But archers benefit from adjacent allies too. If that edge only applied to melee rogues, then the game would offer different but comparable boosts to archers and backstabbers. Melee rogues almost never get to attack while hidden, but at least backstabbers can sneak attack without advantage when an ally stands next to a target. Why else would the game’s design so often reward ranged attackers with extra benefits that surpass anything melee combatants get?Įxhibit A: Ranged rogues can hide and then pop up to attack from hiding, gaining advantage and a sneak attack. With these feats, melee attacks no longer endanger you because you inflict such massive damage that by the time a foe reaches you, it’s dead.ĭ&D’s designers seem to think ranged and melee attacks represent two different, but mostly equal styles, when really, ranged attacks offer massive intrinsic advantages. With Crossbow Expert, you can make ranged attacks while within 5 feet of enemies without suffering disadvantage. If foes move next to you, then your attacks suffer disadvantage and you stop being immune to their melee attacks.įortunately for ranged attackers, the game’s two most broken feats dismantle all these disadvantages.

Ranged attacks suffer drawbacks: Targets can gain cover. No wonder melee attackers tend to be barbarians and paladins no sensible person would opt for such inefficiency and risk. You can switch targets without having to move.

You can fire past obstacles that hamper movement. When you attack from a distance, melee attackers can’t hit you. My broken feat designs make a provocative way to show the big advantages of attacking from range. I’m not competing for worst D&D designer. What would you think of Dungeons & Dragons feats that gave these benefits?īefore making a melee attack, you can teleport to within melee attack range of your target, attack, and then teleport back to your original position.

Rat sharpshooter