![]() You're rewarded a Gorm Needler upon a successful kill. It took a few minutes to kill it this way, but it seemed to work the best for me. Wait again for Deifer to come around and repeat. Do as much damage to Deifer as you can before it starts running again. Give yourself enough room to successfully mount, slow the beast (if needed), and then stun it. I found the southern part of the path to have the least number of mobs to kill. If you're trying to kill it solo, then one strategy is to clear the hostile wildlife in one area nearby the beast's path. You have 10 seconds to damage Deifer before it continues it's circuit. The second ability, Stunning Strike, stuns the beast and forces you to dismount. The damage taken from the other creatures while mounted will kill you faster as seen in the posted video. If you only used Harry repeatedly on Deifer the Untamed, then it would take a very long time to kill it. The slow effect stacks up to a maximum of 50%. The first ability, Harry, causes some slight damage and slows the beast. When mounted, you'll continue to circle the Banks of Life and the other wildlife there won't hesitate to attack you. If you get close enough, you're able to mount Deifer and gain access to two special abilities, Harry and Stunning Strike. It can be attacked, but it doesn't attack back. So at the end of the day, both are pretty good, it just depends on your style and whether you would rather use a focus feature or a manuever to get your stunning in (and this assumes a warrior monk, because monks cannot get this manuever normally).If you've aligned yourself with the Night Fae Covenant, then you can travel to the Banks of Life via the mushroom network if you've unlocked the necessary tier.ĭeifer the Untamed circles very quickly and even on a land mount you can't keep up with it for long. SA is also better at stunning multiple creatures. That said, Stunning Assault has its uses.if your fighting the legendary monster and want to blow through its legendary resistances, SA is a better option. The combination of only spending exertion after you hit and the creature is not yet stunned really does help to save exertion over time, and I think in general will be the more efficient option. So in conclusion, at this first tier mathematical example.I actually think Stunning Strike looks pretty good. I had to look at an AC of 15 and a Con Save of +10 before the Adept was spending 2+ exertion a round with SS, so the numbers do have to be a bit more extreme before SS is costing you more exertion than SA. ![]() since less hits occurs there are less chances for a stun, and SA I'm paying the exertion whether I hit or not. ![]() The secrets of creating and operating gunpowder weapons have been discovered in various corners of the D&D. That is, none available to player characters. Therearen’t really any common methods of imposing the Paralyzed condition in 5e. Very few spells cause it and it most often happens due to a monster’s ability rather than originating from the player characters. Now if you adjust the numbers, higher con saves favor SA, as the more times SS fails to land the more times I need to spend exertion, whereas SA is happy to just keep stunning away. Optional Rule: Firearm Proficiency TCE p9. D&D 5e’s Paralyzed condition is actually a fairly rare status effect. So if the Monk is willing to sacrifice ~5% stun chance, they save ~.66 exertion. I was checked to see how often the creature was stunned, and how much exertion was spent to get the effect. ![]() So how do they compare? I did a 1 million run simulation to see how the two abilities looked. The mage as a spellcaster is definitely a creature I would in theory want to stun, they have an okay con save (+3), but a decent AC with shield (17). So for the target, I looked at a few CR 6 options, and found the mage. This gives us a Focus DC of 14, and a Maneuver DC of 15. Take a 5th level Adept with a 16 dex / 16 wisdom split, and lets do a flurry of blows 4 attack assault. Now at first glance, my thought was that SA would be the better option, so I ran a little test. It could be more efficient, or I could spend 4 exertions on 4 attacks to try and get the stun. With SS, I can wait until I hit, and once I stun, I don't have to keep spending exertion if I don't want to. But in theory I could get a lot of stunning chances for a low exertion cost. I spend 2 exertion straight up, and then see what happens. Stunning Strike - The adept focus power that lets you spend exertion after a hit to trigger a stun, one exertion per attack. Stunning Assault - A manuever that costs 2 exertion and allows any of your attacks to trigger a stun. So after debating this one a little bit, I decided to turn to the math!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |