You clicked on this thread because you want to improve at combat. Maybe you are new to the game, or are struggling with a particular class. Maybe you are a veteran who already knows the ins and outs! In that case hopefully you can still learn something new and also add to the discussion. Lets begin.
Building a competent character: To excel in combat you need a correctly built character. Focus on what your primary ability score will be, that is the ability score that will be the most help to you during combat. Usually this will be strength for a melee character, dexterity for a ranged character (you can also go melee with dex using a narrow selection of "finesse" weapons), or either intelligence, wisdom, or charisma as a spellcaster depending which governs your spell save DC. Make it a priority to maximize this ability score on character creation, because that will directly improve your ability to fight. Next, set Constitution to your second highest ability score to maximize the number of hit points your character has. Finally, don't ignore dexterity. Unless you plan to use heavy armor, this adds directly to your AC. When choosing a race try to pick one that further adds to your primary ability score. Also bonuses to constitution and dexterity for more AC is a plus.
Know what you are capable of: Next, you need to understand every action, bonus action, and reaction you character is capable of performing. This includes all the mundane ones such as attack, dodge, and opportunity attack along with all the ones you get from your class, race, feats, etc. I find it helpful to make a list and write all of them down. That way every time it is your turn you have this organized list of every possible move your character could make and can duly consider each one before making a decision. By thinking about each action, you will wonder which is the BEST to use, this is the beginning of tactical thinking. Which leads to the next point here.
Tactical Thinking: So you have built a competent character, and understand exactly what they can do. Now how do you sequence your actions, that is to say what your character can do, to maximize your effectiveness in combat? There is no clear way to answer that, but one metric to judge how "good" and action was is by looking at how big of an impact it has on the hit point pool. D&D combat is a game of hit points. If you expire all of your enemies' you win, lose all of yours and you lose. Therefore, every action in combat should either deal damage (expire enemy HP) or mitigate damage (stop your side from losing HP). Lets look at the standard attack action. You attack and deal damage. Say on average you are dealing roughly 10 damage per turn. In this particular combat you are squaring off with a large boss monster that deals an average of 30 damage per turn to you. If you were to dodge, statistically that roughly halves the damage, meaning you could mitigate 15 damage by dodging. Between dealing 10 and mitigating 15, here we see mitigating 15 (taking the dodge action) is tactically superior. This is the essence of tactical thinking- what action can I take that will maximize damage dealt to the enemies, or minimize damage taken to my team, or some combination thereof? Now of course D&D is a game of probability and statistics. I could take the most tactically sound option in the world and if the dice don't go my way, then it was worthless! But again the point here is to think statistically, and to trust your intuition. For spell casters we can break down combat related spells in the same manner. We have direct damage spells like fireball that simply deal damage. There are buffing spells like bless that deal damage by increasing the hit probability of recipients and mitigate damage by increasing saving throw odds. Debuff spells work the same way but reverse logic against enemies. Summoning spells such as conjure elemental are nice because they can deal damage (the elemental attacks and hits an enemy) and mitigate damage if the elemental draws attacks away from the players. Crowd control spells like banishment and hold person can mitigate quite a lot of damage by removing an enemy from the fight entirely, preventing them from dealing damage and hold person (and monster) is particularly are powerful because they can also deal a lot of damage in the form of allowing advantaged auto crit hits against the target (the paralyzed condition). Zone control spells like web and illusion spells can mitigate damage by either physically impeding the enemies or tricking/confusing them. Some also deal damage. The point is try to start thinking about every action, bonus action, and reaction that you take from the perspective of: "How is this affecting the battle in terms of overall damage dealt/mitigated?"
Positioning and terrain: As you know, your turn in combat consists of more than an action, reaction, and bonus action... You have movement too! Understanding your movement, taking it seriously, and thinking about it tactically in terms of how it can deal/mitigate damage is what you should be doing. Positioning is a big deal. Lets say there is a monster within 20 feet of you that could attack you next turn, and you are a low AC spellcaster character... By using your movement to move 30 (or whatever your speed is) feet away from them, then acting, you just mitigated damage by denying that creature an attack or at least forcing them to choose a higher AC target to attack. You could also move BEFORE your action, lets say there is 4 monsters lined up for a lighting bolt. You judge that is the maximum damage and most tactically sound move you can make that turn. You just need to use your movement to get in position and line it up first. Just remember- maybe doing this will open you up for an attack, and if your AC is low, subtract the expected damage taken from that (vs. them attacking a higher AC target) from the damage given. Terrain is also an important issue to consider... By using your movement to utilize terrain features it is possible to significantly reduce damage dealt/mitigated. Try to identify obstacles, patches of difficult terrain, and choke points. By moving in a manner that screens enemies with obstacles and difficult terrain, you can deny them the opportunity to attack you next turn and therefore mitigate damage. Obstacles can also be used as cover from ranged attacks and spells, mitigating damage. Use your movement to reach these obstacles. Obstacles could be boulders, wall corners, pillars and columns, etc. Fighting in choke points can mitigate damage by physically limiting the number of enemies that can attack you each turn. I'm just shotgunning examples at this point, you guys get the idea- USE YOUR MOVEMENT TO FURTHER YOUR TACTICAL GOALS!
There may be times where having constitution third would be prudent. The rule that I generally adhere to is that constitution is at worst your 13 with standard array. Also, a 16 and a 17 provide the same modifier bonus, so consider giving the 14 to your +2 racial stat (if you have one) and possibly the +1 to your 15. There will be times when that's not possible or doesn't fit your character concept. That's fine.
A perfect example would be a wood elf monk. A 14 dex and a 15 wis will give 16 in each stat. Both boost common saves and both can boost AC with a monk. Your AC using unarmored defense would be 16. Going with more constitution gives 1 more HP per level and putting the 15 in dex and either the 13 or 14 in Wis would give you 17 dex (+3) and either 14 or 15 in wis (+2) for a 15 AC with unarmored defense.
You don't have to be a slave to this way of thought, but at least give it some thought before you sway from constitution as your 2nd or 3rd best ability. If you will be a ranged spellcaster, there should be more emphasis on con at #2 stat, particularly if you plan on concentration spells. Melee range spellcasters should prioritize strength (heavy armor) or dex (at least 14 for medium armor, and as much as you can spare for light/no armor while not cheating your spellcasting stat or constitution too much). Warcaster, Tough, and Resilient (Con) are great feats for melee casters in particular, depending on the build.
When thinking tactically it's essential to coordinate with the rest of the party.
What if I have to sacrifice an extra 1d6 damage but in doing so I set up the rouge to get an extra 3d6 sneak attack?
What if I can do double damage to this vulnerable but full HP enemy minon, but I could also do half damage to a low AC spell caster and set up the fighter after me in initiative to finish them off instead?
Also, don't underestimate the value of the Help action.
On something like an Alchemist Artificer (and anyone who generally fills that weird quazi mid ranged support). Help actioning the big hit may contribute more than you would have normally. just ya'kno use prudence so you don't get nixed yerself.(Even better if you can do this for your ally via a "pet" or "familiar" type situation)
Stacking damage is not bad. I once played in a campain where we met a geomancer who give our weapons more power by adding magic gems to them. the gems added 2d6 damage (ruby=fire, emerald=acid, amethyst=force, and so on). I got fire ruby ring. I was a Tabaxi druid, who knew Primal Savagery. the DM was impressed when he saw where i was going with the ring. I could stack the damage of my claws with the cantrip damage with the ring damage, totaling to 1d4+STR-MOD slashing + 1d10 acid + 2d6 fire damage.
I'm pretty sure that RAW, primal savagery just deals 1d10 damage, it's NOT 1d10 damage plus your normal unarmed strike damage. Just checking that you realized that part was also homebrew, like the gems.
I'm pretty sure that RAW, primal savagery just deals 1d10 damage, it's NOT 1d10 damage plus your normal unarmed strike damage. Just checking that you realized that part was also homebrew, like the gems
define "RAW", I'm not sure how that game mechanic works.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
If we are “thinking tactically” then the OP is essentially saying a Mastermind Rogue is worthless compared to other rogue subclasses. Even though 1 of their big ticket items is bonus action help from 30 feet away. Which is quite nice, as you can sit back there with a bow. Shoot from safety. And still help the paladin/warlock/barb/whomever Melee person get in a massive attack.
doesnt fit under competent character section comments. Doesn’t fit under tactically section where “every action in combat should either deal damage or mitigate damage”.
i don’t see why OP would recommend I do a bonus action.... say dagger throw for. Straight 1d4 damage total. Vs a help action. To double the paladin’s chance at a crit that he can smite on. Which can deal from like 3-200 more damage. Can anybody help me see OPs point of view of why the help action should never be used?
I'm pretty sure that RAW, primal savagery just deals 1d10 damage, it's NOT 1d10 damage plus your normal unarmed strike damage. Just checking that you realized that part was also homebrew, like the gems.
That is correct. It is a spell, not a weapon attack. I'm not aware of any Druid features that add a modifier to spell damage, such as Potent Spellcasting (Cleric, Cleric cantrips) or Agonizing Blast (Warlock, Eldritch Blast specific).
It is also not a weapon cantrip like Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade, which includes an actual full melee weapon attack as part of the spell.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Let's set the scene. The paladin has been attacking a goblin and it's low health. A pair of hobgoblins are attacking your bard healer as of the last two turns, and the last got a critical hit along with the martial advantage on the bard for 2d8+1+4d6 damage (the rolls were average, so 24 damage went out). The hobgoblin that got the critical hit is closer to you and within range while the other is behind both the bard and the other hobgoblin, giving it half cover plus you'll have disadvantage unless you move.
Since your party is level 4 your sneak attack is 2d6 and your bard buddy has a con bonus of +1 & you use average rolls for HP meaning the bard has 30 HP total and 6 HP remaining. You attack the closer hobgoblin with your action dealing 1d6+4(shortbow or hand crossbow, plus your dex modifier of +4 for an 18)+2d6 (sneak attack) for 14.5 average damage on a hit or 2d6+4+4d6 for 25 average damage on a crit, either one killing an average hobgoblin and eliminating the material advantage bonus for the remaining hobgoblin. You decide to move with 20 feet of the paladin's goblin to throw a dagger for 1d4 or 2.5 damage (or 30 feet to shoot a hand crossbow bolt if you have it for 1d6 or 3.5 damage) in hopes of killing the goblin to free the paladin to engage the other hobgoblin without fear of drawing an AoO. I think that sequence would be better than the help, whereas, helping the paladin who was attacking a young white dragon might be more beneficial if the paladin has smites available, particularly if you've already landed your sneak attack.
Let's set the scene. The paladin has been attacking a goblin and it's low health. A pair of hobgoblins are attacking your bard healer as of the last two turns, and the last got a critical hit along with the martial advantage on the bard for 2d8+1+4d6 damage (the rolls were average, so 24 damage went out). The hobgoblin that got the critical hit is closer to you and within range while the other is behind both the bard and the other hobgoblin, giving it half cover plus you'll have disadvantage unless you move.
Since your party is level 4 your sneak attack is 2d6 and your bard buddy has a con bonus of +1 & you use average rolls for HP meaning the bard has 30 HP total and 6 HP remaining. You attack the closer hobgoblin with your action dealing 1d6+4(shortbow or hand crossbow, plus your dex modifier of +4 for an 18)+2d6 (sneak attack) for 14.5 average damage on a hit or 2d6+4+4d6 for 25 average damage on a crit, either one killing an average hobgoblin and eliminating the material advantage bonus for the remaining hobgoblin. You decide to move with 20 feet of the paladin's goblin to throw a dagger for 1d4 or 2.5 damage (or 30 feet to shoot a hand crossbow bolt if you have it for 1d6 or 3.5 damage) in hopes of killing the goblin to free the paladin to engage the other hobgoblin without fear of drawing an AoO. I think that sequence would be better than the help, whereas, helping the paladin who was attacking a young white dragon might be more beneficial if the paladin has smites available, particularly if you've already landed your sneak attack.
In that scenario....
”in hopes of”
Let’s base our entire “thinking tactically” on “hopes”.
scneario: I hope I crit on my attack to kill the dragon as we’re facing a TPK vs let me help someone who can actually do it without needing a crit.
Let’s base our entire “thinking tactically” on “hopes”.
scneario: I hope I crit on my attack to kill the dragon as we’re facing a TPK vs let me help someone who can actually do it without needing a crit.
My apologies, I was rushed at the end and didn't clarify that the dragon would not be present in the first part of the scenario. The hobgoblins would represent the biggest, most present threat (meaning others may be in play, but they are several turns away or unknown to the party). The "hopes" are basically that you hit and do enough damage to kill the goblin to prevent the AoO and corresponding 1d6+2 (5) damage from the AoO along with the potential 1d6+2 (5) damage that the goblin might do if it's still alive and attacks, or calls in reinforcements if it flees. The assumption is that the paladin would try to kill it, or would be able to kill the hobgoblin without the aid and that the bard could possibly help.
In the scenario where the dragon is on the table, the help is likely going to be the right call in 99% of the scenarios.
I'm also assuming that you have ways to make the bonus attacks, since two weapon fighting is likely off the table with a bow attack.
If we are “thinking tactically” then the OP is essentially saying a Mastermind Rogue is worthless compared to other rogue subclasses. Even though 1 of their big ticket items is bonus action help from 30 feet away. Which is quite nice, as you can sit back there with a bow. Shoot from safety. And still help the paladin/warlock/barb/whomever Melee person get in a massive attack.
doesnt fit under competent character section comments. Doesn’t fit under tactically section where “every action in combat should either deal damage or mitigate damage”.
i don’t see why OP would recommend I do a bonus action.... say dagger throw for. Straight 1d4 damage total. Vs a help action. To double the paladin’s chance at a crit that he can smite on. Which can deal from like 3-200 more damage. Can anybody help me see OPs point of view of why the help action should never be used?
Oh not at all my friend, not at all. The help action can be considered from a tactical perspective just like every other action.
Say that the Paladin is engaged with an ogre. It is your turn and you are deciding between which is a sounder tactical move to make with your bonus action- throwing a dagger or giving help. Lets get into the math.
Throwing the dagger and hitting results in 1d4 damage, for an average of 2.5 damage. You have a +5 to hit, and the ogre has an AC of 11, meaning you have 75% hit probability. By multiplying 2.5 by .75, we conclude the grand average of throwing the dagger is 1.875 damage. That is the "Tactical" value of throwing the dagger.
Now lets look at the help action. By helping the paladin you increase his hit probability (give advantage), and therefore increase his damage output. That is the tactical value. Say the paladin has a long sword, 1d8 damage for an average of 4.5 and also has a +3 strength mod for an average of 7.5 on damage rolls. You also know he is planning to smite, so factoring that in we get 18.5 average damage for the attack. He also has a +5 to hit for a 75% hit rate for a grand total of 13.875 damage in tactical value for the attack. With ADVANTAGE however, that rises to a 93% hit rate (I won't bore you with the probability math just trust me). So now the attack is dealing a grand total of 17.201 damage in tactical value. Looking at the difference of 17.2 - 13.875 being 3.325, we ultimately conclude taking the help action is indeed a more tactically sound move than throwing a dagger: 3.325 > 1.875.
This is the second thread where you've advocated characters having only one good stat for skills. That's not good advice. Especially for classes like Clerics, Rangers, and Monks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You clicked on this thread because you want to improve at combat. Maybe you are new to the game, or are struggling with a particular class. Maybe you are a veteran who already knows the ins and outs! In that case hopefully you can still learn something new and also add to the discussion. Lets begin.
Building a competent character: To excel in combat you need a correctly built character. Focus on what your primary ability score will be, that is the ability score that will be the most help to you during combat. Usually this will be strength for a melee character, dexterity for a ranged character (you can also go melee with dex using a narrow selection of "finesse" weapons), or either intelligence, wisdom, or charisma as a spellcaster depending which governs your spell save DC. Make it a priority to maximize this ability score on character creation, because that will directly improve your ability to fight. Next, set Constitution to your second highest ability score to maximize the number of hit points your character has. Finally, don't ignore dexterity. Unless you plan to use heavy armor, this adds directly to your AC. When choosing a race try to pick one that further adds to your primary ability score. Also bonuses to constitution and dexterity for more AC is a plus.
Know what you are capable of: Next, you need to understand every action, bonus action, and reaction you character is capable of performing. This includes all the mundane ones such as attack, dodge, and opportunity attack along with all the ones you get from your class, race, feats, etc. I find it helpful to make a list and write all of them down. That way every time it is your turn you have this organized list of every possible move your character could make and can duly consider each one before making a decision. By thinking about each action, you will wonder which is the BEST to use, this is the beginning of tactical thinking. Which leads to the next point here.
Tactical Thinking: So you have built a competent character, and understand exactly what they can do. Now how do you sequence your actions, that is to say what your character can do, to maximize your effectiveness in combat? There is no clear way to answer that, but one metric to judge how "good" and action was is by looking at how big of an impact it has on the hit point pool. D&D combat is a game of hit points. If you expire all of your enemies' you win, lose all of yours and you lose. Therefore, every action in combat should either deal damage (expire enemy HP) or mitigate damage (stop your side from losing HP). Lets look at the standard attack action. You attack and deal damage. Say on average you are dealing roughly 10 damage per turn. In this particular combat you are squaring off with a large boss monster that deals an average of 30 damage per turn to you. If you were to dodge, statistically that roughly halves the damage, meaning you could mitigate 15 damage by dodging. Between dealing 10 and mitigating 15, here we see mitigating 15 (taking the dodge action) is tactically superior. This is the essence of tactical thinking- what action can I take that will maximize damage dealt to the enemies, or minimize damage taken to my team, or some combination thereof? Now of course D&D is a game of probability and statistics. I could take the most tactically sound option in the world and if the dice don't go my way, then it was worthless! But again the point here is to think statistically, and to trust your intuition. For spell casters we can break down combat related spells in the same manner. We have direct damage spells like fireball that simply deal damage. There are buffing spells like bless that deal damage by increasing the hit probability of recipients and mitigate damage by increasing saving throw odds. Debuff spells work the same way but reverse logic against enemies. Summoning spells such as conjure elemental are nice because they can deal damage (the elemental attacks and hits an enemy) and mitigate damage if the elemental draws attacks away from the players. Crowd control spells like banishment and hold person can mitigate quite a lot of damage by removing an enemy from the fight entirely, preventing them from dealing damage and hold person (and monster) is particularly are powerful because they can also deal a lot of damage in the form of allowing advantaged auto crit hits against the target (the paralyzed condition). Zone control spells like web and illusion spells can mitigate damage by either physically impeding the enemies or tricking/confusing them. Some also deal damage. The point is try to start thinking about every action, bonus action, and reaction that you take from the perspective of: "How is this affecting the battle in terms of overall damage dealt/mitigated?"
Positioning and terrain: As you know, your turn in combat consists of more than an action, reaction, and bonus action... You have movement too! Understanding your movement, taking it seriously, and thinking about it tactically in terms of how it can deal/mitigate damage is what you should be doing. Positioning is a big deal. Lets say there is a monster within 20 feet of you that could attack you next turn, and you are a low AC spellcaster character... By using your movement to move 30 (or whatever your speed is) feet away from them, then acting, you just mitigated damage by denying that creature an attack or at least forcing them to choose a higher AC target to attack. You could also move BEFORE your action, lets say there is 4 monsters lined up for a lighting bolt. You judge that is the maximum damage and most tactically sound move you can make that turn. You just need to use your movement to get in position and line it up first. Just remember- maybe doing this will open you up for an attack, and if your AC is low, subtract the expected damage taken from that (vs. them attacking a higher AC target) from the damage given. Terrain is also an important issue to consider... By using your movement to utilize terrain features it is possible to significantly reduce damage dealt/mitigated. Try to identify obstacles, patches of difficult terrain, and choke points. By moving in a manner that screens enemies with obstacles and difficult terrain, you can deny them the opportunity to attack you next turn and therefore mitigate damage. Obstacles can also be used as cover from ranged attacks and spells, mitigating damage. Use your movement to reach these obstacles. Obstacles could be boulders, wall corners, pillars and columns, etc. Fighting in choke points can mitigate damage by physically limiting the number of enemies that can attack you each turn. I'm just shotgunning examples at this point, you guys get the idea- USE YOUR MOVEMENT TO FURTHER YOUR TACTICAL GOALS!
There may be times where having constitution third would be prudent. The rule that I generally adhere to is that constitution is at worst your 13 with standard array. Also, a 16 and a 17 provide the same modifier bonus, so consider giving the 14 to your +2 racial stat (if you have one) and possibly the +1 to your 15. There will be times when that's not possible or doesn't fit your character concept. That's fine.
A perfect example would be a wood elf monk. A 14 dex and a 15 wis will give 16 in each stat. Both boost common saves and both can boost AC with a monk. Your AC using unarmored defense would be 16. Going with more constitution gives 1 more HP per level and putting the 15 in dex and either the 13 or 14 in Wis would give you 17 dex (+3) and either 14 or 15 in wis (+2) for a 15 AC with unarmored defense.
You don't have to be a slave to this way of thought, but at least give it some thought before you sway from constitution as your 2nd or 3rd best ability. If you will be a ranged spellcaster, there should be more emphasis on con at #2 stat, particularly if you plan on concentration spells. Melee range spellcasters should prioritize strength (heavy armor) or dex (at least 14 for medium armor, and as much as you can spare for light/no armor while not cheating your spellcasting stat or constitution too much). Warcaster, Tough, and Resilient (Con) are great feats for melee casters in particular, depending on the build.
When thinking tactically it's essential to coordinate with the rest of the party.
What if I have to sacrifice an extra 1d6 damage but in doing so I set up the rouge to get an extra 3d6 sneak attack?
What if I can do double damage to this vulnerable but full HP enemy minon, but I could also do half damage to a low AC spell caster and set up the fighter after me in initiative to finish them off instead?
Also, don't underestimate the value of the Help action.
On something like an Alchemist Artificer (and anyone who generally fills that weird quazi mid ranged support). Help actioning the big hit may contribute more than you would have normally.
just ya'kno use prudence so you don't get nixed yerself.(Even better if you can do this for your ally via a "pet" or "familiar" type situation)
Stacking damage is not bad. I once played in a campain where we met a geomancer who give our weapons more power by adding magic gems to them. the gems added 2d6 damage (ruby=fire, emerald=acid, amethyst=force, and so on). I got fire ruby ring. I was a Tabaxi druid, who knew Primal Savagery. the DM was impressed when he saw where i was going with the ring. I could stack the damage of my claws with the cantrip damage with the ring damage, totaling to 1d4+STR-MOD slashing + 1d10 acid + 2d6 fire damage.
I'm pretty sure that RAW, primal savagery just deals 1d10 damage, it's NOT 1d10 damage plus your normal unarmed strike damage. Just checking that you realized that part was also homebrew, like the gems.
define "RAW", I'm not sure how that game mechanic works.
Rules as written.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
If we are “thinking tactically” then the OP is essentially saying a Mastermind Rogue is worthless compared to other rogue subclasses. Even though 1 of their big ticket items is bonus action help from 30 feet away. Which is quite nice, as you can sit back there with a bow. Shoot from safety. And still help the paladin/warlock/barb/whomever Melee person get in a massive attack.
doesnt fit under competent character section comments. Doesn’t fit under tactically section where “every action in combat should either deal damage or mitigate damage”.
i don’t see why OP would recommend I do a bonus action.... say dagger throw for. Straight 1d4 damage total. Vs a help action. To double the paladin’s chance at a crit that he can smite on. Which can deal from like 3-200 more damage. Can anybody help me see OPs point of view of why the help action should never be used?
That is correct. It is a spell, not a weapon attack. I'm not aware of any Druid features that add a modifier to spell damage, such as Potent Spellcasting (Cleric, Cleric cantrips) or Agonizing Blast (Warlock, Eldritch Blast specific).
It is also not a weapon cantrip like Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade, which includes an actual full melee weapon attack as part of the spell.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Let's set the scene. The paladin has been attacking a goblin and it's low health. A pair of hobgoblins are attacking your bard healer as of the last two turns, and the last got a critical hit along with the martial advantage on the bard for 2d8+1+4d6 damage (the rolls were average, so 24 damage went out). The hobgoblin that got the critical hit is closer to you and within range while the other is behind both the bard and the other hobgoblin, giving it half cover plus you'll have disadvantage unless you move.
Since your party is level 4 your sneak attack is 2d6 and your bard buddy has a con bonus of +1 & you use average rolls for HP meaning the bard has 30 HP total and 6 HP remaining. You attack the closer hobgoblin with your action dealing 1d6+4(shortbow or hand crossbow, plus your dex modifier of +4 for an 18)+2d6 (sneak attack) for 14.5 average damage on a hit or 2d6+4+4d6 for 25 average damage on a crit, either one killing an average hobgoblin and eliminating the material advantage bonus for the remaining hobgoblin. You decide to move with 20 feet of the paladin's goblin to throw a dagger for 1d4 or 2.5 damage (or 30 feet to shoot a hand crossbow bolt if you have it for 1d6 or 3.5 damage) in hopes of killing the goblin to free the paladin to engage the other hobgoblin without fear of drawing an AoO. I think that sequence would be better than the help, whereas, helping the paladin who was attacking a young white dragon might be more beneficial if the paladin has smites available, particularly if you've already landed your sneak attack.
In that scenario....
”in hopes of”
Let’s base our entire “thinking tactically” on “hopes”.
scneario: I hope I crit on my attack to kill the dragon as we’re facing a TPK vs let me help someone who can actually do it without needing a crit.
My apologies, I was rushed at the end and didn't clarify that the dragon would not be present in the first part of the scenario. The hobgoblins would represent the biggest, most present threat (meaning others may be in play, but they are several turns away or unknown to the party). The "hopes" are basically that you hit and do enough damage to kill the goblin to prevent the AoO and corresponding 1d6+2 (5) damage from the AoO along with the potential 1d6+2 (5) damage that the goblin might do if it's still alive and attacks, or calls in reinforcements if it flees. The assumption is that the paladin would try to kill it, or would be able to kill the hobgoblin without the aid and that the bard could possibly help.
In the scenario where the dragon is on the table, the help is likely going to be the right call in 99% of the scenarios.
I'm also assuming that you have ways to make the bonus attacks, since two weapon fighting is likely off the table with a bow attack.
Oh not at all my friend, not at all. The help action can be considered from a tactical perspective just like every other action.
Say that the Paladin is engaged with an ogre. It is your turn and you are deciding between which is a sounder tactical move to make with your bonus action- throwing a dagger or giving help. Lets get into the math.
Throwing the dagger and hitting results in 1d4 damage, for an average of 2.5 damage. You have a +5 to hit, and the ogre has an AC of 11, meaning you have 75% hit probability. By multiplying 2.5 by .75, we conclude the grand average of throwing the dagger is 1.875 damage. That is the "Tactical" value of throwing the dagger.
Now lets look at the help action. By helping the paladin you increase his hit probability (give advantage), and therefore increase his damage output. That is the tactical value. Say the paladin has a long sword, 1d8 damage for an average of 4.5 and also has a +3 strength mod for an average of 7.5 on damage rolls. You also know he is planning to smite, so factoring that in we get 18.5 average damage for the attack. He also has a +5 to hit for a 75% hit rate for a grand total of 13.875 damage in tactical value for the attack. With ADVANTAGE however, that rises to a 93% hit rate (I won't bore you with the probability math just trust me). So now the attack is dealing a grand total of 17.201 damage in tactical value. Looking at the difference of 17.2 - 13.875 being 3.325, we ultimately conclude taking the help action is indeed a more tactically sound move than throwing a dagger: 3.325 > 1.875.
This is the second thread where you've advocated characters having only one good stat for skills. That's not good advice. Especially for classes like Clerics, Rangers, and Monks.