yeah its called being polite it is a game about having fun, yes you can play this invunerable warforged who refuses to help others in any significant way other than to destroy your enemies ether due to mistrust or some other factor, but the others might see that kind of as a dick move
So why are you so impolite that you assume that a player who makes such a build wouldn't cooperate with fellow players in an actual game? You are making assumptions based on nothing but your own opinions. If that's how you would play this character, that's solely on you.
i made an misstake. I admitted to making that mistake, shut up about it
Kettle, pot.
athas is and has always been a soldier, one who would repect the strength and valor of his fellow armsmen. In an game where he fights alongside say an defensively minded paladin, fighter or barbarian, i do not think he would hessitate to lend some of this magic, some of his infusions to his allies, and of course you have additional magic items to bring to bear. In this instance the warforged does not really have much compared to his fellow armsmen does he, he will still probably be rocking that very same equipment as the build descriibes if magic items are plentiful, but the only thing he has that his fellow armsmen would not would be a few extra attunement slots and that delicous but far-away 20th level capstone for +6 to all saves. He would still be able to take much damage, (and thus still be somewhat effective as an tank) but he would for the most part never outshine such a party member if such a party member existed, he never outshines the hill dwarf zealot barbarian, he amplifies the potency of the zealot barbarian. Would still be a fun build, would still be an character extremely helpful to the rest of the party (especially to the other tanks), he would tank, but he'd never really be THE tank unless the party martials slack on constituion or if nobody else wants to go that route
Not sure what that has anything to do with anything but if that's how you feel, sure. Though it is rather interesting that you first accuse this build/the builder of being (and I quote) "a selfish piece of shit" and then you go on about how it's a perfect build for supporting the group. The rest is just your subjective opinions that doesn't really contribute in the slightest or change the fact that you were wrong.
Anyways, I can see that this easily upsets you so unless you have any specific questions you would like me to respond to (if you have any questions on the build or it's viability I suggest you check out the actual trhead where it is from) I'm going to pass for now. Take care!
athas is and has always been a soldier, one who would repect the strength and valor of his fellow armsmen. In an game where he fights alongside say an defensively minded paladin, fighter or barbarian, i do not think he would hessitate to lend some of this magic, some of his infusions to his allies, and of course you have additional magic items to bring to bear. In this instance the warforged does not really have much compared to his fellow armsmen does he, he will still probably be rocking that very same equipment as the build descriibes if magic items are plentiful, but the only thing he has that his fellow armsmen would not would be a few extra attunement slots and that delicous but far-away 20th level capstone for +6 to all saves. He would still be able to take much damage, (and thus still be somewhat effective as an tank) but he would for the most part never outshine such a party member if such a party member existed, he never outshines the hill dwarf zealot barbarian, he amplifies the potency of the zealot barbarian. Would still be a fun build, would still be an character extremely helpful to the rest of the party (especially to the other tanks), he would tank, but he'd never really be THE tank unless the party martials slack on constituion or if nobody else wants to go that route
Not sure what that has anything to do with anything but if that's how you feel, sure. Though it is rather interesting that you first accuse this build/the builder of being (and I quote) "a selfish piece of shit" and then you go on about how it's a perfect build for supporting the group. The rest is just your subjective opinions that doesn't really contribute in the slightest or change the fact that you were wrong.
look, the protector cannon option allows you to give its benefits to any number of creatures within 10 feet of the cannon. You asked what rule said that you have to give the benefits of the cannon, i pointed out how that would be mean since you can absolutely give both yourself and your friends the benefits of the cannon if you are close enough and deliberately choosing not to give the benefit while you are within 10 feet is actively spiteful and counterproductive. I said not that the build or its creator is inherently mean
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
athas is and has always been a soldier, one who would repect the strength and valor of his fellow armsmen. In an game where he fights alongside say an defensively minded paladin, fighter or barbarian, i do not think he would hessitate to lend some of this magic, some of his infusions to his allies, and of course you have additional magic items to bring to bear. In this instance the warforged does not really have much compared to his fellow armsmen does he, he will still probably be rocking that very same equipment as the build descriibes if magic items are plentiful, but the only thing he has that his fellow armsmen would not would be a few extra attunement slots and that delicous but far-away 20th level capstone for +6 to all saves. He would still be able to take much damage, (and thus still be somewhat effective as an tank) but he would for the most part never outshine such a party member if such a party member existed, he never outshines the hill dwarf zealot barbarian, he amplifies the potency of the zealot barbarian. Would still be a fun build, would still be an character extremely helpful to the rest of the party (especially to the other tanks), he would tank, but he'd never really be THE tank unless the party martials slack on constituion or if nobody else wants to go that route
Not sure what that has anything to do with anything but if that's how you feel, sure. Though it is rather interesting that you first accuse this build/the builder of being (and I quote) "a selfish piece of shit" and then you go on about how it's a perfect build for supporting the group. The rest is just your subjective opinions that doesn't really contribute in the slightest or change the fact that you were wrong.
look, the protector cannon option allows you to give its benefits to any number of creatures within 10 feet of the cannon. You asked what rule said that you have to give the benefits of the cannon, i pointed out how that would be mean since you can absolutely give both yourself and your friends the benefits of the cannon if you are close enough and deliberately choosing not to give the benefit while you are within 10 feet is actively spiteful and counterproductive. I said not that the build or its creator is inherently mean
But why would you ever be so impolite as to assume that the artificer would ever deny their friends the benefits of said canon? That's just you assuming things based on nothing but your own opinions.
athas is and has always been a soldier, one who would repect the strength and valor of his fellow armsmen. In an game where he fights alongside say an defensively minded paladin, fighter or barbarian, i do not think he would hessitate to lend some of this magic, some of his infusions to his allies, and of course you have additional magic items to bring to bear. In this instance the warforged does not really have much compared to his fellow armsmen does he, he will still probably be rocking that very same equipment as the build descriibes if magic items are plentiful, but the only thing he has that his fellow armsmen would not would be a few extra attunement slots and that delicous but far-away 20th level capstone for +6 to all saves. He would still be able to take much damage, (and thus still be somewhat effective as an tank) but he would for the most part never outshine such a party member if such a party member existed, he never outshines the hill dwarf zealot barbarian, he amplifies the potency of the zealot barbarian. Would still be a fun build, would still be an character extremely helpful to the rest of the party (especially to the other tanks), he would tank, but he'd never really be THE tank unless the party martials slack on constituion or if nobody else wants to go that route
Not sure what that has anything to do with anything but if that's how you feel, sure. Though it is rather interesting that you first accuse this build/the builder of being (and I quote) "a selfish piece of shit" and then you go on about how it's a perfect build for supporting the group. The rest is just your subjective opinions that doesn't really contribute in the slightest or change the fact that you were wrong.
look, the protector cannon option allows you to give its benefits to any number of creatures within 10 feet of the cannon. You asked what rule said that you have to give the benefits of the cannon, i pointed out how that would be mean since you can absolutely give both yourself and your friends the benefits of the cannon if you are close enough and deliberately choosing not to give the benefit while you are within 10 feet is actively spiteful and counterproductive. I said not that the build or its creator is inherently mean
But why would you ever be so impolite as to assume that the artificer would ever deny their friends the benefits of said canon? That's just you assuming things based on nothing but your own opinions.
well you did apparently, when you said as follows:
Can you point me to the rule that says that they have to share with anyone else?
commenting regarding my claim that the temp HP and half cover where meant to be shared with others. I was never assuming that an player would ever try to hog all the temp hp for themselves, becuase that would be a little silly. I was always trying to assert that the cannon's benefit will apply not just to the artificer but also to the artificer's friends and allies (in an perhaps a little hostile and toxic manner that i should not have taken in hindsight). This means that when comparing the tanking capabillities of this build compared to other builds, it helps to also consider the way the two builds would compare if both found themselves in the same party, where both would be able to benefit from the temp hp and half cover granted by the eldritch cannon. In such instances the tools and tricks atlas has over his compatriots gets reduced to flash of genius, his ability to attune to many magic items, and soul of artifice. Once we hit soul of artifice i could agree that atlas is an fine tank indeed, and defenetly on par with any of his allies with or without his other buffs, and with the cannon backing him up he'll do just fine against the threats that face the party (but then so do anyone with good con and at least an d8 or d10 hit dice within his aura), it is just that in a party with other people in a proper campaign he probably will not get the same chance to shine and the hill dwarf zealot barbarian who picked toughness as their first feat standing right next to him might end up doing more as a tank, or at least getting more credit
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
So... the artillerist not only has a nice defensive ability due to 1d8 + Int temp hp per turn, but can *also* apply that bonus to all allies who stand in range?
How does that make the artificer a weaker or worse class than they would be if they couldn't share those benefits?
athas is and has always been a soldier, one who would repect the strength and valor of his fellow armsmen. In an game where he fights alongside say an defensively minded paladin, fighter or barbarian, i do not think he would hessitate to lend some of this magic, some of his infusions to his allies, and of course you have additional magic items to bring to bear. In this instance the warforged does not really have much compared to his fellow armsmen does he, he will still probably be rocking that very same equipment as the build descriibes if magic items are plentiful, but the only thing he has that his fellow armsmen would not would be a few extra attunement slots and that delicous but far-away 20th level capstone for +6 to all saves. He would still be able to take much damage, (and thus still be somewhat effective as an tank) but he would for the most part never outshine such a party member if such a party member existed, he never outshines the hill dwarf zealot barbarian, he amplifies the potency of the zealot barbarian. Would still be a fun build, would still be an character extremely helpful to the rest of the party (especially to the other tanks), he would tank, but he'd never really be THE tank unless the party martials slack on constituion or if nobody else wants to go that route
Not sure what that has anything to do with anything but if that's how you feel, sure. Though it is rather interesting that you first accuse this build/the builder of being (and I quote) "a selfish piece of shit" and then you go on about how it's a perfect build for supporting the group. The rest is just your subjective opinions that doesn't really contribute in the slightest or change the fact that you were wrong.
look, the protector cannon option allows you to give its benefits to any number of creatures within 10 feet of the cannon. You asked what rule said that you have to give the benefits of the cannon, i pointed out how that would be mean since you can absolutely give both yourself and your friends the benefits of the cannon if you are close enough and deliberately choosing not to give the benefit while you are within 10 feet is actively spiteful and counterproductive. I said not that the build or its creator is inherently mean
But why would you ever be so impolite as to assume that the artificer would ever deny their friends the benefits of said canon? That's just you assuming things based on nothing but your own opinions.
well you did apparently, when you said as follows:
Well no, that is not at all true. That was a reply to your statement that the builder of the Artificier in question was, and these are your words, "a selfish piece of shit". You are the one assuming things.
Its probably in part due to their subclasses being so unremarkable. The basic rogue kit is pretty good! But an inquisitor, mastermind, scout, etc. all play fairly similarly, with none of them having a feature which directly increases damage per round. Assassin is the exception, but its one that really only works on paper, considering that a lot of players perceive that their DM rarely awards surprise rounds, and even then, there's no guarantee the Assassin will go before the enemy during that surprise round to receive the benefit of their feature, or that they'll hit with their attack if they do.
I'm pretty surprised rogue wasnt higher on the strong side. They are one of the best balanced classes in the game I think.
They dominate the out of combat part of the game.
I think you answered your own question there. Rogues are well balanced which also translates to not overwhelmingly powerful. I think the top three classes in the poll all have ways/options to work the system to their advantage. Of course, a few levels of rogue typically find their way into most min/max builds.
And I'd agree with rogues being top tier out of combat but bard probably edge them out of the #1 spot.
I'm pretty surprised rogue wasnt higher on the strong side. They are one of the best balanced classes in the game I think.
They dominate the out of combat part of the game.
I think people are also underestimating how powerful Evasion is. If you're fighting Dragons or mages that can cast Fireball, it's such a big boost to survivability.
But yes, out of combat, their skills, their expertise, their incredibly useful thieves' tools ability, their scouting ability, etc. make them so good. I was one of the people that voted for Rogue.
Two of my five characters have been Rogues, and a third character has the Urban Bounty Hunter background and Gloves of Thievery, with 18 Dexterity, so he's part Rogue, even though he's never taken a level in the class.
I think people are also underestimating how powerful Evasion is. If you're fighting Dragons or mages that can cast Fireball, it's such a big boost to survivability.
People's impressions of classes tend to formed by how they play at low levels. Tier 1 thieves are a lot squishier than tier 1 fighters.
So... the artillerist not only has a nice defensive ability due to 1d8 + Int temp hp per turn, but can *also* apply that bonus to all allies who stand in range?
How does that make the artificer a weaker or worse class than they would be if they couldn't share those benefits?
it does not make the feature weaker, indeed it makes the feature stronger, and indeed the class as a whole has quite a lot of potency, just means that they might get outshadowed by other party members when it comes to tanking which is itself fine becuase dnd is a cooperative game, you are having fun, everyone else is having fun
Well no, that is not at all true. That was a reply to your statement that the builder of the Artificier in question was, and these are your words, "a selfish piece of shit". You are the one assuming things.
the only thing i wanted to communicate with that statement is that an artillerist artificer will share the bonuses with others, or at least can be assumed to do so since they will not be penalized for not doing so, thus any other party member with an d8 or higher hit dice and similar focus on con and armor will between levels 3 and 9 be just as tanky as the artificer while within their aura, its not an I will never die build like the bear barbarian/ moon druid multiclass, its an we will never die build, the artificer never excels defensively compared to the rest of the party until he or she starts to be able to attune to multiple magic items at once, thus they may be one of if not the best tanks in an solo setting with no magic items, but they will not be the best tank in the party
I'm pretty surprised rogue wasnt higher on the strong side. They are one of the best balanced classes in the game I think.
They dominate the out of combat part of the game.
only problem of knock and invisibility and pass without trace who all make the skills of the rouge slightly less desireable but indeed expertise is an nice feature, reliable talent is also delicious and generally it is just better at being a ranger than the ranger, and with cunning action, evasion and uncanny doge they are very impossible to kill which is nice, they are often considered incredebly powerful and so yeah it is indeed quite the suprise
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Its probably in part due to their subclasses being so unremarkable. The basic rogue kit is pretty good! But an inquisitor, mastermind, scout, etc. all play fairly similarly, with none of them having a feature which directly increases damage per round. Assassin is the exception, but its one that really only works on paper, considering that a lot of players perceive that their DM rarely awards surprise rounds, and even then, there's no guarantee the Assassin will go before the enemy during that surprise round to receive the benefit of their feature, or that they'll hit with their attack if they do.
Arcane Trickster has a strict bump in damage with booming blade and spells like shadow blade.
Thief can toss an acid vial or alchemist fire as a BA so that's a damage increase.
Rogue doesn't need a lot of combat help with subclasses though as Sneak Attack is expected to proc every round and scales very well.
I think you answered your own question there. Rogues are well balanced which also translates to not overwhelmingly powerful. I think the top three classes in the poll all have ways/options to work the system to their advantage. Of course, a few levels of rogue typically find their way into most min/max builds.
And I'd agree with rogues being top tier out of combat but bard probably edge them out of the #1 spot.
Hard agree on Bard.
Rogues do more damage in combat on average as bards lack damage options until 10th level or if you go lore Bard.
My favorite classes are monk and Barbarian. Why? Unarmored defense. You don’t need to buy armor, you don’t have to worry about armor proficiencies, as your ability scores rise, your ac rises faster because you have 2 ability scores bringing it up rather than one. It’s great
My favorite classes are monk and Barbarian. Why? Unarmored defense. You don’t need to buy armor, you don’t have to worry about armor proficiencies, as your ability scores rise, your ac rises faster because you have 2 ability scores bringing it up rather than one. It’s great
that logic only really works if you happen to have both scores uneven at an given ASI opportunity, otherwise your AC would rise just as quickly as for the rouge but max out more slowly
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
My favorite classes are monk and Barbarian. Why? Unarmored defense. You don’t need to buy armor, you don’t have to worry about armor proficiencies, as your ability scores rise, your ac rises faster because you have 2 ability scores bringing it up rather than one. It’s great
that logic only really works if you happen to have both scores uneven at an given ASI opportunity, otherwise your AC would rise just as quickly as for the rouge but max out more slowly
If your DM uses the sleeping Armor rules then it becomes much better...especially if you are in a dangerous style campaign like Out of the Abyss.
I do not do the armor sleep rules myself as STR builds are already in a worse position than DEX builds about 80% of the time so I do not like to crap on them too much more.
My favorite classes are monk and Barbarian. Why? Unarmored defense. You don’t need to buy armor, you don’t have to worry about armor proficiencies, as your ability scores rise, your ac rises faster because you have 2 ability scores bringing it up rather than one. It’s great
that logic only really works if you happen to have both scores uneven at an given ASI opportunity, otherwise your AC would rise just as quickly as for the rouge but max out more slowly
If your DM uses the sleeping Armor rules then it becomes much better...especially if you are in a dangerous style campaign like Out of the Abyss.
I do not do the armor sleep rules myself as STR builds are already in a worse position than DEX builds about 80% of the time so I do not like to crap on them too much more.
except for the few players playing as warforged or some kind of homebrew undead race with immunity to exhaustion, though those are pretty rare exceptions and in those instances it is much better yes
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Although Ranger got a significant boost, I think it would still probably be in the bottom three. I still think it has a fundamental issue where its martial and casting sides just don't have the synergy you can achieve with other mixed builds. I think if it had a way to convert spells directly into damage in the same vein as a paladin's smites, it would be a huge boost.
As it is now, they have some nice spells but you need concentration to get the most of them and there's very little else in the class that acknowledges that or helps with it in any way. Other than just standing way back with a longbow.
It's still one of my favorite classes. Not saying it's weak or terrible, just that if I had to rank all the classes solely based on what it brings to the table mechanically, ranger would still be in the bottom three. But not that far below the others - I don't really think anyone is that far behind the pack anymore.
So why are you so impolite that you assume that a player who makes such a build wouldn't cooperate with fellow players in an actual game? You are making assumptions based on nothing but your own opinions. If that's how you would play this character, that's solely on you.
Not sure what that has anything to do with anything but if that's how you feel, sure. Though it is rather interesting that you first accuse this build/the builder of being (and I quote) "a selfish piece of shit" and then you go on about how it's a perfect build for supporting the group. The rest is just your subjective opinions that doesn't really contribute in the slightest or change the fact that you were wrong.
Anyways, I can see that this easily upsets you so unless you have any specific questions you would like me to respond to (if you have any questions on the build or it's viability I suggest you check out the actual trhead where it is from) I'm going to pass for now. Take care!
look, the protector cannon option allows you to give its benefits to any number of creatures within 10 feet of the cannon. You asked what rule said that you have to give the benefits of the cannon, i pointed out how that would be mean since you can absolutely give both yourself and your friends the benefits of the cannon if you are close enough and deliberately choosing not to give the benefit while you are within 10 feet is actively spiteful and counterproductive. I said not that the build or its creator is inherently mean
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
But why would you ever be so impolite as to assume that the artificer would ever deny their friends the benefits of said canon? That's just you assuming things based on nothing but your own opinions.
well you did apparently, when you said as follows:
commenting regarding my claim that the temp HP and half cover where meant to be shared with others. I was never assuming that an player would ever try to hog all the temp hp for themselves, becuase that would be a little silly. I was always trying to assert that the cannon's benefit will apply not just to the artificer but also to the artificer's friends and allies (in an perhaps a little hostile and toxic manner that i should not have taken in hindsight). This means that when comparing the tanking capabillities of this build compared to other builds, it helps to also consider the way the two builds would compare if both found themselves in the same party, where both would be able to benefit from the temp hp and half cover granted by the eldritch cannon. In such instances the tools and tricks atlas has over his compatriots gets reduced to flash of genius, his ability to attune to many magic items, and soul of artifice. Once we hit soul of artifice i could agree that atlas is an fine tank indeed, and defenetly on par with any of his allies with or without his other buffs, and with the cannon backing him up he'll do just fine against the threats that face the party (but then so do anyone with good con and at least an d8 or d10 hit dice within his aura), it is just that in a party with other people in a proper campaign he probably will not get the same chance to shine and the hill dwarf zealot barbarian who picked toughness as their first feat standing right next to him might end up doing more as a tank, or at least getting more credit
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
So... the artillerist not only has a nice defensive ability due to 1d8 + Int temp hp per turn, but can *also* apply that bonus to all allies who stand in range?
How does that make the artificer a weaker or worse class than they would be if they couldn't share those benefits?
Well no, that is not at all true. That was a reply to your statement that the builder of the Artificier in question was, and these are your words, "a selfish piece of shit". You are the one assuming things.
I'm pretty surprised rogue wasnt higher on the strong side. They are one of the best balanced classes in the game I think.
They dominate the out of combat part of the game.
Its probably in part due to their subclasses being so unremarkable. The basic rogue kit is pretty good! But an inquisitor, mastermind, scout, etc. all play fairly similarly, with none of them having a feature which directly increases damage per round. Assassin is the exception, but its one that really only works on paper, considering that a lot of players perceive that their DM rarely awards surprise rounds, and even then, there's no guarantee the Assassin will go before the enemy during that surprise round to receive the benefit of their feature, or that they'll hit with their attack if they do.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I think you answered your own question there. Rogues are well balanced which also translates to not overwhelmingly powerful. I think the top three classes in the poll all have ways/options to work the system to their advantage. Of course, a few levels of rogue typically find their way into most min/max builds.
And I'd agree with rogues being top tier out of combat but bard probably edge them out of the #1 spot.
Current Characters I am playing: Dr Konstantin van Wulf | Taegen Willowrun | Mad Magnar
Check out my homebrew: Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Feats
I think people are also underestimating how powerful Evasion is. If you're fighting Dragons or mages that can cast Fireball, it's such a big boost to survivability.
But yes, out of combat, their skills, their expertise, their incredibly useful thieves' tools ability, their scouting ability, etc. make them so good. I was one of the people that voted for Rogue.
Two of my five characters have been Rogues, and a third character has the Urban Bounty Hunter background and Gloves of Thievery, with 18 Dexterity, so he's part Rogue, even though he's never taken a level in the class.
People's impressions of classes tend to formed by how they play at low levels. Tier 1 thieves are a lot squishier than tier 1 fighters.
it does not make the feature weaker, indeed it makes the feature stronger, and indeed the class as a whole has quite a lot of potency, just means that they might get outshadowed by other party members when it comes to tanking which is itself fine becuase dnd is a cooperative game, you are having fun, everyone else is having fun
the only thing i wanted to communicate with that statement is that an artillerist artificer will share the bonuses with others, or at least can be assumed to do so since they will not be penalized for not doing so, thus any other party member with an d8 or higher hit dice and similar focus on con and armor will between levels 3 and 9 be just as tanky as the artificer while within their aura, its not an I will never die build like the bear barbarian/ moon druid multiclass, its an we will never die build, the artificer never excels defensively compared to the rest of the party until he or she starts to be able to attune to multiple magic items at once, thus they may be one of if not the best tanks in an solo setting with no magic items, but they will not be the best tank in the party
only problem of knock and invisibility and pass without trace who all make the skills of the rouge slightly less desireable but indeed expertise is an nice feature, reliable talent is also delicious and generally it is just better at being a ranger than the ranger, and with cunning action, evasion and uncanny doge they are very impossible to kill which is nice, they are often considered incredebly powerful and so yeah it is indeed quite the suprise
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Arcane Trickster has a strict bump in damage with booming blade and spells like shadow blade.
Thief can toss an acid vial or alchemist fire as a BA so that's a damage increase.
Rogue doesn't need a lot of combat help with subclasses though as Sneak Attack is expected to proc every round and scales very well.
Hard agree on Bard.
Rogues do more damage in combat on average as bards lack damage options until 10th level or if you go lore Bard.
My favorite classes are monk and Barbarian. Why? Unarmored defense. You don’t need to buy armor, you don’t have to worry about armor proficiencies, as your ability scores rise, your ac rises faster because you have 2 ability scores bringing it up rather than one. It’s great
that logic only really works if you happen to have both scores uneven at an given ASI opportunity, otherwise your AC would rise just as quickly as for the rouge but max out more slowly
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
If your DM uses the sleeping Armor rules then it becomes much better...especially if you are in a dangerous style campaign like Out of the Abyss.
I do not do the armor sleep rules myself as STR builds are already in a worse position than DEX builds about 80% of the time so I do not like to crap on them too much more.
except for the few players playing as warforged or some kind of homebrew undead race with immunity to exhaustion, though those are pretty rare exceptions and in those instances it is much better yes
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
the onlty time i ever died was with monk... ranger and barb are just not very good... best are obviously sorcerer, wizard, and rogue
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<
I wonder how this poll would look post-Tashas?
Although Ranger got a significant boost, I think it would still probably be in the bottom three. I still think it has a fundamental issue where its martial and casting sides just don't have the synergy you can achieve with other mixed builds. I think if it had a way to convert spells directly into damage in the same vein as a paladin's smites, it would be a huge boost.
As it is now, they have some nice spells but you need concentration to get the most of them and there's very little else in the class that acknowledges that or helps with it in any way. Other than just standing way back with a longbow.
It's still one of my favorite classes. Not saying it's weak or terrible, just that if I had to rank all the classes solely based on what it brings to the table mechanically, ranger would still be in the bottom three. But not that far below the others - I don't really think anyone is that far behind the pack anymore.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm