I spoke to the DM even and he told me some anecdotes about flexibility, compromises, and many instances where his players and own characters diverge from their path.
Compromise is where both sides give a little to come to a solution that works for everyone. This sounds like them just steamrolling you into a build that you don't want to play so they can continue to play how they want. If you're saying "I don't want to tank" and they're saying "well too bad," then I think you have some serious group dynamic problems that need to be worked out.
There is also a lot more the DM can do. You can make encounters catered to a ranged team. Smart enemies target healers and spellcasters first. If the DM decides not to use "pile on the tank" tactics then you can all play what you want.
I would personally turn to hirelings if the other party members insist they have a dedicated defender. One would be surprised by how hard a guard is to deal with when it's taking the Dodge action.
If guards are too fragile, a veteran will be useful, if a tad bit pricy; 1 veteran can go for 2 GP per day, while a guard would go for 2 SP instead. I'd argue that the group would need special connections to hire one.
Statistically, the best hireling for game balance would be a single thug. Equip that sucker (scale mail and shield, AC 16) and go to town. Wouldn't likely outshine the other characters and has comparable hit points.
You ought to play your character they way you want to play. I dealt with a player who tried to say "you have to do this this way," and everyone at that table got very upset because of it. Don't bend to control freaks.
It's entirely possible to build a melee Ranger able to take solid hits. However, that's not the situation. The Ranger in question was built with ranged attacking in mind, and has now been shoehorned into the role of tanking.
I do agree that the Cleric should give it a go at being the frontliner, but to say that all Clerics make great frontliners is not true. Like the Ranger, it depends on how they are built. Trickery Domain is one of those that can go several different directions. Without seeing that character sheet, there's no definitive way to say if they'd be better suited to tanking than the Ranger.
So, I think the 17 AC (unbuffed) cleric is kinda being a jerk. The cleric can still be a great cleric on the front line. Maybe, maybe they have to adjust spell choice a little. Not really a big deal they can change it the next day. The ranger on the other hand has to make permanent choices. Even making those choices the ranger will still be a sub-par front line. Such as Medium Armor Master. Then the ranger can get up to a 19 AC if they have the money/gear/sacrifice important character development for something the player does not want to do. The cleric can adjust a spell list by 1 spell and be able to cast Shield of Faith after they get Mirror Image up. Then they have a 19 AC and copies. The slightly lower HP of the cleric just won't matter when they are not getting hit. Hands down the cleric in this group will make a better front line if needed.
Don't know if it was part of a backstory or whatever but the cleric also has a magic cloak that would be epic (at level 4) for the Ranger or Rogue of the group. So yeaaaaaaaaahhhhhh...
The party is far far FAR better off with the cleric concentrating on Bless and working around the edges, than if he is tanking with Shield of Faith and losing concentration on it one or two rounds into the fight after a few hits. Turning hits into misses for the entire party and passing saves that preserve action economy is going to be superior to mitigating damage (poorly), for the same reason that attacking is usually better than healing.
You can’t tank if your AC is dependent on Concentration, until you’re higher level and can afford to bleed spell slots recasting buffs. You just can’t.
Wouldn't bane be a better tanking spell than bless? Lowering enemy attack rolls and sticking more save or suck spells and abilities sounds better for that purpose to me. Charisma is often a low save for enemies, too, so the likelihood of it failing is rather small. On top of all that, it's certainly thematic for the Trickery domain.
Don't know if it was part of a backstory or whatever but the cleric also has a magic cloak that would be epic (at level 4) for the Ranger or Rogue of the group. So yeaaaaaaaaahhhhhh...
Looks like that cloak needs a character of a specific religion/faction or a cleric/paladin not opposed to it to use that, so the others would need to meet that former criteria to share it. Blessing of the Trickster works wonders, but the cleric can't use it on himself, so this seems fine to me.
Bless always succeeds, while Bane will have probably a 20-40% chance of failing even against enemies without a Charisma save proficiency;
combats often have more enemies than you can cover with Bane, while the party mostly fits within a 1st level Bless, or entirely within a 2nd-level one
Again, attacking is better than defending. Bane prolongs combat by making enemies do less damage to the party, while Bless speeds up combat by making players land more attacks and save against more inconvenient effects that might slow down their turns. Banedoes help your casters deal more damage, though, so I suppose Bane could be the more attack-oriented spell against small groups of enemies if your party does most of its damage with save spells.
This group has both a divine sorlock and a cleric, so they can potentially have both bless and bane up at the same time, though I doubt the sorlock would give up on concentrating on hex.
Such a choice must be made willingly, though, as it would affect that character's role. Can't go around forcing changes the player doesn't want to make.
I know other people have already said this, but please, please don't force your character into a "role" you don't want for her. D&D is not an MMO—it's designed so that parties can be effective (unless you're a real wargame-style group who lives for the challenge) with any mix of classes. In fact, D&D existed before "tanks" were even a thing. Always talk these things through, because D&D is about fun, not winning. If an adult conversation with your friends doesn't help them understand why they shouldn't push you to do something that isn't fun for you, they're not being very good friends!
Its true, I don't want to play her like that. It is totally out of character for her and goes against her background as well.
I have spoken to the group about working differently, but there has been no change in how combat works. It starts and then they all run behind me and attack from a far and throw bonus actions to heal me before they run out and I hit the ground. Then someone comes close enough for a cure wounds as I am flanked to all get out.
I should note that all of our combat except 2 instances have been underground where my only light source has the range of a torch.
I spoke to the DM even and he told me some anecdotes about flexibility, compromises, and many instances where his players and own characters diverge from their path.
Also, take the armor and shield method - and just dodge in combat until they stop attacking you and proceed to move on and engage your allies. Then switch to your bow and be ranged again. Dodge works wonders. 🙂
The party is far far FAR better off with the cleric concentrating on Bless and working around the edges, than if he is tanking with Shield of Faith and losing concentration on it one or two rounds into the fight after a few hits. Turning hits into misses for the entire party and passing saves that preserve action economy is going to be superior to mitigating damage (poorly), for the same reason that attacking is usually better than healing.
You can’t tank if your AC is dependent on Concentration, until you’re higher level and can afford to bleed spell slots recasting buffs. You just can’t.
You are still making claims in general terms. This specificparty is not a general party. What you are saying is correct in general but not for this specific party.
Let's evaluate:
The party level is 4. CR for this party will not normally exceed 4. The average attack bonus for the CR 4 is 5. Concentration checks are a default 10 or half the damage done. So to get to an 11 you have to be hit for 22 damage. Other than a big bad boss this is very very very unlikely at CR 4. With this cleric in mind, they have to take 26 points of damage in 1 hit to only have a 50% chance to succeed. But wait, before you make a concentration check you have to be hit.
Attacking a 19 AC with 3 mirror image copies +5 to hit. Chance to hit: ~6%
Attacking a 19 AC with 2 mirror image copies +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~15%
Attacking a 19 AC with 1 mirror image copy +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~22%
In my model, the first 9 attacks never even hit the cleric. They missed or hit an MI. Unless they are fighting 9 enemies that is a significant number of rounds. With this cleric having a 60% chance to pass concentration checks I would have to say the evidence suggests you CAN tank while using a concentration spell. Even without the spell the cleric still has the best base AC of the party.
The cleric in this specific party is still the best choice for a front line tank if needed. Especially because if they want they can run Bless and still be the front line.
Attacking a 17 AC with 3 mirror image copies +5 to hit. Chance to hit: ~10%
Attacking a 17 AC with 2 mirror image copies +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~18%
Attacking a 17 AC with 1 mirror image copy +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~27%
As it stands right now the ranger of the group only has a 15 AC. You don't have to run a model for that. The ranger gets hit 50% of the time with a +5 attack bonus which is the average for CR 4.
@Ceropio. One of my first statements about disengage and run behind the cleric still stands and has now been supported by lots of facts and numbers. Do what makes the game fun for you. The question about who is the better "tank" for your party is answered.
Oh, and last caveat: None of those calculations take into account the cleric saying "I use my action to dodge." after setting up MI and SoF.
The issue with switching from sword/board to bow or vice-versa is that it takes an action to don or doff a shield; a fighter can get away with it using Action Surge, but it's not as good on a ranger.
I pray that they won't have to fight a sizable orc group; they'll just bonus action dash for the sorcadin once eldritch blast starts flying. If either side is scattered, that won't end well. Another possible issue is if the group gets surprised and a large bandit gang holds them up with crossbows ready to fire if they try anything funny.
Given how encounter difficulty is calculated, we can expect 6-7 orcs or 10-11 bandits for medium-hard difficulty; that's too much for a single tank to control.
One more bit on the cleric being a better tank: clerics can cast spiritual weapon as a bonus action. This lets him Dodge and still attack without needing to worry about sacrificing offensive presence.
Hmmm... just noticed the homebrew race. Half-Dryad with only +1 DEX and +2 WIS and adv vs charm... seems weak for a half dryad. You should probably make or find better homebrew. I would say darkvision for 30' is the least that should be added. An argument could be made for something like Druidcraft at will and Goodberry 1/day. I know random comments.
Hmmm... just noticed the homebrew race. Half-Dryad with only +1 DEX and +2 WIS and adv vs charm... seems weak for a half dryad. You should probably make or find better homebrew. I would say darkvision for 30' is the least that should be added. An argument could be made for something like Druidcraft at will and Goodberry 1/day. I know random comments.
I like this, makes it comparable to tieflings with a resistance and Innate Spellcasting. 2nd level Goodberry at 3rd level (keeps in line with most other IS), and pass without trace at 5th.
Then again, it already gets wood elf's Mask of the Wild and a better forest gnome's Speak with Small Beasts, so it has excellent scouting potential. I think it's fine as is.
The issue with switching from sword/board to bow or vice-versa is that it takes an action to don or doff a shield; a fighter can get away with it using Action Surge, but it's not as good on a ranger.
I pray that they won't have to fight a sizable orc group; they'll just bonus action dash for the sorcadin once eldritch blast starts flying. If either side is scattered, that won't end well. Another possible issue is if the group gets surprised and a large bandit gang holds them up with crossbows ready to fire if they try anything funny.
Given how encounter difficulty is calculated, we can expect 6-7 orcs or 10-11 bandits for medium-hard difficulty; that's too much for a single tank to control.
One more bit on the cleric being a better tank: clerics can cast spiritual weapon as a bonus action. This lets him Dodge and still attack without needing to worry about sacrificing offensive presence.
Yeah, my point being that if the rest of the party is “forcing” your character into battle and not bothering to lighten the load at all, then focus on defense. You can’t be expected to be the only one at the fore when you wanted to play a Ranger to begin with. Wield a shield and darts then so you don’t have to drop your shield.
A Spiritual Weapon is a solid idea, and probably where I’d go with this one if they really wanted to force you further into that role.
I'm a bit surprised your ranger isn't proficient in Athletics checks; one out could be to climb a tree when combat begins. You'd be free to shoot from your vantage point while the rest of the group learns how to manage their hit points and AC. Sorcadin has mage armor and shield, and we've already discussed the cleric's options. The rogue can also potentially climb trees and the sorcadin can use misty step to join you on the treetops, though that'd leave the cleric on the ground by himself. If they continue to be a bother, sit out for a game and see how they handle combat without any "tanks."
A 1 HP character often hits just as hard as one without having taken any damage. By forcing all the attacks onto you when you aren't even intended for a tank role, they're potentially denying you of your own turns while you make death saves. That's never a fun situation to be in.
Parties fight two or three times a day. If every time they fight, having a tank is presumed to be contingent on the cleric having a second level slot for mirror image, a first level slot for shield of faith, and concentration maintained on the shield, and the first two turns of each combat used to set up... well, I don’t think that cleric would be a jerk to say “no, that’s ridiculous, just put on some armor and your AC is as good as mine!” No room to ever cast hold person, spiritual weapon, hardly room to heal... a cleric just has too much important stuff to do to be screwing around wasting spells to prevent themselves being hit.
Just put on some better armor, take crossbow Expert before sharpshooter, and multiclass ranger with battle master fighter to be a melee range bow user who catches up on feats.
Back in the day, we always had an NPC or two as party members that the group took turns controlling. That was in AD&D when modules were geared to 4-6 players and there were only 3 players and the DM. Maybe that’s an option for a tank?
Parties fight two or three times a day. If every time they fight, having a tank is presumed to be contingent on the cleric having a second level slot for mirror image, a first level slot for shield of faith, and concentration maintained on the shield, and the first two turns of each combat used to set up... well, I don’t think that cleric would be a jerk to say “no, that’s ridiculous, just put on some armor and your AC is as good as mine!” No room to ever cast hold person, spiritual weapon, hardly room to heal... a cleric just has too much important stuff to do to be screwing around wasting spells to prevent themselves being hit.
Just put on some better armor, take crossbow Expert before sharpshooter, and multiclass ranger with battle master fighter to be a melee range bow user who catches up on feats.
If the spells prevent the damage from happening, then it's not much different than healing away damage that has already been taken, except healing is almost always inefficient. An ogre missing its attack because of mirror image is often a good thing, as the 13 average damage it does per hit is a bit too much to ignore.
I agree that upgrading armor isn't a bad idea, but multiclassing into fighter delays ranger spell progression and EXTRA ATTACK. Last I checked, that's very important for almost every martial character. Almost every guide I've read heavily suggest sticking to a class until it gets Extra Attack for martials or 3rd level spells for full casters. Maybe 6th for martial-subclass full casters for both.
Crossbow Expert isn't a bad idea, though, even if you don't plan to use crossbows. Being stuck in melee with disadvantage on your attacks sucks. If you're comfortable using a rapier when the gap closes instead, taking Sharpshooter is perfectly fine.
Compromise is where both sides give a little to come to a solution that works for everyone. This sounds like them just steamrolling you into a build that you don't want to play so they can continue to play how they want. If you're saying "I don't want to tank" and they're saying "well too bad," then I think you have some serious group dynamic problems that need to be worked out.
There is also a lot more the DM can do. You can make encounters catered to a ranged team. Smart enemies target healers and spellcasters first. If the DM decides not to use "pile on the tank" tactics then you can all play what you want.
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
I would personally turn to hirelings if the other party members insist they have a dedicated defender. One would be surprised by how hard a guard is to deal with when it's taking the Dodge action.
If guards are too fragile, a veteran will be useful, if a tad bit pricy; 1 veteran can go for 2 GP per day, while a guard would go for 2 SP instead. I'd argue that the group would need special connections to hire one.
Statistically, the best hireling for game balance would be a single thug. Equip that sucker (scale mail and shield, AC 16) and go to town. Wouldn't likely outshine the other characters and has comparable hit points.
You ought to play your character they way you want to play. I dealt with a player who tried to say "you have to do this this way," and everyone at that table got very upset because of it. Don't bend to control freaks.
The characters are public. So we can see the cleric in question: https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/28095067
So, I think the 17 AC (unbuffed) cleric is kinda being a jerk. The cleric can still be a great cleric on the front line. Maybe, maybe they have to adjust spell choice a little. Not really a big deal they can change it the next day. The ranger on the other hand has to make permanent choices. Even making those choices the ranger will still be a sub-par front line. Such as Medium Armor Master. Then the ranger can get up to a 19 AC if they have the money/gear/sacrifice important character development for something the player does not want to do. The cleric can adjust a spell list by 1 spell and be able to cast Shield of Faith after they get Mirror Image up. Then they have a 19 AC and copies. The slightly lower HP of the cleric just won't matter when they are not getting hit. Hands down the cleric in this group will make a better front line if needed.
Don't know if it was part of a backstory or whatever but the cleric also has a magic cloak that would be epic (at level 4) for the Ranger or Rogue of the group. So yeaaaaaaaaahhhhhh...
The party is far far FAR better off with the cleric concentrating on Bless and working around the edges, than if he is tanking with Shield of Faith and losing concentration on it one or two rounds into the fight after a few hits. Turning hits into misses for the entire party and passing saves that preserve action economy is going to be superior to mitigating damage (poorly), for the same reason that attacking is usually better than healing.
You can’t tank if your AC is dependent on Concentration, until you’re higher level and can afford to bleed spell slots recasting buffs. You just can’t.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Wouldn't bane be a better tanking spell than bless? Lowering enemy attack rolls and sticking more save or suck spells and abilities sounds better for that purpose to me. Charisma is often a low save for enemies, too, so the likelihood of it failing is rather small. On top of all that, it's certainly thematic for the Trickery domain.
Looks like that cloak needs a character of a specific religion/faction or a cleric/paladin not opposed to it to use that, so the others would need to meet that former criteria to share it. Blessing of the Trickster works wonders, but the cleric can't use it on himself, so this seems fine to me.
No, because:
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
This group has both a divine sorlock and a cleric, so they can potentially have both bless and bane up at the same time, though I doubt the sorlock would give up on concentrating on hex.
Such a choice must be made willingly, though, as it would affect that character's role. Can't go around forcing changes the player doesn't want to make.
I know other people have already said this, but please, please don't force your character into a "role" you don't want for her. D&D is not an MMO—it's designed so that parties can be effective (unless you're a real wargame-style group who lives for the challenge) with any mix of classes. In fact, D&D existed before "tanks" were even a thing. Always talk these things through, because D&D is about fun, not winning. If an adult conversation with your friends doesn't help them understand why they shouldn't push you to do something that isn't fun for you, they're not being very good friends!
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Also, take the armor and shield method - and just dodge in combat until they stop attacking you and proceed to move on and engage your allies. Then switch to your bow and be ranged again. Dodge works wonders. 🙂
You are still making claims in general terms. This specific party is not a general party. What you are saying is correct in general but not for this specific party.
Let's evaluate:
The party level is 4. CR for this party will not normally exceed 4. The average attack bonus for the CR 4 is 5. Concentration checks are a default 10 or half the damage done. So to get to an 11 you have to be hit for 22 damage. Other than a big bad boss this is very very very unlikely at CR 4. With this cleric in mind, they have to take 26 points of damage in 1 hit to only have a 50% chance to succeed. But wait, before you make a concentration check you have to be hit.
Attacking a 19 AC with 3 mirror image copies +5 to hit. Chance to hit: ~6%
Attacking a 19 AC with 2 mirror image copies +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~15%
Attacking a 19 AC with 1 mirror image copy +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~22%
In my model, the first 9 attacks never even hit the cleric. They missed or hit an MI. Unless they are fighting 9 enemies that is a significant number of rounds. With this cleric having a 60% chance to pass concentration checks I would have to say the evidence suggests you CAN tank while using a concentration spell. Even without the spell the cleric still has the best base AC of the party.
The cleric in this specific party is still the best choice for a front line tank if needed. Especially because if they want they can run Bless and still be the front line.
Attacking a 17 AC with 3 mirror image copies +5 to hit. Chance to hit: ~10%
Attacking a 17 AC with 2 mirror image copies +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~18%
Attacking a 17 AC with 1 mirror image copy +5 to hit: Chance to hit: ~27%
As it stands right now the ranger of the group only has a 15 AC. You don't have to run a model for that. The ranger gets hit 50% of the time with a +5 attack bonus which is the average for CR 4.
@Ceropio. One of my first statements about disengage and run behind the cleric still stands and has now been supported by lots of facts and numbers. Do what makes the game fun for you. The question about who is the better "tank" for your party is answered.
Oh, and last caveat: None of those calculations take into account the cleric saying "I use my action to dodge." after setting up MI and SoF.
The issue with switching from sword/board to bow or vice-versa is that it takes an action to don or doff a shield; a fighter can get away with it using Action Surge, but it's not as good on a ranger.
I pray that they won't have to fight a sizable orc group; they'll just bonus action dash for the sorcadin once eldritch blast starts flying. If either side is scattered, that won't end well. Another possible issue is if the group gets surprised and a large bandit gang holds them up with crossbows ready to fire if they try anything funny.
Given how encounter difficulty is calculated, we can expect 6-7 orcs or 10-11 bandits for medium-hard difficulty; that's too much for a single tank to control.
One more bit on the cleric being a better tank: clerics can cast spiritual weapon as a bonus action. This lets him Dodge and still attack without needing to worry about sacrificing offensive presence.
Off-topic:
Hmmm... just noticed the homebrew race. Half-Dryad with only +1 DEX and +2 WIS and adv vs charm... seems weak for a half dryad. You should probably make or find better homebrew. I would say darkvision for 30' is the least that should be added. An argument could be made for something like Druidcraft at will and Goodberry 1/day. I know random comments.
I like this, makes it comparable to tieflings with a resistance and Innate Spellcasting. 2nd level Goodberry at 3rd level (keeps in line with most other IS), and pass without trace at 5th.
Then again, it already gets wood elf's Mask of the Wild and a better forest gnome's Speak with Small Beasts, so it has excellent scouting potential. I think it's fine as is.
Yeah, my point being that if the rest of the party is “forcing” your character into battle and not bothering to lighten the load at all, then focus on defense. You can’t be expected to be the only one at the fore when you wanted to play a Ranger to begin with. Wield a shield and darts then so you don’t have to drop your shield.
A Spiritual Weapon is a solid idea, and probably where I’d go with this one if they really wanted to force you further into that role.
Rangers don't get SW, clerics do.
I'm a bit surprised your ranger isn't proficient in Athletics checks; one out could be to climb a tree when combat begins. You'd be free to shoot from your vantage point while the rest of the group learns how to manage their hit points and AC. Sorcadin has mage armor and shield, and we've already discussed the cleric's options. The rogue can also potentially climb trees and the sorcadin can use misty step to join you on the treetops, though that'd leave the cleric on the ground by himself. If they continue to be a bother, sit out for a game and see how they handle combat without any "tanks."
A 1 HP character often hits just as hard as one without having taken any damage. By forcing all the attacks onto you when you aren't even intended for a tank role, they're potentially denying you of your own turns while you make death saves. That's never a fun situation to be in.
Parties fight two or three times a day. If every time they fight, having a tank is presumed to be contingent on the cleric having a second level slot for mirror image, a first level slot for shield of faith, and concentration maintained on the shield, and the first two turns of each combat used to set up... well, I don’t think that cleric would be a jerk to say “no, that’s ridiculous, just put on some armor and your AC is as good as mine!” No room to ever cast hold person, spiritual weapon, hardly room to heal... a cleric just has too much important stuff to do to be screwing around wasting spells to prevent themselves being hit.
Just put on some better armor, take crossbow Expert before sharpshooter, and multiclass ranger with battle master fighter to be a melee range bow user who catches up on feats.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Back in the day, we always had an NPC or two as party members that the group took turns controlling. That was in AD&D when modules were geared to 4-6 players and there were only 3 players and the DM. Maybe that’s an option for a tank?
edit: Wtfdndad beat me to it.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
If the spells prevent the damage from happening, then it's not much different than healing away damage that has already been taken, except healing is almost always inefficient. An ogre missing its attack because of mirror image is often a good thing, as the 13 average damage it does per hit is a bit too much to ignore.
I agree that upgrading armor isn't a bad idea, but multiclassing into fighter delays ranger spell progression and EXTRA ATTACK. Last I checked, that's very important for almost every martial character. Almost every guide I've read heavily suggest sticking to a class until it gets Extra Attack for martials or 3rd level spells for full casters. Maybe 6th for martial-subclass full casters for both.
Crossbow Expert isn't a bad idea, though, even if you don't plan to use crossbows. Being stuck in melee with disadvantage on your attacks sucks. If you're comfortable using a rapier when the gap closes instead, taking Sharpshooter is perfectly fine.
The Clerik can also block a narrow passage by useing sanctuarry and dodge, i made my DM cry with that combo.
Attack: [roll]3d20dl2+6[/roll] Damage: [roll](if([roll:-1:critical], =0, 1d8, 2{1d8}.expand()))+4[/roll] Sneakattack: [roll](if([roll:-2:critical], =0, 2d6, 2{2d6}.expand()))[/roll]The Clerik can also block a narrow passage by useing sanctuarry and dodge, i made my DM cry with that combo.
Attack: [roll]3d20dl2+6[/roll] Damage: [roll](if([roll:-1:critical], =0, 1d8, 2{1d8}.expand()))+4[/roll] Sneakattack: [roll](if([roll:-2:critical], =0, 2d6, 2{2d6}.expand()))[/roll]