Nick.) So the given attack order is entirely kosher.
Not sure why you think they need to be unequipping the hand crossbow to throw daggers.
I know the OP's DM already approves but it asked for thoughts.
It wouldn't need to unequip the Hand Crossbow, unless it want to use a Versatile weapon with two hands for the extra attack of the Dual Wielder feat.
Indeed the Nick Mastery Dagger attack could go in step 2 or 3.
I definitely see why you might rule that, but doing so wouldn't affect the damage output, and as I'm reading, RAW do not require this stipulation:
Nick states "When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action," and the Light property states "When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn. That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon." As I read, the Light weapon that procs the extra attack would have to be part of the Attack action, but the extra attack itself must be made with another weapon, and Nick just moves that to the Action instead of the BA. I'm not finding any verbiage indicating that this attack must be made with a Nick weapon. Again, this doesn't really affect your damage, and as I'm seeing it, the rules allow for either choice, but I just find shoot, throw, shoot, throw to make more sense from a "realism adjacent" perspective, and the idea of someone who shoots you just so they can stab you better is just hilariously fun to me.
The key here is understanding Nick - it moves the bonus action light weapon attack into the attack action, BUT, the Nick attack must be with the Nick weapon. Because the PC is a L5 ranger they also get the extra attack in their attack action for a total of 3 attacks in the attack action and a they still have a free bonus action thanks to dual wielding. Personally I would go:
R1: BA- Hunters mark, AA: Hand xbow, hand xbow, dagger(Nick attack). This way you get an extra D6 on each hit. Then (assuming they don’t lose concentration on HM)-
R2+: AA: Hxb, dagger, h b; then BA: dagger. This provides the possibility of advantage ( from vex) on each dagger attack and provides the extra D6 damage from HM on each attack that hits..
The fly in the ointment with all of this is that hand xbow shave the loading property so you only get one attack with it each round - so I’m assuming the DM has Over ruled that to allow this.
otherwise you only get 1 xbow attack and all others are dagger attacks which don’t get the +2 to hit from archery fighting style
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Crossbow Expert still waives the Loading property on all crossbows
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
This is a matter of dispute, and it's not well-supported either way by the rules. (It's my preferred interpretation, but I still consider it a table ruling.)
There are reasonable arguments for both Nick on the enabling weapon, and Nick on the additional attack weapon.
There are also arguments for Nick on either one of the two.
(The arguments for it working as long as you have the mastery, even if you don't use a nick weapon at all are not, IMO, good.)
Yes it is an unclear ruling but hat seems to be he best and most accepted reading.
ok, my forgetting so crossbow expert covers loading, sorry about that.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.