Please help me see where we're doing something wrong and/or missing a rule ...
I have a party of fifth level characters who have been running Horde of the Dragon Queen. The ranger, now fifth level, is essentially outclassing the party and sucking a lot of fun out of things for both myself and the other players. Here's the combo at issue:
Ranger, Archer Type, Colossus Slayer, with Hunter's Mark. He is shooting twice per round at +9 per shot -- easily the highest hit number in the group and seemingly auto-hitting most of the things in the adventure (basically AC 16 and lower, common in HotDQ). So long as he's marked his first target he's shooting it for 1d6+2d8+4 damage the first hit, or 16 - 18 dmage on average; and if the target lives he shoots again for 1d6+1d8+4 damage, or 12-13 on average. So he's basically pumping 28 - 31 damage a round into enemies on average, easily enough to two-shot many enemies in the Castle excounter (bullywugs, lizardmen, Dragonclaws, etc). And because Hunter's Mark lasts an hour, he can just keep moving the Mark to another target and even between encounters if they don't rest for an hour.
Hes a damage machine, and meanwhile my fighter is swinging at +5s and doing basically 1d8+4 damage per hit, 8-9 on average per hit and 16-18 per turn ... IF he hits, which is less likely. He can spend his Superiority dice each combat (he's a Defense fighter and Battle Master) but they only apply to his next attaxk, not the whole combat like Hunters Mark/Collosus Slayer, and if he spends them all in one combat he's like a ist ed Wizard -- limited to basic attacks until he can rest and regain his "spells".
[These numbers, by the way, are presuming no magic weapons, since HotDQ isn't very thick with them anyway.]
And before you say "Attack him, Hunters Mark is Concentration," that's true but (1) he's very good about staying in the backfield and moving into/out of cover and (2) Concentration checks are prety stupid easy anyway, especially if the PC has a Con bonus (he does).
Between the Ranger and tiefling thief who was Sneak attacking every round by moving into and out of darkness, they killed a dragon in 4 rounds. At 5th level. The Paladin wasn't even able to get a shot in they killed it so fast (he was slow and across the room).
I am frustrated as a DM. I'm not having fun and I know the Fighter isn't having fun, and I get the sense that others at the table are eqully annoyed. But if I start arbitratily disalowing things right now -- limiting Hunter's Mark to one target for example -- I'll just alienate the Ranger player, who's only guilty of using the rules as written.
Help?
By the way, the dragpn was a Young Black Dragon. I decided it lived in the castle to try and throw SOME kind of challenge at these players. Didn't work. 137 HPs gone >snap!< like that. 
"Hey [Ranger's Player], I'm having an issue - as are several others - and I wonder if you can help us find a solution. Your character does amazing amounts of damage and that appears to be totally in-line with the rules. But in this game, we can only consider any given session a win if we all have a good time and create an exciting, memorable story. I know I'm not having a good time because I feel like I'm unable to effectively challenge you and some of the others are feeling overshadowed. And the stories we're creating are basically just full of arrows and easy fights and that's getting kind of dull. So how do you think we can fix this problem so we're all having fun and creating an exciting, memorable story together?"
And say this in person, not in an email, text, or chat.
While you're at it, check my Adventure Scenarios for examples of encounters that aren't necessarily won by putting out a lot of damage. I know you're playing a module, but perhaps you can make some changes to the encounters.
We actually had a conversation very similar to this at the end of the last session, when the frustration was getting palpable at the table. The player in question just kind of shrugged and said "I'm just playing it by the rules". He agreed that he would let the Hunter's Mark expire at the end of every combat, meaning he could "only" cast it four times between rests.
What's worse is that hes beginning to brag about how awesome his character is. I've smacked him down for that, but he's still clearly boastful about his damage output.
And thanks for pointing me to that list. We are technically playing Adventurer's league, so I am loathe to change too much, but it's coming off the rails anyway so I may just go back to old-school self-writing.
Some notes:
Why is the Fighter swinging at +5 - if he does +4 damage, he should be at +7 at 5th - +4 for stat, +3 for proficiency bonus.
Defense Style isn't really a good choice in the first place - it only benefits the Fighter if he can force people to attack him, not others. Dueling ups his damage by +4 per round if he's carrying a shield. Consider going Human/Great Weapon Fighter/Polearm Master for a feat choice as that gives an extra bonus action attack and a reaction option.
Fighters benefit greatly from short rests. The way the system is intended to work is that you ought to hand out 2 per adventuring day. Not only does that recharge his Battlemaster options, but it makes it harder for the Ranger to by the book keep Hunter's Mark up.
Colossus Slayer only works when you hit a wounded opponent. So in order for him to two-shot an enemy, he needs to hit both times, which ought to be harder.
Some monsters are smart - do you go after the defensive(shield) looking Fighter with the high AC or the lightly armored Ranger in back with the big bow? Seems to be a straightforward choice. Do you focus fire on the guy in back with the big bow? If he feels that he can brag about how awesome he is, some monsters may have heard about it on the grapevine and know to target him
Sounds to me like he min-maxed his character's build, which is fine if every player is doing that. If not though, it leads to situations where one really well-built character dominates the game.
You have three choices:
1) Start applying arbitrary restrictions (like forcing him to allow his Hunter's Mark to expire). I dislike this option because you're basically telling him that you're not a good enough DM to figure out a counter tactic, and instead of trying to improve your DMing, you're going to selectively punish him.
2) Figure out how the other characters can optimize their builds and let them readjust so that they match the Ranger's level of play. This to me is the most attractive option, but also requires you to do the most research and get real in-depth with each player's character choices. It sounds to me like your Fighter just sucks, he's trying to play an offensive character but picking defensive class options. The Paladin may wish to invest in a mount to overcome his problem of not being able to reach the fight by the time it's over.
3) Counter the Ranger's tactics with superior tactics. If he is playing smart and keeping his distance from enemies in the back ranks, provide invisible foes waiting to strike the rear of the party, focusing fire on the Ranger first. This is the other attractive options. There are plenty of monsters in the Monster Manual that can use magical means to either beat the Ranger at his own game or make his fighting style irrelevant. Other choices include building NPC enemies using PC rules to provide him a nemesis of sufficient power to balance out encounters.
I will have to check the Fighter's numbers. He may have a lower Strength / higher Constitution build. I'm pretty sure he's at +5 though. If not I will be sure to help him correct the error.
Re: The Colossus Slayer. If a target is undamaged he just uses CS with the second shot. And again, he's shooting at +9. In the Castle Area of HotDQ, the average enemy has AC 14 - 16, meaning that even in situations where he's at Dsadvantage he only needs a 5 - 7 or higher to hit.
Dyndrilliac wrote:
Ariamythe wrote:
1) Check your fighters math; remind them to use action surge, and (as written above) try to put in 2 short rests per adventuring day so the Hunters Mark wears off and the Battlemasters dice refresh.
2) Use hordes of small creatures as well as a couple of big ones. It doesn't matter if the ranger does 30 damage and the fighter does 15, when there are enemies with 10 to perish with a dramatic "AAAARRG!".
Basically all you have to do is adjust the encounters slightly so that everyone has something to do. If you have a couple of optimized damage dealers, solo monsters are not the way to challenge -or fully engage - a party. Lesson learned the hard way, believe me.
I feel like the situation and the advice here are all suggesting to me that I need to drop the HotDQ module and just write my own material, Adventurer's league be d@maned. The mod is just too straightforward in its assumption of a balanced, sane party.
What does it mean to "hand out" or "put in" short rests though? It's the players' choice to do this, no? I guess you guys mean "opportunities for short rest?"
1.) I definitely agree on a math check for all characters. Periodically.
2.) Artillery is very strong. That's why we use it. Ranger stays ranged. Enemies can also use ranged attacks. Seriously consider rewrites of the pre-written fights so they compliment your party.
3.) Guy built for offense will out-damage guy built for defense.
4.) guy built for defense needs to feel this was a memorable and meaningful choice. Again, need to rewrite encounters so that he has the chance to hold off multiple attackers.
5.) Basic Party Ops: a) Tank sets offensive/defensive battle lines & terms by which a fight begins. B) support/heals ensure tank holds the lines he's set. C) DPS ends the fight. No single character can win alone. W/o tank, DPS and healers get chewed up and spit out. Everyone has a role; every role is necessary; everyone should feel metal AF for doing their job right.
6.) player not happy w/defensive build should consider simple re-spec, take a different role, or enjoy how much damage he "mitigated" vs how much he dealt.
iserith wrote:
I get that, but when to short rest is really a choice on the part of the players. A DM can't tell them to short rest. If they want to press on and look for trouble, that's their business. The only issue at that point is resolving when to short rest based on the fighter's and ranger's priorities (for example).
Ariamythe wrote:
"I feel like the situation and the advice here are all suggesting to me that I need to drop the HotDQ module and just write my own material, Adventurer's league be d@maned. The mod is just too straightforward in its assumption of a balanced, sane party."
There's some of that, though I look at it more along the lines of "The text of the module is the first word in what to run, not the last word."
If you have to run the module as is without changing anything, ask yourself (as DM) "What am I doing to describe the setting and the results of the players actions that makes the players who AREN'T dealing mega-damage feel like they are making important contibutions? And how can I do more of that?"
The problem isn't that the ranger is dealing Tons 'O Damage (tm); the problem is that other people at the table are unhappy. Deal with the actual problem.
Dont drop HODQ, just add to it. I ended up adding Half-Dragons as "Elite Cultist" because I have the same situation with a Great Weapon Fighting Barbarian that does massive damage and only takes half damage when he is raging. Basically, in order to give him a challenge, I would have to have a monster so powerful, that a single attack on another player would probably kill them. Here are some suggestions:
1. "What goes around comes around" Add an equally skilled counter-sniper.
2. Rogue Sneak attack him and keep him in toe to toe melee
3. Set up a rear ambush that will keep him tied up - the NPC's have learned his tactics and adjusted for it.
4. The Cult of the Dragon is tired of loosing allies and has sent a powerful magic user to deal with him. I couple overchanneled lightning bolts up his arse should humble him a bit.
And Ariamythe, if I may add some unsolicited DM advice, in the example of the Black Dragon addition, I am having to do the same things. My players have been playing for at least 20 years and know full well how to absolutely maximize their character builds, teamwork during an epic battle, and DPR (luckily I have been DMing for at least that long!). They too would hack the young Dragon "as written" to shreads, even with the new "bounded accuracy" and challenge rating system. Add as many hitpoints as needed to give them one hell of a battle, you can add resistance to slashing etc also, Dragon regen, higher AC etc. The Dragon(even a young one) should be powerful enough to kill any one of them and therefore, truly freared by them and force them to fight as a group. In the case of your sniper, the Dragon is highly intelligent and will focus all of his fury on him. Something that I have found that helps, especially when the characters get a bit "too big for their britches" is to have something like this smack them down a notch or two. If they jump on this Dragon and a character with say 60 hitpoints takes 50 in one round, the oh s&*t factor kicks in. The healer starts to quickly run out of big heals, they start burning all of their action surges to drink a healing potient just to stay alive instead of attack 2 or 3 more times, second winds, etc. It makes it to where they cant just do max DPR to win every battle. Last but not least, characters that are too emboldened need to learn their place in the world. Add a much larger dragon guarding some eggs. The dragon has no interest in fighting(he is so powerful, they are no threat) as long as they do not take "one step closer". If they do make the foolish decision, wipe them out. They need to learn that not every battle is winable.
iserith wrote:
A 5th lvl fighter should have better than a +5 ab, it seems he went with the duelist option to get +2 damage, a shield and a base strength of 14.
That just isn't a great build:
Is he human?
What did he do with his feat(s)?
Where did his higher scores go? the ranger apparently has an 18/19 in dexterity. or did you decide to roll dice ?
In regards to the ranger:
How do you keep track of time, aren't you being too lenient in regards to time lapsing ?
Do you take into account terrain, cover (including cover from party members) ? these tend to be more of a bother to a ranged character.
Do you ever engage the ranger in melee ? provoking AoO to move away or suffer disadvantage on shots.
Do you ever target the ranger with ranged attacks ? he likely does not have a great AC and he does likely not have a good con save, even with a decent bonus. so concentration is fragile.
The 1d8 damage from colocuses slayer is just 1/turn, it is not that impressive later on and only usable on a target that is already damaged.
Allowing the fighter to use his powers to recharge after about an hour instead of / in addition to a short rest might help, but maybe not more than thrice a day.
You could allow ppl to remake their character in a limited way now they have been playing a bit.
I will say that having a damage dealer in the party is not a problem in itself, it seems he has to make up for a fighter that deals very little in the way of damage.
Why are the other party members unhappy, the ranger is not really that overpowered, do they have similar unoptimized builds ?
Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
I am in agreement with Iserith.
I am also wondering why the issue of some characters wanting short rests more often than others isn't seen as being self-correcting. The party thinks they have time to rest, some party members choose to rest - the others choose between resting with their party even they didn't need a rest, and pressing on without the members that chose to rest, which basically becomes "we rest when we have the time because it's useful to the party as a whole" or "I don't need to rest yet so I am going to go find another encounter to spend resources on and end up needing to rest because of it since facing an encounter without the rest of the party is dangerous."
iserith wrote:
DemoMonkey wrote:
Of course, that's where the defender comes in handy.
Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
We have a Ranger in our party. We are all happy when she kicks ass and takes names. It's going to be sick when she hits fifth level. Our melee characters feel their job first is to take damage so everyone else lives. We also have a Sorceror who casts Shatter all the time for mega damage.
If your fighter is feeling left behind, help him rebuild his character to be a better defender. Sword and Shield isn't massive damage, but with the right feat or two, it's quite effective. Shield Mastery, Grapple, and Sentinel are all useful abilities to control enemies combined with Battle Master abilities. Maybe if enemies are in melee with the fighter, and he has Sentinel, they choose to disengage and charge the Ranger who just shot his buddy. Now the Fighter can use his Sentinel and stop him from moving. Maybe he trips one with a maneuver and shield bashes another prone to keep them from engaging the Wizard. Maybe he grapples a bad guy and drags him away from killing the unconscious ally. Work with him to give him abilities to use and then have encounters that use those things.
if your fighter speced for defence definatly make it worth while. and make sure it is known to him. one thing you might wanna do is enchourage the ranger to occasionally comment on it too. if the ranger occassionally comments "... jeeze man that woulda one shoted me!" it might be all the fighter needs
Its a character design decision... but one the fighter has to be happy with.
I am playing a 1/2 orc S/S paladin. By level 2 or 3 I had a 20 AC, plus I don't 'die' when I get to 0 the first time. I don't do nearly the fun damage many of the others do, but I am able to run up to the bad guys and grab their attention, or let the BBEG pound on me for a few rounds while everyone pours on the damage. One time, I stood in a doorway and 'fought' 3 bad guys in melee, so that others could shoot and cast to take them down.
It *can* be cool and fun, but if your fighter player doesn't like that, if what he wants is to do a lot of damage... then he needs to take a different approach.
But yeah, he should have at least a 16 Str, and by 4th level, either 18, or some really cool feat.
crimfan07 wrote:
BrianCritchley wrote:
Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
It's just a simple matter of compromise between players who understand the goals of play: having a good time and creating an exciting, memorable story. Sometimes that will mean the fighter doesn't get his short rest because they have important matters to attend to where wasting the extra time left on the ranger's spell won't be optimal. In other cases, there will be times when having the fighter's second wind and action surge will be clutch and the ranger has other spell slots to burn anyway. Maybe for the sake of a good story, the ranger will find something else to do other than applying arrows to targets; they've got 5 skills that might come into play, 6 if it's a variant human. (My fighter, for example, does pretty good damage compared to the rest of the party, but almost always finds something more interesting and effective to do with his actions than "hit it with my sword." Nobody remembers the times I hit things with my weapon. But they do remember all the crazy crap he pulls and somehow manages to get to work!)
Interestig comprimise, martial abilites recharge at the end of combat. So things like Battlemaster Superiorty die. We could go through other classes and their abilities as they come up. This allows your fighter to go on with out that Hour break that kills hunters mark, and still get his cool feature back.
Spending Hit Die, casters abilities to regain spell slots (arcane recovery ect) take a Short rest. Doesnt have to be an hour. I mean really a Wizard might just need to prep a few material components(this has to deal with how my world treats magic) Or clerics/druids performing pray/rites to regain their divine power.
That will let the Battlemaster keep going with the ranger for longer, But you should definetly sit with the player and check his math and respec. If he is younger (to me this means below 18, probably below 16 honestly) and new to DnD or just table top games, then it shouldnt be a problem at all to respec if he realized he isnt fullfing his desired concept very well or no longer likes the original concept he had.
crimfan07 wrote:
paulstrait wrote:
you do know that you can split the two parts.... have the class features recharge on a short rest and the heling on a daily week basis. They do not both have to operate on the same schedule.
ARROWS. Simple answer. How are you treating his arrows? He can only carry so many in a quiver, 20. When he shoots his arrows, how many do you let him recover? Where does he get his re supply? Only let him recover half at the most, require a dex check or some other skill check that seems likely. If you throw enough monsters at the party he will run out and have to melee. Don't make it easy for him to resupply, that way he has to pick his shots.
If you had your enemy figure out the tactics, then you can have a rogue steal his amunition during a rest, or something of that nature. A fun trick I used to use is drop a magic item, bow, that is cursed. causing 50% of his shots to miss, or hit his team mates, or something like that.
I would start with the arrow supply option first, if I remember the module right they are out in the middle of nowhere so he can not buy arrows. When he is humbled enough add in some archers and arrows to their drops, but don't let him get too overstocked.
I found this helpful. From http://slyflourish.com/5e_gotchas.html
"Allies provide partial cover to everyone. If you're shooting at something and anything is in the way, your target is +2 to defenses. This generally makes it a pain to shoot into a crowd."
We used to run into this problem all the time in 4e. People would choose to play a Leader, Controller or Defender and then wonder why the Striker was handing out all the damage.
And...
It's tough to play a game where one player wants to min/max his or her character and the other players don't want to take that approach. It usually shows up in more areas than just character creation/building... it's a general approach to play.
For instance, some players like to give their characters 'flaws' and actually use them in the course of the game. A character that has an irrational fear of rodents or insects for example. Some groups will enjoy it when the Wizard hops up on the table screaming "A MOUSE... A MOUSE!... Somebody KILL it!!!" in the middle of a fight... other groups don't want to put up with that type of antic.
I've run into both 4e and 3.5/Pathfinder players who would actually insult other players for failing to take "the correct" feats or powers for their characters...
It's hard, perhaps impossible, to reconcile players with wildly different concepts and approaches as to how D&D is 'supposed to be played'.
http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4160601
You may want to consider this thread, which discusses a similar problem (but from a player's point of view). My suggestions are post # 5.
I hope they help.
Ariamythe wrote:
transcendantviewer wrote:
EzechielDantan wrote:
Also, Hunter's mark only lasts one hour. You could consider telling the players when they do a skill challenge, or are out of combat, that what ever they did took an hour. Thus, his hunter's mark would wear off.
Does HotDQ offer other areas where characters can shine? Are there roleplaying situations where the Fighter, or Pally, or someone else can get the spotlight and get their heoric moment? What about various other skill checks or ability checks that would greatly help the players out, like History, or Acana, or Religion checks to get more information about the Dragon Cult. Usually when I run, I try to make sure each player gets their moment, whether it be in battle or out of battle. I often will see if the players want to split up when they go to town and are doing the initial information gathering for the various "quests" or bargain for goods, or get drunk up at the tavern yet hear all the juicy rumors. In that way, every character gets a bit of a buy in with the adventure, more than just the combat.
As for combat... if it is too easy, I would throw in a ton more "minionesque" creatures... like kobolds, or the more throw away mobs. In this way, all players face off against these creatures which aren't worth that much more XP (or don't even give players XP for them, hehe). I think a GM is allowed to scale encounters even in a module right? As others have stated, I wouldn't see why the cultists and others (who have heard the renown of the party) wouldn't specifically target the ranger with ranged attacks... javalins, and arrows, etc. With more mini-mobs, the other characters can have their day fighting through the horde while also engaging the big baddies.
And as someone pointed out...arrows? How many arrows does this guy carry with him?
From a different perspective, as an experienced player, for the first time in a long time, my friends and I are able to play outside of our usual gamer group with new DMs and players new to us thanks to one of the local game stores and Encounter/Expeditions etc. In our current game, as a player, I am doing my best to spread around the various character highlights. I'll be encouraging certain players to do XYZ and have their characters shine, or really point out awesome moments in battles and bring it up in subsequent sessions to help bask in that character's glory etc. I'm also fortunate my friend who games with me has the same philosophy, and although our characters are pretty central to the party, we constantly let the other players (most are new) shine so they have a good time. Perhaps if the ranger is someone who has a lot more experienced, you can suggest that he helps raise the morale of the party in various other ways both in and out of combat.
Hope this helps.
Yep. HOTDQ has opportunities for everyone to shine. Takes some GM and pc input but it is turning out to be a very good campaign. Done about half of Naetyr thus far.
I used to have this issue, where one pc is stronger than the rest. I can assure you the ranger is not over powered, the issue is the rest of your players are likely not optimized.
With all due respect, a figther should not be losing out that badly to a ranger on damage. Action surge, and the various feats, he should be pumping out more damage. In fact, fighters have the higest DPR in 5th edition on the math, especially over time. (some situtional exceptions).
Its hard to design encounters for mixed strength characters.
I agree with the issue not being with the Ranger being 'too powerful' nor him being 'too boastful'. Roleplaying a character that has greater matial ability than his companions he WOULD be more boastful. If the cool thing he just did was take out a half dragon shooting it in his eye after the fight he would walk around saying 'did you guys see that shot!!?'
If the other players are upset at not putting out the same amount of damage the issue is they have not optimised the way the Ranger did and they regret their choices. As this forum has pointed out time and again the ranger is not the biggest hitter by a long way, when classes are optimised.
So I would suggest an open discusion with the group, if the issue is about damage dealing then I guess they are only interested in fighting rather than all the other parts of D&D? Maybe throw in a lot less fights and a lot more RP/Skill based elements that are not based on the skills your Ranger is profficient in. Magical based traps, Charisma based interactions etc.
I would also take a second look at all your other players backgrounds and what fluff they have come up with for their characters (if they have none get them to write some!) and what style of play they are aiming for. If the fighter is deliberately going for Defence over offence let him find some full plate/armour upgrades. Let the magic users find +1 wands etc the rogue a cloak giving him advantage on stealth checks, things that will make they feel useful, or as effective as the Ranger.
What I don't think would be fair is to penalise the Ranger for playing the way he wants to or for working hard on optimising his abilities.....on the other hand it does seem he needs more of a challange. Gaining notice from cultists and attracting bigger enemies that have been sent to dela with him would add to his ego AND give others a chance to shine as he will need HELP!
Best of luck 
bawylie wrote:
PhillPowell wrote:
Azylynne wrote:
DLfan wrote:
Azylynne wrote:
Azylynne wrote:
Rhenny wrote:
DLfan wrote:
BRJN wrote:
My own experience with ranged guys who outclass the rest of the party is that you need to press them. Force them into cover get them into cross fires, and use cover yourself. If they used cover, force them out. Use highly mobile guys, use ranged guys. Use little ranged guys... They can have 4 hp and a long bow and they will start doing damage. They aren't woeth wasting your big damage on them, so the guys who do less get them. Often, through, those guys are not actually mobile. That makes it hard because they can out over the guys that conan protect, and the big damage guy is actually the one under threat. Using this kind of combined arms makes combat much more interesting,
NamelessHero wrote:
Give the fighter a +1 weapon with some interesting (but not too strong) special ability that activates on kill 1/day so that he actually remembers scoring that kill, use some low-hp enemies that both the ranger and the fighter can oneshot. Encourage the fighter to use his next feat for ability increase (why didn't you encourage him to use his last feat for the same purpose?), use ranged enemies, cover and renformcements to challenge the ranger.
Ariamythe wrote:
My group still plays 4e, but we have approximately the same situation: we have two rangers who both act as the heavy hitters on the team as far as combat goes. Which actually pans out well, because our barbarian went for an exremely defensive build, maxing out AC so that he can absorb close range shots and act as a distraction while the rangers attack from a distance.
In your case, I think it could work if your fighter also sort of embraces that role, and maybe even works it into the story universe. Maybe he's miffed that he can't do as much damage as the ranger, but maybe that just means that he needs to find another role to occupy. I mean, it's not really the ranger's fault that he's doing his job well, and in spite of some of the comments insinuating that the DM should intervene in how he uses his powers, I think that punishing the player for taking the time to find the right feats and powers isn't really the way to go.
You know if the fighter used feint, he'd have advantage to hit and 1D8+weapon die+damage bonus as well? Doing so four times per short rest, IIRC.
In fact I think, IIRC, the fighter could do so on both attacks.
Noon wrote:
Noon wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
iserith wrote:
In addition to checking the To Hit math for the characters you will want to adjust the difficulty of the enounter. I've found that my group is fighting at 1 level higher than listed in the DMG for the Encuonter Difficulty chart. So, when the group of 5 of the 5th level characters runs into a deadly encounter the encounter XP value is between 750x5 to 1100x5. In addition, the encounter multiplier is decreased by one level. So, if there are 2 creatures then the multiplier is 1. If there are 3 - 6 creatures the multipier is 1.5. The result is deadly encounters are deadly, even with my poor ability at using tactics with the NPCs.
Besides the creatures that were mentioned above, I would recomend adding a couple creatures that can close the gap to the ranger in at a fast pace. My preference is the orc; however, you will want to use a CR 2 or 3 orc to ensure they get to their target prior to being taken out. Additional options is to give NPCs potions of healing, potions of invisibilty (very rare). Finally, you can surprise the party with a cultist who learned Deflect Missiles (monk 3rd lvl ability).
Th3Dux wrote:
Another thing to look at are the tactics being used by the ranger. Often archers will think the best tactic when faced with an approaching enemy is to kill as many of them at the front so as to delay the close assault from happening. This however is a poor tactic. The archer should be aiming to take out the "second wave" of attackers first. If they kill all of the first "wave" then it just delays the start of the combat, and then they have to deal with the rest, all at the same time. By removing the second rank it gives the close combat characters fewer targets to deal with at one time, before the back one hit.
Also adding scouts and flankers can keep the archer busy, while not taking away from the close combat specialists.
Noon wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Noon wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Noon wrote:
iserith wrote:
iserith wrote:
Noon wrote:
Beldak_Serpenthelm wrote:
Beldak_Serpenthelm wrote:
crimfan07 wrote:
iserith wrote:
It's like you threw random words around a bunch of "true way's" and called it good.
Noon wrote:
Ashrym wrote:
I'll say it again. Numbers and variety and pressing the archer. He'll feel great killing guys, but he'll get overwhelmed if they Rush him. Numbers win 5e in many ways, and twice as many half the XP guys is better for dealing with big single target damage guys. Force a tough choice
Leugren wrote:
iserith wrote:
Noon wrote:
next refers to the nearest following, subsequent simply means following or later. This is enforced by saying a subsequent turn instead of the subsequent / next turn.
I had some initial doubts as well, but that was not because of the description it's more a balance issue. The spell did not compare that well with other spells, it seemed quite a bit more useful than most by this definition.
Noon wrote:
Noon wrote: