Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
Hello all. I haven't played a Hunter yet and I'm just getting caught up. I would like to know, in your experience, which is better for a classic Longbow Hunter: Colossus Slayer or Horde Breaker?

Colossus Slayer seems to be better for single targets, i.e. the many boss encounters (Owlbear Mother, Bulette, etc. pp.).

Horde Breaker is not supposed to be as compatible with Hunter's Mark, if I understand it correctly:

"With Hunter's Mark, Hijorn deals d8+d6+3 points of damage on a longbow hit, averaging 11 points of damage. However, the bonus damage from Hunter's Mark does not apply to a secondary target, so her base damage is 8.5 instead."

Or is that nonsense because the quotation is from a post from 2014 (TT): https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?377065-Colossus-Slayer-vs-Horde-Breaker-Reference-Table

For the more experienced among you who have already played it: After killing a target with an active Hunter's Mark within the 5 meter range, can I reapply the Hunter's Mark to the next target available through Horde Breaker?

Last edited by Lotus Noctus; 14/03/23 07:23 PM.
Joined: Dec 2022
P
member
Offline
member
P
Joined: Dec 2022
Colossus slayer IMO is simply the best option for any ranger because of its versatility of use. This might be different on release, but currently in EA there are only a few fights where enemies will be gathered in a way horde breaker will be useful. Meanwhile colossus slayer works on anything everywhere not at full health. Similarly Giant killer is not great simply because there aren't many large enemies.
As for hunter's mark I'm not sure you can reapply it to the second horde breaker target, but it costs a BA so if you certainly wouldn't be able to reapply in the same turn you apply it (unless below 50% and wearing helmet of grit).

Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
Originally Posted by Princeps08
As for hunter's mark I'm not sure you can reapply it to the second horde breaker target, but it costs a BA so if you certainly wouldn't be able to reapply in the same turn you apply it (unless below 50% and wearing helmet of grit).

I see, this means that the Hunter's Mark must ideally be cast on the first turn. On the second turn, the target with the Hunter's Mark must be near another potential opponent who will get the Hunter's Mark off if I take out the first target.... Hmm, that is indeed a few too many conditions that need to be met. I think you are right. Colossus Slayer is better because at least you have the BA free, which is more versatile.

Joined: Dec 2022
P
member
Offline
member
P
Joined: Dec 2022
Originally Posted by Lotus Noctus
I see, this means that the Hunter's Mark must ideally be cast on the first turn. On the second turn, the target with the Hunter's Mark must be near another potential opponent who will get the Hunter's Mark off if I take out the first target.... Hmm, that is indeed a few too many conditions that need to be met. I think you are right. Colossus Slayer is better because at least you have the BA free, which is more versatile.

Yeah, also if you are in a single target or boss situation you will still have colossus slayer once per round assuming you can hit something missing health. We'll have to see what release looks like to see if options beyond colossus slayer become more generally viable.

Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
You're neglecting the important detail in that Colossus-Slayer is the most abjectly boring option to pick from the available options. Sorry... it really is though.

In tabletop, I've found that the instances where you're taking your turn and you wish to ask "has that one been hurt yet", and the answer is no, comes up more frequently than individual impressions feel like, and conversely, the situations where you can get that extra free shot in because there are at least two enemies close to each other, happens fairly regularly - on account of melee creatures tending to try to attack the same targets, if nothing else.

Breaker is an entire extra shot, while Slayer is one extra fixed damage die on an existing shot; if you're getting them both every round, then your damage averages will be higher with horde-breaker overall. As long as one of your shots is against your marked target, hunter's mark is mostly irrelevant to the calculations, and no part of either feature has any bonus action requirements.

In a single target, boss-oriented situation, Slayer will naturally win out - if you are shooting boss and only the boss... but in major boss encounters, if you are the ranged damage-dealer, then there's a very high probability that add control is going to be your duty if and when minions show up - and if you're having to knock down minions before they can get to your casters or cause trouble, then they're mostly not going to be hurt when you first shoot them, so even in boss fights, as long as it's not a single thing with no support, Breaker still keeps up. If it is a single thing with no support, Slayer is definitely the way to go.

Let's suppose you're level 5, and run a few situations:

A group of small and medium size critters are assailing the group in a large space, but converging on your party - individually they aren't very tough, but there's a lot of them.

Breaker: marks the largest, toughest looking thing, and takes a shot at it (1d8 + 1d6 + 4); it dies - this is not a boss encounter. Is there a creature next to this one - let's suppose 'No'. Breaker looks around and takes their second shot against a minion that does have another minion next to it (1d8 + 4) x 2 - they kill 2 more critters. (Average turn damage: 29, 3 creature kills)

Slayer: marks the largest, toughest-looking thing and takes a shot at it (1d8 + 1d6 + 4); is the target hurt? Not when you shot, no bonus damage. It dies anyway, this is not a boss encounter. Slayers takes their second shot against another creature (1d8 + 4), and kills it too. (Average turn damage: 16.5, 2 creature kills)

This encounter continues with Breaker eliminating one additional monster on average per turn, until the encounter ends. Even if they don't always get their benefit, Breaker is still the more flexible and more effective option here.

==

Suppose we add a boss creature to this though:

Breaker: marks the largest, toughest looking thing, and takes a shot at it (1d8 + 1d6 + 4); it's tougher than the others. Is there a creature next to this one - let's suppose 'No'. Breaker looks around and takes their second shot against a minion that does have another minion next to it (1d8 + 4) x 2 - they kill 2 more critters. (Average turn damage: 29, 2 creature kills, minor boss damage)

Slayer: marks the largest, toughest-looking thing and takes a shot at it (1d8 + 1d6 + 4); is the target hurt? Not when you shot, no bonus damage. Slayers takes their second shot against the boss creature (2d8 +1d6 + 4). (Average turn damage: 28.5, no add kills, but moderate boss damage)

Breaker still averaged higher overall damage and add cleanup. One could argue that the boss will drop sooner with Slayer, but if Slayer isn't controlling the minions, someone else has to instead, or they'll cause damage and interruption on the party.

Second turn:

Breaker: checks to see if there is a minion close to the boss - let's assume 'yes' this time, since we said 'no' last turn; Breaker can take both shots at the boss, and take their free shot at that minion: (2d8 +2d6 +8) + (1d8 +4) (Average turn damage: 32.5, 1 creature kills, moderate boss damage)

Slayer: Being generous and assuming the minions haven't caused any major issues or gotten close enough to make Slayer's shots difficult, they can take both shots at the boss (3d8 + 2d6 + 8) (Average turn damage: 28.5, no add kills, moderate boss damage).

Slayer still falls behind on average damage. All of Slayer's is on the boss target, while a portion (under 1/3) of Breaker's was on a minion.

Third turn:

(!) Let's suppose that Breaker's better add clean-up has removed the minions and provides no opportunity for their extra shot this round.
(!) Let's suppose that Slayer's extra boss damage will cause it to die on the first attack, but there are still minions.

Breaker: Only has the boss left, and takes both shots on it, but cannot gain their extra shot: (2d8 +2d6 +8) (Average damage: 24, boss dies, Encounter is complete!)

Slayer: Takes their first shot on the boss (2d8 +1d6 + 4), and it does. If we permit Slayer to re-mark between attacks (Formally, you should not be able to use a bonus action between the attacks of your extra attack, but *Most* DMs do permit this), they can then shoot one minion, (1d8 + 1d6 + 4) (Average Damage: 28.5, boss kill, 1 minion kill, Encounter is Not complete - 2 minions remain!)

Breaker: (Average Damage for encounter, 3 turns: 85.5, 3 minion kills, 1 boss kill. (!) Breaker's averages assume they did NOT get their perk on the third turn.
Slayer: (Average Damage for encounter, 3 turns: 85.5, 1 minion kill, 1 boss kill, Encounter incomplete - minions remain. (!) Slayer did the same damage every turn, and their average assumes they Did get their bonus every turn.

==

Lastly, let's assume the party is attacked by a single powerful entity, with no support:

Breaker: Marks the boss and takes 2 shots: (2d8 + 2d6 + 8) (Average Damage: 24)
Slayer: Marks the boss and takes 2 shots: (3d8 + 2d6 + 8) (Average Damage: 29.5)

Slayer doesn't get their bonus on the first shot, but they get it on the second shot of that same first turn, so they do get it every round. In this scenario, nothing changes, all numbers are consistent and continue, and Slayer averages more damage to the boss target by a few points (4.5, average of 1d8) each round. Slayer comes out on top in situations where they Always get their benefit and Breaker Never gets their... this should not surprise anyone. Conversely, Slayer remains the better and more interesting choice in situations where both get their perks consistently, and even in cases where slayer always gets theirs, and Breaker only gets theirs some of the time. If slayer focuses on getting the most damage they can every round, they'll also end up neglecting other elements of more complex fights, and leave those tasks to others and potentially drawing out a fight that they sought to speed up.

Joined: Dec 2022
P
member
Offline
member
P
Joined: Dec 2022
Originally Posted by Niara
You're neglecting the important detail in that Colossus-Slayer is the most abjectly boring option to pick from the available options. Sorry... it really is though.

In tabletop, I've found that the instances where you're taking your turn and you wish to ask "has that one been hurt yet", and the answer is no, comes up more frequently than individual impressions feel like, and conversely, the situations where you can get that extra free shot in because there are at least two enemies close to each other, happens fairly regularly - on account of melee creatures tending to try to attack the same targets, if nothing else.


This isn't table top though. For most of the encounters in EA and because of how enemies seem to behave colossus slayer is simply better. Now whether this will be true on release is certainly a contention, but until then colossus slayer is the better pick.

Joined: Jul 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2017
Both are really bad compared to the options and damage of the Beastmaster at lvl 5, it's quite sad. Hunter is the weakest option in the whole game from all classes and subclasses I tried (Fighter, Cleric, Barbarian, Warlock, Sorcerer, Wizard, Rogue, Ranger)

That set apart, Horde Breaker is better in theory and Colossus Slayer is better in the current game. As much as I admire Niara for her big knowledge and fantastic ability to explain things, I cannot transfer the comparison in the last post to the (current) game. At level 5, what even minor creature you face as enemy dies after 12 or 18 damage (and that's max damage of the rolls)? Ranger damage is quite low and the Horde Breaker Hunter usually does not kill in one turn. That would not matter much if you could use the feature quite often, but you cannot. The range of Horde Breaker is so low that even in big fights with lots of enemies only seldomly it is usuable because the enemies simply aren't close enough together.

Colossus Slayer is boring but at least you can use it almost every shot (although I read that it proccs only one time a turn, is that new?). As many non-boss creatures need several turns to be killed, it is not only a feature against bosses but utilized in almost all instances. If you can stand the annoying presence of a flying minion (I'm quite irritated by the raven, especially the big one, which is the best pet for a Dex based Ranger and will not play Ranger for this reason), take the feat at character creation to summon an animal friend without a spell slot, then use the little raven. It is highly mobile and it's 1 damage can make Colossus Slayer possible in many cases.


BTW in my opinion Larian has to do something to make the Hunter subclass better. It has no utility, in stark contrast to the (Larian-made) Beastmaster, it only can do damage, and in that it is worse than the Beastmaster.

Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
I won't object or contest that in present game BG3, a combination of slightly inflated values and inflated mobility for creatures, coupled with crippled ranges, means that things don't stack up like they should... but I stand by my statement that Colossus Slayer is just so utterly Boring that it loses out as a choice for me every time ^.^

Joined: Jul 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2017
I concede that Horde Breaker is much more interesting. But also disappointing. grin

I'm not a DnD player, I only read about how weak the Beastmaster is in TT. In BG3 it is one of the strongest subclasses. I don't mind that. But considering what Larian did to the Beastmaster, I don't understand why poor Hunter's choice Horde Breaker has to have such a small radius of effect in BG3. I like the concept of the Ranger and I would like to play wood elf, a fitting race, but looking at the weak Hunter and the annoying animal companions (why is the raven the size of a little plane, or the boar like an elephant?) of the Beastmaster, the class is off the table for me. It can be fun to play weaker chars but I usually achieve this by other means (no gadgets for example), not by having a weak (sub)class per se.

Maybe (just maybe) I would play Hunter Ranger if you could choose two of the Hunter feats and Horde Breaker would get more radius or a different mechanic.

BTW perhaps Larian thinks this way: the weakest subclass and the strongest subclass of all in the end give a balanced result, so the Ranger is fine. well

Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
Thanks so far for your insights. I have to clarify though that at the moment I'm not interested in other Ranger subclasses, because then I would tend to a future Gloom Stalker dip and the question of a Hunter or Beastmaster would not arise for me. I'm really interested in figuring out what will fit my playstyle better between a Colossus Slayer & Horde Breaker Hunter. You're probably missing some info on that, which I'll add now:

My current party has a Thief, Valour Bard, Battle Master and Berserker. I will replace the Berserker by a Hunter for an second playthrough later on.

My desired party would be as follows:

1. Thief (Level X) / Saboteur or Grenadier (Level X) --> Dual Wield Hand Crossbow Gunner in synergy with first strike openers via Smoke Powder Bombs etc. pp.
2. Bard of Whispers (Level 3 dip) / Elemental Monk (Level X) / Storm Sorcerer (Level X) - Jack of all Trades --> caster / support
3. Battle Master (Level 5) / Battle Smith (Level 7) -->Crossbow Sharpshooter
4. Bloodhunter (Level 2 dip) / Hunter (Level X)--> Longbow Bounty Hunter for flavor
(5. Warlock (Level 2 dip) / Necromancer (Level X) --> Eldritch Blaster)


My Bounty Hunter will be a Zariel-Tiefling just for flavor. I will stay true to my playstyle from the first two games and play a ranged combat party that can tank or switch to melee combat if necessary. The main strategy is to mow down everything beforehand with ranged anyway. Hopefully when the party size gets increased I can play an additional Necro and also summon Skeletons to distract the enemies and keep them at a distance. I'm not sure about playing with the Steel Defender. It depends. If they create really nice Steel Defender pets (I like Golems), I might not use an extra Necro at all.... Otherwise, I'm more interested in the Battlesmith class itself than, what I've seen / read so far, ugly Steel Defenders... I assassinate most melee enemies with my Rogue or just by, I'll call it "diagonal shooting". This means that you normally have a disadvantage in ranged attacks on melee enemies that are directly in front of you. So I don't shoot the enemies directly in front of me, I shoot the ones that are near a party member further away, and my party members in turn shoot the ones that may be surrounding me to get around this malus. I haven't even really had to use crowd control like Web or Spike Growth yet. I have also hardly used Void Bulbs so far. I admit that in my recently completed first playthrough, there were really few situations for the Horde Breaker. Even if Colossus Slayer is boring, it will be (more) effective. The decision still remains a tough one.

Last edited by Lotus Noctus; 16/03/23 04:19 PM.
Joined: Mar 2023
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2023
It all depends on how you want to play, that's the deal!

This whole idea of "better or worse" doesn't exist in my opinion when it comes to such a rich RPG.

In my case, I prefer Horde Breaker because I always have a barbarian in the party engaging with two or three creatures...

Now, without Leroy Jenkins in the party, you can invest in extra damage every turn.

Understand how you want to play, and how the group will have the most fun, that's the key!

Joined: Jul 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2017
Your party to me seems to be a rather weak one, but that may be personal taste, and connected to my denial to use any gadget (like bombs) instead of skills and because of my lacking knowledge of the Bard class. I would surely not compose my party so single target physical damage centric. But as the combat in the game is not very difficult, every party composition should work.

If you plan to be mostly ranged, replacing the Barbarian by a ranged class makes sense. You lose however at least 2/3 of the damage you had if you take a Hunter Ranger. That could change if the Sharpshooter feat is in the release, for which I hope. Compared to that, the decision between Colossus Slayer and Horde Breaker is not that important. I would choose Colossus Slayer because it is just reliable damage and helps against boss creatures and normal creatures.

Do you play with Karmic Dice enabled or disabled? If disabled, how do you get the Advantage you then need to be effective in combat? Can the Bard give Advantage to the Fighter and Ranger who are lacking here?

Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
Then I have very good news for you: "Gadgets" like the Smoke Powder Bomb, however, I have used in battles rather rarely. The first ones you get at the Toll House, which makes the fight against the Gnolls to save the Zhents much easier, especially if you choose the approach via the rear tunnel access to have the cutscene with Rugan. Otherwise, the Zhents usually did not survive the Gnoll attack. Others play more excessively with the "Fireball" spell. So I'm rather relaxed about gadgets like bombs and my use of them so far.

With my Valour Bard, I used Bardic Inspiration (I just forgot or drank a Healing Potion instead) even less, almost never in combat, and not even her own offensive or control spells. Both Bardic Inspiration and Karmic Dice (unless I forgot to disable it) I even used rarely, that is, on very difficult dialogue rolls. But sometimes Guidance was removed, sometimes Guidance and Bardic Inspiration were possible together. I was more supporting / healing and spell casting from scrolls (Guiding Bolt, Ray of Frost, Magic Missile). Otherwise, my Bard had the function to interrogate the dead with the "Disguise Self" and th "Speak with Dead" combo. For this I later provided the Necro, in case the party size is increased.

In extremely rare fights where a tank was needed, like with the Lava Elemental and Grym, I then buffed my Battle Master with defensive spells and it was sufficient.

The most difficult fight was with Auntie Ethel (at Level 4), but I was very lucky.

Overall, I like my little DnD SWAT unit so far. xDD

Yes I haven't tested the Ranger yet and right now the air is out for a second run too, just for the Hunter. All the proofreading and inconsistencies etc. pp. have worn me out.

Last edited by Lotus Noctus; 17/03/23 06:24 AM.
Joined: Jul 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2017
I always do the Gnolls before the Tollhouse, at the end of lvl 3. Tollhouse for me is lvl 4. The Gnolls are relatively easy if you position your ranged on the rock left on the way to the Gnolls and start from stealth. BTW you can get a powder bomb already in the Blighted Village, under some circumstances.

Has the Bard Healing Word or similar and possibilities to give advantage? It's a buffing class, isn't it? Healing Word for me is the best spell around. In several fights chars can get downed if you are unlucky with initiative ot hit chances, I would not like to be without Healing Word then. I'm so little interested in the Bard class that I did not even read about it, so I know nothing.

Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
Ofc as well as Cure Wounds, but the Gnolls do too much damage (AoE damage by exploding alchemist fires + ranged Multiattack + Flint melee onehits, so you can hardly keep the Zhents alive (if you take this approach)... They are also mostly onehit victims for the Flint...
https://forums.larian.com/ubbthread...s=Rugan+buggy&Search=true#Post842384

From outside I find the fight against the Gnolls also easy-peasy, especially since you can then also turn the Flint against them. But as I said I choose the approach without the Flint cutscene, but deliberately the one with the Zhents, if you use the other approach. You don't get both cutscenes. wink

It took me severeal trys and the only chance so far was a quick and massivly AoE damage output to the Gnolls and I managed to block and distract them by a summoned Flaming Sphere via scroll. Praise to the Smoke Powder Bomb and the scroll.

Last edited by Lotus Noctus; 17/03/23 02:01 PM.
Joined: Jul 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2017
That is strange. I always did and do the Gnolls in the order bridge, then hill, then cave, on the direct way from the hill to the cave (a very short distance) where you can see the bloody hand on the rock on the left side. And never ever were the Zhents dead before I killed the Gnolls. The two Zhents in the cave always remained alive, in more than a dozen runs.

Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Apr 2022
Location: Germany
All is well. I have never doubted that. I merely tried to explain to you that it is the other way around if you use the way via the rear cave entrance and try to defend the Zhents from the inside. Simple try that approach next time and you'll know what I mean. ;-)

I choose the way through the back entrance because I want the cutscene with the Zhents and not with the Flint. RP-wise, I join the Zhentarim and accordingly want all possible dialogues and cutscenes with the individual Zhents. But still, this approach should not be made disproportionately more difficult than the other. It is quite noticeable that the predominant aggro of the Gnolls in the outside fight is us and in the inside fight it is the Zhents.

Last edited by Lotus Noctus; 20/03/23 11:12 AM.
Joined: Jul 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2017
Ok, I see. I never tried the back alley indeed. It shouldn't be more difficult that way, I concur. Perhaps Larian wants to give a benefit to those who use proven tactics and attack the Gnolls from the rear (even if only by chance)? grin


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5