Hunter's Mark: Should your Ranger take it? D&D 5e

If you like what I do and would consider supporting this channel through Patreon:

If you would like to know how I calculate damage or how baseline damage is determined, I go through it in this video:

Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
1:11 Downsides of HM
2:33 Comparing HM to CBE
3:28 Level 1
6:05 Level 3
8:52 Level 5
12:07 Comparing results
14:02 Other considerations
16:51 Conclusions

Join my discord:

Follow me on Twitter:

[angelwings]

if anything it feels like hunter's mark has been a trap for the designers. they seem to have tunnel vision for the ability which imo takes away from actually cool stuff they could give to rangers instead. like, does anyone really want the ranger's identity to revolve around "I can choose a specific enemy and do a d6 extra damage to them"?

[MegaZed]

Honestly, since the numbers did wind up being so close, the video ultimately boiled down to "...and again, this is why feats at Level 1 in 5E are powerful."

[DrStrangelove]

Just a few days ago my girlfriend was making a character for Out Of the Abyss, a drow ranger. And although I suggested Hunter's Mark, she opted for Crossbow Expert and Favored Foe. That way she could pick Goodberry and Entangle as her first 2 spells. And I was just wondering if she made the right choice, and then you made this video and did the math. Thank you for that! All things considered, I think CBE is the right choice for a Drow in the Underdark. Range won't be an issue, and it suits the flavor and the lore of the Drow

[RenoKyrie]

Hunters Mark and Eldritch Blast deffinitly should have been a Feature like Cleric and Paladin have

Imagine if Hunter's get the highest damage scaling, Monster Slayer become Party Damage Support, Fey Wanderer is Status spamming, Swarmkeeper is AOE, Gloomstalker is a Burst

[Zhon]

As someone playing a low-level ranger in one of my campaigns, I think this dramatically overestimates Favored Foe. Unless you're fighting a single legendary creature, the damage output of a XBE ranger is high enough that most enemies will just die after one or two rounds. You mentioned at the beginning that one of the downsides of Hunter's Mark is that you have to spend many turns reapplying it after your first target goes down - well, Favored Foe can't be reapplied at all. Once your initial target is dead, it's gone. Longer combats against multiple foes are therefore more likely to favor Hunter's Mark, unless you want to blow all of your Favored Foe uses in a single combat.

[CivilWarMan]

One of the big intangible unaccounted-for factors in this Hunter's Mark/Crossbow Expert comparison is that the former is weapon agnostic. When the DM starts handing out magical weapons, the Ranger that uses HM can theoretically benefit from any weapon they find. However, for the Ranger that replaces HM with CBE, many magical weapons that are not hand crossbows are trash, because the increase in damage they receive from the weapon's magical properties has to be taken into account alongside the loss of the bonus action attack. Ironically, even a lot of magical crossbows are of limited use to the Crossbow Expert Ranger, because the extra attack only applies to hand crossbows.

That, along with other feats and abilities like Polearm Master and Flurry of Blows, is actually one of the things that makes me think that the direct weaponization of bonus actions may be bad for the game's overall design. Bonus action abilities that directly deal damage often end up being either completely useless or considered near-mandatory to the point where character builds get completely warped around focusing on them to the detriment of other features that get ignored as a result, with very little middle ground between those two extremes.

[NageIfar]

Something else to consider for early level is the question of oneshotting enemies and overkilling them.
SS damage might guarantee a oneshot on a Goblin; or it might severely overkill a wounded enemy.

[BSRJR]

I don’t understand why the conversation about Hunter’s Mark often boils down to, “a better use of your bonus action”. Once you use that first round to cast it, you’re free to use your subsequent bonus actions however you want. And the extra damage still applies. Hunter’s Mark+Crossbow Expert is a good combo.

[sohkaswifteagle]

Their is one variable I didn't heard you talk about. The durability of the target.

Sure if you are fighting 5HP goblin, you need a bonus action to switch hunter mark on each attack since you will most likely kill a goblin in a single hit. making hunter mark very weak since it consume your bonus action every round.
But if you are fighting a 26 HP zombie then you are using your bonus action every 3 rounds since you need multiple attack to deal 26 damage and overkill the zombie so it do not come back with relentless feature.
And this distinction is very important. Some spell are better against horde of weak monster (AoE spells for example) while other spell (like hunter mark) is better against strong BBEG

[quintec]

Despite the assurances of backwards compatibility, I think my table is going to lean toward using only the new core books once they release.

I can't properly express how tired we are of the current lvl 1 feat experience and its impact on the game.

The new system with specific feats designed for use at lvl 1 seems way more healthy.

[boringbone]

Damage aside, the tracking component of the spell is underrated. The Ranger for the party I'm DMing saved everyone when they were fighting the BBEG Lich, by using Hunter's Mark to track their location after the Lich used Dimension Door to escape to a hidden room in the lair, to recover spell slots with lair action.

[benjamin_burke]

I’d say the biggest problem with Hunter’s Mark is that you only have one bonus action, so once you have extra attack, you might at the start of your turn move your Hunter’s Mark onto one creature, kill it with your first attack, and then, when you go to attack a second creature, you can’t move your Hunter’s Mark on the next guy.

Hunter’s Mark is also an anti-combo with Sharpshooter: taking a penalty to-hit gets worse when the attack’s base damage is higher. It’s not dramatic in this circumstance, but it becomes especially noticeable in, say, Rogues.

[leapofaith]

Two of my favorite ranger subclasses are the Drakewarden and Revised Beastmaster. (Heck, they are two of my favorite 5e subclasses period.) I end up never taking hunter's mark because regardless of the math, I'm never NOT going to want to use my cool pet to help me in battle.

[Whitecat-xxrr]

My players use HM for damage. But if an enemy tries to escape, even with teleports, fly or dimension travel, my rangers are always "hey, I had a HM on him, I'll track him!". And why not, they are given all information they need, as this use is quite narrow!

[Mubban]

I play a ranger in icewind dale with Gritty realism resting rules, so we are always really short on time and resources. For me, it has been evident that going the CBE route has been correct only because it conservs my spellslots for Absorb elements and entangle, which have both really saved the day on many occasions.

[deathtoexistance]

Another thing to note is hunters mark may often use your bonus action, but won't always use it. Could be useful for a variety of things, like homebrew bonus action potions rules, multiclass options or other feat options.
Also a crossbow expert ranger can also use hunters mark for fights vs tanky enemies you likely won't need to transfer on.
While feats aren't free, you should also note that for higher level play having a +2 ability score a level sooner means you have less effective feats later for straight damage. That means you might take crossbow expert later anyway, or might get more utility instead.
This is also all different with a different subclass. My friend is playing a beastmaster ranger and as such is using her bonus action for beast of the land attacks if she isnt using hunters mark. There is no reason to take crossbow expert for her so a longbow is better, but for other subclasses like swarmkeeper or hunter the extra damage is more likely to apply from another attack, so crossbow expert might edge hunters mark out.
Something you also don't discuss is magic items. Magic items can affect your chance to hit, benefitting hunters mark more, and or could increase damage per attack, benefitting crossbow expert more. And what of consumables? An arrow of dragon slaying might be pivotal but the attack it is made with is the one that matters, so a spell like ensnaring strike to grant you advantage to hit the one arrow could be more valuable than either of these options.
Overall just know your options and what they're good for.

[stephenburley]

Additional consideration that missed the list is Damage Break Points. The value of Sharp Shooter at low levels really sky rockets if the +10 to damage is going to cause you to more often take out an opponent on round one, even though it may not be the better average damage. Traversely, if a single hit without Sharpshooter is enough to land a kill, Crossbow Expert shoots up in value.

Like with the other Additional Considerations, this is very much "depending on how things are run at your table, and what niche you are trying to fill, either can be good". I think it's something we don't talk about enough in white room math, so I really appreciate seeing the list of additional considerations here.

[ikaros]

The way I see it, if your one and only goal is damage, which honestly it shouldnt be, but IF IT IS, then Hunters mark is a reasonably competitive option at levels 2, 3, and 4. From levels 5 to 9 you have Pass Without Trace for those sweet sweet surprise round ambushes, or summon beast when you cant arrange for that.

When you get third level spells, well theres really no competing with conjure animals, though if your table disapproves of CA theres still decent mileage to get out of summon fey.

[MatthewDragonHammer]

Glad to see that the numbers are as close as I assumed they would be. It basically boils down to “you do you, it doesn’t matter much.”

[Pharoom]

I have actually used the secondary effect of hunter's mark. Not to hunt down an enemy, but to keep track of an ally.