Archery Build Question


Advice

1 to 50 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I've always read that Zen Archers are amazing archers, but I was wondering if they are the "end-all-be-all" of archery? I've also seen mention that Inquisitors can make good archers, but what about just a Dex/Str-based Fighter or Ranger? Can they still keep up or are they just too far outclassed by Monks and Inquisitors?


Archery is very powerful, a Zen archer, sohei, inquisitor, fighter, ranger or urban barbarian can all make an exceptional archer. They all do it a little different though and there are a ton of feats for the style.


Ok, that pretty much answers my question. Any time I see someone talk about archery, it's almost always a Zen Archer and maybe someone else chiming in that Inquisitors work too.

I almost never see anyone talk about Ranger or Fighter archers.

I had a crazy idea pop into my head yesterday for a Robin Hood build, based on the Disneys Robin Hood, so I'm thinking Kitsune Fighter, maybe with the Archer archetype. Will have to look through the handbooks on here and see what else I need to look into.


I've also seen a good case for a cleric archer. A bit weaker on the archery side, but you'll have 9th level spells to console you.

Bards aren't bad with it either, but they split their archery with buffing the party (and themselves).


Oh, I forgot about the Paladin archetype. It makes a fantastic 2 level dip, though I wouldn't go much farther with it.

RaizielDragon wrote:
I almost never see anyone talk about Ranger or Fighter archers.

Splutter Cough Splutter

I have played with a vanilla ranger archer who used a +2 Holy bow (Holy is the key part of that). He did absolutely monstrous amounts of damage. Believe me, there's nothing wrong with Rangers as an archer class.

Nothing wrong with Fighters, either. The "power path" for a fighter is actually the Weapon Master archetype. That adds more to damage. The archer archetype is more toned down, but has a couple fancy tricks to keep things interesting.


With it being a high-Dex build, and Armor Training being most advantageous for high-Dex characters, I would think keeping Armor Training would be fairly important. I looked at Archer and Weapon Master, and their main advantage over base Fighter seems to be that they effectively get Weapon Training a little early, and therefore can fit in an extra +1/+1 att/dmg near the end of their career. After looking over Archer, the only thing I really wanted from it was the "doesn't provoke when using a bow", and I'm fairly confident (but not 100% sure) there is a feat for that.

As for the Weapon Master, I got a similar feeling there as well. You get the eventual +1/+1 over a base Fighter, some nice additions to confirming crits, etc., but I think I would take the Armor Training over that. Being able to still use your full Dex mod in Mithral Plate Mail seems pretty awesome.

Sczarni

The truth is, if this is a game capped at 12 levels, like Society play, you can't do much better than a Zen Archer or a Ranger.

The reason is early access to Improved Precise Shot (level 6).

When played by the rules Archery is a combat style rife with penalties. The only way to reliably mitigate many of those penalties is through movement or feats. Movement precludes full-attacks; which is what makes Archery so powerful.

I have no doubt that at higher levels the Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, and Barbarian will pull away from the Zen Archer in terms of damage output. But the Inquisitor can't get Improved Precise Shot until something like level 15 - which hurts. Especially if you have a party with melee comrades that like to charge the enemy, unwittingly granting them a +4 soft cover bonus to AC.


I've looked over Kitsune, Hengeyokai, and Anumus as possible races, and am not really enthralled with any of them. Any suggestions for an anthropomorphic race? Should I just suck it up and use one of the above, or is there one that I'm missing that could work?

Silver Crusade

I play an inquisitor archer in Society play. I picked up a pair of Boots of Speed for him to cover haste in case there's no arcane caster, or if he/she only memorized one. When I get Bane and judgements rolling, along with some of the longer lasting self-buff spells like heroism, I find myself making four attacks per round, landing all four of them, and doing an average of about 30 damage per hit with him.

Sczarni

lol im currently trying to build a Kitsune Zen archer for PFS my self since kitsunes are becoming playable after the 15th hehe will be totally fun lol


I've always gotten the impression that straight Fighter is a better archer than an Archer fighter. Sort of depends on if you want to do anything with the combat maneuvers at range. If so, then yeah Archer archetype is probably up your alley. If not, then straight Fighter is probably better.

YMMV.


Urban/Invulnerable Rager Barbarian makes a great archer as well.


Stright fighter is actually better than the archer archetype. The only thing the archetype gains is the ability to do combat maneuvers through their bow, which while interesting, isn't worth the losses. The archer version of weapon training starts at 5th level like the normal archer, but progresses every 5 levels, instead of 4 like normal.

The ability the archer fighter gets to not provoke is like Point Blank Master, except several levels later than the normal fighter could take it with feats.

In general, there isn't much gained but the loss of additional weapon types means he can't switch hit or switch to melee if he needed/wanted to. Overall, the gain just isn't worth it.

Zen Archer and Ranger are probably the best simply because of their earlier access to a lot of the important Archery feats.

At the very end of the game, a fighter might outdamage them but he wont be able to do anythign else. The zen archer and ranger bring a lot more to the table than just damage.

The Inquisitor again delays on feats because of lower BAB.

Silver Crusade

I agree zen archer and ranger are great, mainly because of their earlier than normal access to Improved Precise Shot. I still love my inquisitor, though.


Do non-Zen's have a way to keep up with the Zen Archers number of attacks via flurry?


Also, if this isnt a PFS game, the Sylph race can get awesome flying at level 9. Being airborne makes line of sight and full attacks a lot easier. I thought up a character once using a Sylph archer wearing a leather jacket and spouting off lines from Top Gun in every fight. You need a very accepting group to go along with the concept though (Too close for blasts, switch to bows!)

As far as armor training goes, i dont see archers in melee too often so AC isnt as super important. Plus high dex will help keep you on par anyways.

For ranger, i've seen a ranger with boon companion and mounted archery on a wolf do great with his 50' mounted movement and full attack.


Yes, to a point. The use of Rapid Shot and Many Shot puts them on near equal levels of number of shots.

A 12th level zen archer for instance gets 10/10/5/5/0, note he cannot use Rapid Shot or Many Shot.

A 112th level Ranger gets 12/7/2 from BAB. Rapid shot adds an extra attack at -2, and Many Shot adds an extra arrow from the first attack (which is basically like an extra attack).

The advantage the Zen-archer has is the chance to spend ki to make an extra attack. Ki is however, a limited resource. So it's not something to be relied on all the time.

We also shouldn't forget about Favored Enemy with Instant Enemy for Rangers. That can be a big to hit and damage boost. Put on a wand (which while expensive can be done), and you can basically choose any enemy you want/need to utterly decimate.

Torbyne wrote:
For ranger, i've seen a ranger with boon companion and mounted archery on a wolf do great with his 50' mounted movement and full attack.

Mounted archery is probably the best thing ever. It's tits.

Move your mounts full speed with no penalty (penalties dont' begin until double move) and still get a full attack? Yes please!

Play as a Nirmathi Regular Archetype and get yourself a flying mount and rain down hell on the enemy!


I think all those tricks would be outside the flavor of the build. Robin Hood doesn't fly, nor does he have a flying mount, and I don't think he even regularly fought from horseback; especially not the specific Robin Hood in question.

I think my worries have been assuaged though. Sounds like a Dex-based ranged Fighter should work just fine for the build.


A while back I did a level-by level breakdown of the Zen Archer vs a vanilla Fighter, counting cover penalties, single attacks, full attacks, and full attacks with ki points. The basic takeaway was that the they are about even through level 3 (<1 point per round difference). Starting at level 4, the fighter pulls ahead a little bit (<3 points per round), but the Zen archer does 1.5 times as much damage when he can use a ki point for an extra attack.

If the ZA picks up Improved Precise Shot at level 6, he pulls ahead of the fighter up through level 8. From level 9 through 12, the fighter starts doing 1.5 to 2 times as much damage as the ZA unless the ZA used a ki point, which put the ZA ahead a little bit (<2 points per round). At level 11, when the fighter picks up Improved Precise Shot, he starts doing 1.5 times the damage of even the ZA's ki point attack.

The big difference was Weapon Training. Once that kicked in at level 5, the ZA had to start spending ki points to keep up, and weapon training 2 at level 9 even made up for not having Improved Precise Shot. Picking up Gloves of Dueling would just make the difference more pronounced. So the big takeaway is...

If you want the highest DPR archer, play a fighter (but do not play an archetype that trades away weapon training).

Even after that exercise, I still play Zen Archers (specifically Qingongg/Zen Archer)--or at least through 6th level (since all their feats are so front loaded). I know they do less damage, but I find them much more fun to play. Higher saves, higher AC, feats available for other stuff, ki powers...

It all depends on what you want.


RaizielDragon wrote:

I think all those tricks would be outside the flavor of the build. Robin Hood doesn't fly, nor does he have a flying mount, and I don't think he even regularly fought from horseback; especially not the specific Robin Hood in question.

I think my worries have been assuaged though. Sounds like a Dex-based ranged Fighter should work just fine for the build.

If you are wanting to model this after Disney's Robin Hood, you are missing a golden opportunity. I would suggest going Kitsune Ranger archer with the Beastmaster Archetype. Favored enemy Animals (lion) with a bear animal companion named Little John, or a Badger named Friar Tuck, or a Lion named King Richard. With Boon companion, you could have all 3!


RaizielDragon wrote:

I think all those tricks would be outside the flavor of the build. Robin Hood doesn't fly, nor does he have a flying mount, and I don't think he even regularly fought from horseback; especially not the specific Robin Hood in question.

I think my worries have been assuaged though. Sounds like a Dex-based ranged Fighter should work just fine for the build.

Robin Hood may not have had a flying mount, of even had a animal companion, but I would say fighter doesn't fit the bill either.

Robin Hood was generally skilled, and didn't use heavy armor. Heck he didn't use any armor at all in the Disney movie.

Fighter's only have 2 skill points + int per level, which leaves a whole lot (for me) to be desired in acurately representing Robin Hood.

Honestly, except for the restriciton of law, the zen-archer is probably the best fit for robin hood there is in terms of skilled, excellent archer, unarmored combatant. If he could be chaotic good he'd be perfect. Sure, the fighter will do more damage than him, but DPR isn't the only facet of a character.

Scarab Sages

I recently discovered a Trait for Erastil worshipers that makes up for the lack of early access to improved precise shot for non Rangers / Zen Archers

Quote:

Deadeye Bowman

Source Inner Sea Gods pg. 219 (Amazon)
Category Religion
Requirement(s) Erastil
When you are using a longbow, if only a single creature is providing soft cover to your target, your target does not receive the +4 bonus to AC.


True, he wasn't armored, and it would be nice to reflect everything he could do, but I think being a Kitsune and being a BA archer will be enough to get the point of the character across. Everything else can just be flavor and personality. I might not even end up with heavy armor. Mithral breastplate could be flavored as just clothing since it is as light as light armor.

When you say he was skilled, what skills would you be referencing?

I could potentially be persuaded for him to be a Ranger instead, but I have no interest in spellcasting, so I would likely use the Spell-Less Ranger. I also dislike how situational Favored Enemy and Terrain are, so would want an archetype to swap them for something like a flat bonus like the Fighter gets. Plus, as a Fighter, I can do Weapon Training 2 for Light Blades, snag Weapon Finesse, and now Im not useless without a bow. Robin could sword fight too; just not as well as he could shoot


RaizielDragon wrote:
When you say he was skilled, what skills would you be referencing?

From various depictions, Robin Hood could sneak, he could track, he knew his way around the woods, he could ride, climb, swing on a rope through the trees - so you've got Stealth, Survival, Knowledge (nature), Ride, Climb, Acrobatics - except for the last one, sounds very Ranger-ish to me!

I have a Spell-Less Ranger who just hit 6th level and (though he's more of a melee shredder than a Robin Hood type) he's a lot of fun. I think that would be a great approach for a Robin Hood character, as the Ranger Talents allow some cool tricks, and Robin was full of those. And your ranger will still be able to hold his own toe-to-toe.


Well, you can always choose to be a freebooter ranger which discards Favored Enemy for Free Booter's Bane, which doesn't give as big a bonus, but can be used on any enemy you come across. It also gets rid of the animal companion for a semi-useful hunter bond with your team mates. You can get rid of spells with the Trapper or Skirmisher archetypes, though you should check if it stacks with Freebooter.

Actually since Robin Hood didn't use traps, I think a Freebooter Skirmisher Ranger sounds right up your alley. Mind you to check that they don't alter or replace the same things and you should be alright.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@Raziel: sounds like you have narrowed it down to a Fighter which is perfectly fine.
Fighter, no-archetype, just vanilla with feat focusing on ranged combat is absolutely superb.
You don't have the burst damage abilities (smite, favored enemy/ki powers) but as a fighter you always have what you've got.

The only reason I'd consider Zen/Ranger/Paladin if you were looking for things outside of combat. Then again you can select the Lorewarden archetype for fighter if you want to have more out of combat versatility.

I feel that frankly the PBS->PS->RS->DA with WF and WS squeezed is a top performer including PFS play.


I would find a place for Clutsered Shots in the build too, makes DR kind of a joke.


Claxon wrote:

Stright fighter is actually better than the archer archetype. The only thing the archetype gains is the ability to do combat maneuvers through their bow, which while interesting, isn't worth the losses. The archer version of weapon training starts at 5th level like the normal archer, but progresses every 5 levels, instead of 4 like normal.

The ability the archer fighter gets to not provoke is like Point Blank Master, except several levels later than the normal fighter could take it with feats.

In general, there isn't much gained but the loss of additional weapon types means he can't switch hit or switch to melee if he needed/wanted to. Overall, the gain just isn't worth it.

Also, don't forget that Gloves of Dueling don't mesh with the Archer's version of Weapon Training because of this FAQ.

I honestly think that was an very poorly decided FAQ. Hate it. Even the FAQs I may not really agree with, I generally don't have a problem with. But this one I honestly think is pretty terrible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:

Well, you can always choose to be a freebooter ranger which discards Favored Enemy for Free Booter's Bane, which doesn't give as big a bonus, but can be used on any enemy you come across. It also gets rid of the animal companion for a semi-useful hunter bond with your team mates. You can get rid of spells with the Trapper or Skirmisher archetypes, though you should check if it stacks with Freebooter.

Actually since Robin Hood didn't use traps, I think a Freebooter Skirmisher Ranger sounds right up your alley. Mind you to check that they don't alter or replace the same things and you should be alright.

Forgot about Skirmisher. I was going to suggest Trapper when he wanted to dump spells, but Skirmisher (and possibly mixed with Free Booter if there's no desire for an AC) really does fit the flavor quite well.

Nature oriented. Skills. Effects that benefit ranged fighting. Situational bonuses. Team oriented. Actually sounds like a pretty fun build.


Check out treantmonk's guide to rangers if you are seriously considering a ranger. It is very helpful, especially his last build: the switch-hitting ranger. I am currently playing one and quite enjoying it.

The switch-hitter will never be as good as a focused archer at archery or as good at whacking things as a melee focused build but he is quite capable at both, very nearly as good as either of the focused builds without sucking hard at whatever their focus is not. Then you get to add in all the rest of the ranger goodies like decent skills, hunter's bond and the rest of the class abilities that a fighter doesn't get. Even if you trade away your pet and spell casting with archetypes, you're still head and shoulders above a straight fighter IMHO.


I would think Slayer would jump up to the top of some list. Full BAB, Archery Combat Style + Combat Trick Slayer talents will give him the feats needed. Studied Target will nearly cover any attack bonus lost to Deadly Aim as well as adding even more static damage on every arrow. Sneak Attack really doesn't come into play that often, but is pure bonus when it does.


I've statted that build out before. It's feat starved, but if a slayer wins initiative in close combat then someone is going to die...


This has been in interesting thread. An archer was suggested to me in one of my own threads. Based on what I'm reading here (and elsewhere), I'm pretty split between a ranger archer and a bard archer. What I'm wondering is:

1) If playing by PFS rules, how would you compare the two?
2) Being that Dex and Cha are prime for the bard, would that make a halfling the top choice?
3) What other suggestions would you have in building either if you can only use the core book (no APG or any of that)?

I'd appreciate the insight. Thanks.


My initial thought on the two is that the Ranger will likely have a strong lead in damage output while the bard will have far greater out of combat versatility and party aiding buffs in combat.


I'm researching the ranger archer now, and I get the impression that a fighter would make a better archer than the ranger. I figure the fighter would be scooping up feats much faster than the ranger. The ranger gets five feats over 20 levels. The fighter has that by level 8. Plus, the fighter has Weapon training which even though it's half of a ranger's favored enemy, it applies to everything. On top of that, with armor training, the fighter will have better AC. Does the ranger have any archery advantage over the fighter?


Early access to some of the better archery feats, an animal companion, spells, more skills. That's just off the top of my head, there are better number crunchers here who can do a more detailed break down.

Scarab Sages

Kneller wrote:
Does the ranger have any archery advantage over the fighter?

The Ranger gets Improved Precise Strike at 6, the Fighter must wait until 11. The Ranger can have its Favored Enemy bonuses against anything with the instant enemy spell. Spells in general give the ranger more narrative power than the fighter, not to mention 6 skills per level.

If you are playing PFS, the Ranger is far better. If you are playing a home game/higher level, the fighter can catch up.


I never know what campaign I'm going to use a character for, but we typically play pre-mades, so it would likely be one of the pre-made adventure paths put out by Paizo.

As for Instant Enemy, and spells in general, since I would be planning to go Spell-less, would that tip the scales in favor of the Fighter?

I'm thinking Guide as an archetype to go on top of the "Spell-less Ranger" by Kobold Press. I like the looks of it more than Trapper or Skirmisher. There's also the option of the Weapon Champion archetype from Super Genius Games.


Kneller wrote:
I'm researching the ranger archer now, and I get the impression that a fighter would make a better archer than the ranger. I figure the fighter would be scooping up feats much faster than the ranger. The ranger gets five feats over 20 levels. The fighter has that by level 8. Plus, the fighter has Weapon training which even though it's half of a ranger's favored enemy, it applies to everything. On top of that, with armor training, the fighter will have better AC. Does the ranger have any archery advantage over the fighter?

Well, firstly your summation of the situation isn't correct. And this is probably leading you to an unfounded impression.

The ranger doesn't get only 5 feats over 20 levels. Remember, everyone gets a feat at every odd level. So, over 20 levels everyone gets at least 10 feats. The fighter gets a feat at every even level as well. So they get 20 feats in total. The ranger gets 10 feats from levels, and 5 combat style feats (which allow him to ignore prereqs) for a total of 15 feats. He also gets endurance which is technically also a feat, but really isn't that great so I'm not going to count it.

The most important thing here is that the ranger gets to ignore a lot of prereqs that fighters can't. And while the fighter does get a flat bonus that scales, it's slow to come online and with access to instant enemy a Ranger can pump a single Favored Enemy category cast Instant Enemey to really crank out a ton of damage against any target he really wants to. On average, the fighters DPR will be better as he wont need to do that. But DPR is the only advantage a fighter will really have. He has no skills (virtually speaking), no animal companion, no spells. All these things add a lot of versatility and power that can't be simply captured by DPR numbers.

Consider that a ranger can use his animal companion as a mount, and be a mobile death turret. He can move every single turn, and still get a full attack. The fighter wishes he could do that. If the fighter moves he gets one attack. And every time he does his damage output for the fight tanks compares to the ranger who never has to give up an action.

As ranged combatants AC rarely comes into play. I wont say never, but much more rarely than front line characters. The fighter will have a higher AC, but it wont be that big of a deal.


Kneller wrote:
Based on what I'm reading here (and elsewhere), I'm pretty split between a ranger archer and a bard archer.

For PFS, I'd actually recommend the Bard Archer. Here's why:

I've seen a dedicated archer ranger in PFS play. Claxon nails it on the head when he calls it "a mobile turret of death." The truth is that a dedicated archer ranger is often TOO strong of a build for PFS. It's great if you're playing with a group who deliberately minmax their characters to take on the toughest challenges and play everything on hard mode... but otherwise the enemies die too quickly. It becomes very easy to hog the spotlight, and can reduce fun at the table.

A bard isn't going to be the most optimal archer, but in this case that's actually a good thing. A bard will still do enough damage to solidly support the party, and bards have other tricks they can delve into as well. Claxon's comparison of the Ranger vs Fighter (in terms of versatility) was spot on. A bard includes all of that and adds even more to it. They're a great base to build from for face skills, and PFS requires a lot of face skills. With spells and bard song, you'll be a great buffer without hardly trying. Purchase a few wands, and you'll be able to act as a stand-in for the party caster or healer. You actually have slightly more spells than a Ranger, just as many skills, and lot more out-of-battle flexibility. In a homegame, where you know your party and different characters can cover for each other, specialists are ideal. In PFS, it helps to have a character who is much more a generalist. Rangers are certainly better than Fighters in that respect, but Bards are even better.

Plus, archer bards are a lot more novel than ranger bards. ;)

Kneller wrote:
2) Being that Dex and Cha are prime for the bard, would that make a halfling the top choice?

Halflings are actually not ideal for archer builds. You want to have high dexterity to hit stuff, but you also want to have a good amount of strength (around 14, or even 16 if you don't need mental stats) to add to the damage of each arrow. Archers need to use composite bows with strength enhancements, because the 1d6 or 1d8 from a short/long bow doesn't cut it on its own.

You can still have a halfling build, but between the strength loss and size different (a 1d8 longbow becomes 1d6 for small sized creatures) it won't be optimal. It'll still get by just fine in PFS, and it will still be a solid support to the party... it's really a judgement call on how strong you want to be. If you're really serious about comparing the difference of a halfling versus non-halfling archer, build a couple of sample builds at level 7 and compare the damage output. Then take those numbers to a PFS GM near you and ask if the halfling numbers would still be solid against the type of enemies you'll find in 5-9 and 7-11 tier scenarios.

Kneller wrote:
3) What other suggestions would you have in building either if you can only use the core book (no APG or any of that)?

To build a solid archer, you really need a core set of feats. Once you have those feats, everything else is gravy. There are some very nice to have feats aside from the 'essential line,' but they're optional.

Essentials: (pretty much in the order you need to take them)
Point Blank Shot - required for the rest
Precise Shot
Rapid Shot - not used for Zen Archers
Deadly Aim
MultiShot - not used for Zen Archers

Until you get up to Deadly Aim and MultiShot (somewhere around level 5 and 6) the build will feel underepowered. It solidly comes into its own around levels 4-6 (depending on what class you're playing and the feat progression).

Very Nice To Have:
Weapon Focus
Weapon Specialization - Fighters
Point Blank Master - Zen Archers, Rangers, (later on) Fighters
Improved Precise Shot - Zen Archers, Rangers, (later on) Fighters
Clustered Shot
Snapshot, Improved Snapshot, & Combat Reflexes - Fighters, others if you can find the room

Of those feats, I'm not sure which ones are in the Core Rule Book. I'm pretty sure all of the 'essentials' are in the CRB though.


I'm convinced Ranger is the best option here. Fighter gets a few more points of bonus to damage, a couple extra feats, a few extra points of AC, some DR, and an increase in crit multiplier by 1, all over the course of the 20 levels, as compared to the Ranger.

The Ranger gets extra skill points, more skills to choose from, and a whole host of class features that, while not quite keeping up with the DPR of the Fighter, still make for a more versatile and flavorful character.

The Ranger will also be better at Stealth than the Fighter, and being able to Stealth pretty much anywhere, any time (thanks to Camouflage and Hide in Plain Sight), means it will be difficult for someone to attack you in the first place. Not being attacked at all trumps being harder to hit.


For race, as I said, I was looking at Kitsune, Hengeyokai, and Anumus, and I think I decided I like Hengeyokai the most; either Cat or Hare reflavored as a Fox. I get +2 Dex (obvious benefits), +2 Int (extra skill point), Low-light vision, +2 Perception (most used skill), and then a choice of 1 from the following three options:

1) +2 Climb, +2 Stealth (Cat)
2) +10 speed (Hare)
3) +2 Stealth, +2 Survival (Natural Hunter alternate trait)

Speed doesn't seem as important with a ranged build, both of the others give +2 Stealth, so it comes down to +2 Climb or +2 Survival. Failing a Climb check seems more life threatening than failing a Survival check (oddly enough), though I could make that decision based on the campaign the build ends up getting used in.

There's also the option of just being human and flavoring it as a fox, which would still net me +2 Dex, an extra skill point, and an extra feat.

Thoughts?

Silver Crusade

Kneller wrote:

This has been in interesting thread. An archer was suggested to me in one of my own threads. Based on what I'm reading here (and elsewhere), I'm pretty split between a ranger archer and a bard archer. What I'm wondering is:

1) If playing by PFS rules, how would you compare the two?
2) Being that Dex and Cha are prime for the bard, would that make a halfling the top choice?
3) What other suggestions would you have in building either if you can only use the core book (no APG or any of that)?

I'd appreciate the insight. Thanks.

As others have said, the ranger will easily out-damage the bard, and have earlier access to feats, but the bard will have a lot more other stuff they can do besides straight damage, including buffing your allies so they do more damage. So it's a question of how you want to play it.

For an archer bard playing at low levels, human is pretty much the mandatory race for one reason: the bonus feat. Archery requires lots of feats, and bards don't get any bonus feats, so it'll take you a while to get all the necessary ones. That human bonus feat at level 1 is worth its weight in gold for an archer bard.

Getting back to the original poster, I think the kitsune ranger with an animal companion version of one of the other characters from Disney's Robin Hood would be very cool. Speaking of archer characters based on Disney movies, my first thought after seeing Brave was that Merida would make a great archer ranger in Pathfinder, with a favored enemy: bears and a bear animal companion. LOL

Comparing various archery builds, there's one option I'm surprised nobody has mentioned in this thread so far: Paladin with Oath of Vengeance. Forget the archery focused archetype for paladins - this is the one that easily wins out for an archery focused pally. It's also the best use of the Oath of Vengeance archetype.

Starting at level 4, OoV lets you trade out 2 uses of Lay on Hands for an extra Smite. Since archers are rarely on the front lines, you don't need that healing anyway, so trade them all out, and you're suddenly smiting at least 4-5 times per day at level 4, with more as you level up. The smite bonus to hit will make up for the lack of early entry to Improved Precise Shot that rangers and zen archers get, smiting overcomes all DR, thus making Clustered Shot unnecessary, and the smite bonus to damage lets every arrow keep pace with a ranger hitting their favored enemy.

As long as you're mostly facing evil enemies (the one big if in this build, but it's a safe assumption in PFS), you can pretty much smite every battle with this archetype once you hit level 4, and do a ton of damage. You can even smite against mooks and switch to smite a second target in the same battle after killing the first, because you'll have so many smites per day. I haven't done the math or anything, but I'd assume this at least comes close to, or possibly out-paces, the damage from even the best other archery builds.

Scarab Sages

Fromper wrote:
Kneller wrote:

This has been in interesting thread. An archer was suggested to me in one of my own threads. Based on what I'm reading here (and elsewhere), I'm pretty split between a ranger archer and a bard archer. What I'm wondering is:

1) If playing by PFS rules, how would you compare the two?
2) Being that Dex and Cha are prime for the bard, would that make a halfling the top choice?
3) What other suggestions would you have in building either if you can only use the core book (no APG or any of that)?

I'd appreciate the insight. Thanks.

As others have said, the ranger will easily out-damage the bard, and have earlier access to feats, but the bard will have a lot more other stuff they can do besides straight damage, including buffing your allies so they do more damage. So it's a question of how you want to play it.

For an archer bard playing at low levels, human is pretty much the mandatory race for one reason: the bonus feat. Archery requires lots of feats, and bards don't get any bonus feats, so it'll take you a while to get all the necessary ones. That human bonus feat at level 1 is worth its weight in gold for an archer bard.

Getting back to the original poster, I think the kitsune ranger with an animal companion version of one of the other characters from Disney's Robin Hood would be very cool. Speaking of archer characters based on Disney movies, my first thought after seeing Brave was that Merida would make a great archer ranger in Pathfinder, with a favored enemy: bears and a bear animal companion. LOL

Comparing various archery builds, there's one option I'm surprised nobody has mentioned in this thread so far: Paladin with Oath of Vengeance. Forget the archery focused archetype for paladins - this is the one that easily wins out for an archery focused pally. It's also the best use of the Oath of Vengeance archetype.

Starting at level 4, OoV lets you trade out 2 uses of Lay on Hands for an extra Smite. Since archers are rarely on the front lines, you don't need that...

Irorian Paladin actually works pretty well for archers as well. Archers are usually in light armor anyway, so the cha to AC helps, and the personal trial works at range and isn't alignment restricted. The ki pool still allows you to bypass DR, and the improved unarmed strike allows you to kick someone in melee if they try to rush you.


Tengu is the race I would go with here. The scene where he disguises himself as a crow to get into the archery tournament is pretty central to his identity as an archer. I would probably go with a class that has lots of skill points like Ranger, Bard or Rogue.


Gregory Connolly wrote:
Tengu is the race I would go with here. The scene where he disguises himself as a crow to get into the archery tournament is pretty central to his identity as an archer. I would probably go with a class that has lots of skill points like Ranger, Bard or Rogue.

Funny you should mention that. The Anumus race has multiple subraces, like the Hengeyokai, one of which is Avian and gives an ability called "Eagle Eyes", which gives a +1 on ranged attack rolls. Was almost tempted until I realized that the +2 Dex from Hengeyokai (which Anumus lacks) gives me the same thing, and then some.


Kind of weird how there are a number of archetypes dedicated to archery that actually aren't the most optimal way to build that class.

Liberty's Edge

I haven't seen one yet, but I can see a Warpriest making an interesting archer. With divine spells to give you bonuses, and your damage scaling up as a favored weapon eventually, it could end up being more damage output than a lot of the better known archer builds.


Mystically Inclined wrote:
Kind of weird how there are a number of archetypes dedicated to archery that actually aren't the most optimal way to build that class.

Archetypes were general meant to expand options, not to be optimal over the core class. For the most part this is the case. However, there are a few archetypes that are particularly good to the point of making the core class inferior.

Zen-Archer monk is generally superior to core monk, and is one example of this. But if you compare the number of archetypes available, to the one considered to be "better" I imagine it to be a very low ratio.

shaxberd wrote:
I haven't seen one yet, but I can see a Warpriest making an interesting archer. With divine spells to give you bonuses, and your damage scaling up as a favored weapon eventually, it could end up being more damage output than a lot of the better known archer builds.

Yes and no. The ability to swift action self buff could be good, but we haven't seen the final class abilities yet. The fact that the lost full BAB is a big hit. Not because their to hit will suffer too much, but because it means delayed entry to a lot of the important archery feats. Archery is probably the most feat dependent combat style, and being good at it requires having the feats. Zen-Archer and Rangers fall at the top of this list because they get them as bonus feats and can ignore the prereqs of them. Fighters are a solid third due to sheer number of feats and being able to out DPR the first two, but still falls in third because of delayed access and only having DPR advantage (and even then only in the long run).


Well i thought they said they can use their class level to access feats instead of BAB but they dont get any built in way to gain an extra attack like a Magus or Zen Archer so they are one behind there, the extra damage die is bumping from a D8 to a D10, about 1 point more damage, and isnt going to be seen until fairly late game, you might get lucky and have a campaign go on long enough to see 2D6 come online. Or you could use Gravity Bow and have the same 2D6 ~6-8 levels earlier.

1 to 50 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Archery Build Question All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.