I am about to start an adventure with a Ranger, but everyone tells me to pick Fighter with a bow.


Advice

101 to 150 of 150 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Chris Kenney wrote:
Quick point - he specifically wants to give up the spells to get half his favored enemy bonus on all ranged attacks.

Sounds like Slayer to me.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I need to reroll Falandar as one of those.


Or keep him as a KF ranger -- best of both worlds, and then some!


Slayers have to take an action to get those bonuses, the ranger Archetype gets them all the time. plus you still get the animal companion.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Or keep him as a KF ranger -- best of both worlds, and then some!

They don't allow KF in organized play. :P


TriOmegaZero wrote:
They don't allow KF in organized play. :P

Why not organize your own guild or whatever, then? :)

Then the "they" is you.

The Exchange

Crunching numbers, just to make sure I'm not being unreasonably biased against combat familiars.

Mr Crabby, the battlecrab!:

Let's assume that the eldritch guardian started with 14 con, bought the belt of +6 to all str, dex and con. He's level 20, has tons of cash, why the hell not. Fighters con = 20. He also took toughness(representing ranger's use of boon companion feat).

Fighters hp= 10+(19×6)+20(5)+20 FCB+20 toughness=264

Mr Crabby(battle mode - medium sized)

Hp= 132
Saves= Fort +13, Ref +7, Will +6, Immune to mind affecting
AC= 25
Str 22, Dex 13, Con 12, Int 6, Wis 10, Cha 2
To hit= 2 Claws +26 (1d4+6) [grab]
CMB = +26 (+30 to grapple), CMD = 37

Mr Wolfie, Fluffy!:

The ranger has boon companion - or it wouldn't be a fair test.

Size= Large

Hp= 136
Saves = Fort +14, Ref +13, Will +6
AC= 28
Str 30, Dex 17, Con 19, Int 3, Wis 12, Cha 6
To hit = +22 Bite (1d8+15) [trip]
CMB = +24, CMD = 37

Floating ability points were assigned to 1 int, 3 str, respectively.

Calculation errors, thanks for pointing it out, fixed. Moral of story, don't mess with an Eldritch Guardian's crab.

Lower levels, the balance will be in favor of Mr Wolfie, but at higher levels, Mr Crabby wins! Now if only Eldritch guardians had some spells to share with their familiars...


There's a feat, mauler's endurance, that gives your mauler familiar +2 HP per level of the master, so that would give the crab and extra 40hp. 20HP if you take that instead of toughness.

Also shouldn't the wolfs to hit be +22? 12 bab and +10 from str.
And how is the wolf getting+21 to damage? 10str x1.5=15, where's the extra 6 from?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:

Why not organize your own guild or whatever, then? :)

Then the "they" is you.

Because that is no longer organized play.


Just a Mort wrote:

Crunching numbers, just to make sure I'm not being unreasonably biased against combat familiars.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Calculation errors, thanks for pointing it out, fixed. Moral of story, don't mess with an Eldritch Guardian's crab.

Lower levels, the balance will be in favor of Mr Wolfie, but at higher levels, Mr Crabby wins! Now if only Eldritch guardians had some spells to share with their familiars...

For an archer, both are equally bad IMO.

I want something fast and mobile that can be ridden, horse all the way.

This is considering specifically an archer. For a melee character, it becomes a different concern.


The game last night had two consistent issues with the ranged players. No one had precise shot and the melees positioned themselves in a way to provide soft cover to the monsters (imposing a -8 to attack for ranged characters). I ended up taking Feral Hunter as my Level 1 and liked it.


Easy way to solve that if either happens to be an Inquisitor is to take the feat Friendly Fire Maneuvers from Ranged Tactics Toolbox.

It's a teamwork feat, but with Inquisitor's solo tactics it works great. You get to ignore soft cover granted by any ally.

Also, soft cover only provides a -4 to attack. Your target being in melee also provides a -4, which will total to a -8.

So I think your party may have run it incorrectly, or you may have made an error in your statement.


It is also possible that the best archer build is....the one you want to play!!!

Scarab Sages

I think she was right, you just didn't parse her statement properly. The melee fighters were providing cover, so the ranged attacks had the -4 for cover and the -4 for firing into melee.


KenderKin wrote:
It is also possible that the best archer build is....the one you want to play!!!

It's also possible that the archer build you want to play could turn out to be (a) bad (most crossbow-focused characters), or (b) boring ("It's your turn, what do you do?" "I stand still and full attack with my bow, the same as I do every other combat round.")


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Because that is no longer organized play.

It wouldn't be Pathfinder Society(TM), but it could still be organized. Any group of more than one person can make up a name and set up rules and by-laws and form an organization. Then they play.

Who knows, maybe you'd eventually get enough participants that it would end up bigger than the local PFS chapter? Then they'd be saying, "We'd play PFS, but that isn't really organized play, not the way TOZGUILD is!"

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I've really got enough on my hands running the Phoenix lodge, I don't really need to try and start competing with myself. I already play three to four times I week on the busy days.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I don't really need to try and start competing with myself.

LOL!

"Sorry, TriOmegaZero, I can't make your Sunday game."
"Why not?"
"That's the same day as TOZ's game!"
(Mind boggles)

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

He's a real stickler for the rules too.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I swear, you let someone Mount-bomb ONE TIME and they hold it against you forever...

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I cannot express how saddened I am by the responses to the initial question. I just looked through three pages of discussion of feats, class dipping, bonuses, combat advantages, etc.....

Is that the only difference you people see between a fighter and a ranger? Really? I think the decision between the two classes is simple.....WHO is your character? What is his background, his upbringing, his personality? Did he spend his youth tracking through the wilderness, or honing his skills in the militia? Was he influenced by others to walk the path he has chosen?

Story and roleplaying trumps numbers and feats, otherwise you might as well just play a wargame.

/rant

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Shroud wrote:
Story and roleplaying trumps numbers and feats, otherwise you might as well just play a wargame.

I'm sorry, but I can't give you meaningful advice on how to roleplay your character or optimize your background story.

I can give you meaningful advice about which mechanical options are better.

And if you look, you'll see that what you are complaining about is exactly what the OP asked for.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Just a Mort wrote:

Crunching numbers, just to make sure I'm not being unreasonably biased against combat familiars.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Calculation errors, thanks for pointing it out, fixed. Moral of story, don't mess with an Eldritch Guardian's crab.

Lower levels, the balance will be in favor of Mr Wolfie, but at higher levels, Mr Crabby wins! Now if only Eldritch guardians had some spells to share with their familiars...

I believe it is illegal to put a point into the Intelligence of an animal companion. Giving it a 3 int makes it a Magical Beast and no longer eligible to be an animal companion, as it is now sentient.

==Aelryinth

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shroud wrote:

I cannot express how saddened I am by the responses to the initial question. I just looked through three pages of discussion of feats, class dipping, bonuses, combat advantages, etc.....

Is that the only difference you people see between a fighter and a ranger? Really? I think the decision between the two classes is simple.....WHO is your character? What is his background, his upbringing, his personality? Did he spend his youth tracking through the wilderness, or honing his skills in the militia? Was he influenced by others to walk the path he has chosen?

Story and roleplaying trumps numbers and feats, otherwise you might as well just play a wargame.

/rant

Hey, anyone know the falling damage for falling off of a high horse? Figured it'd be useful to Shroud.

Let me just find the original post real quick...

Bhai wrote:

I wanted to pick Ranger with the Divine Marksman archetype, but everyone tells me that it is way more efficient to just pick a Fighter with a bow and then get the feats i want...

1) I just wanted to find out if that's true.
2) I would love to hear some tips on playing a ranged character (any tips you have, don't be shy, they might be found useful by me or others reading this thread).

Well darn it, looks like they wanted to know about efficiency in the respects of ranger vs. fighter and not about how to roleplay.

And tips on how to play a ranged character sound an awful lot like a mechanical question.

But really, it's our fault for answering their question instead of discussing their roleplay which they didn't ask about, I apologize.


How about make your ranger and when others start looking at your character sheet.....gouge their eyes out.

Maybe I am old school, but looking at others sheets and knowing classes and alignments was against rule zero.

Scarab Sages

Aelryinth wrote:
Just a Mort wrote:

Crunching numbers, just to make sure I'm not being unreasonably biased against combat familiars.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Calculation errors, thanks for pointing it out, fixed. Moral of story, don't mess with an Eldritch Guardian's crab.

Lower levels, the balance will be in favor of Mr Wolfie, but at higher levels, Mr Crabby wins! Now if only Eldritch guardians had some spells to share with their familiars...

I believe it is illegal to put a point into the Intelligence of an animal companion. Giving it a 3 int makes it a Magical Beast and no longer eligible to be an animal companion, as it is now sentient.

==Aelryinth

This is incorrect. Animal Companions can have an INT above 3, and remain the animal type if they do. If you read the section on Animal Companions under the Druid in the CRB, you can see there are specific lines in Skills and Feats that allow an animal companion to take any skill or feat when they have an INT of 3 or higher.


Aelryinth wrote:
Just a Mort wrote:

Crunching numbers, just to make sure I'm not being unreasonably biased against combat familiars.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Calculation errors, thanks for pointing it out, fixed. Moral of story, don't mess with an Eldritch Guardian's crab.

Lower levels, the balance will be in favor of Mr Wolfie, but at higher levels, Mr Crabby wins! Now if only Eldritch guardians had some spells to share with their familiars...

I believe it is illegal to put a point into the Intelligence of an animal companion. Giving it a 3 int makes it a Magical Beast and no longer eligible to be an animal companion, as it is now sentient.

==Aelryinth

The rest of the world believes you are wrong. Actually INT 3 Animal Companions are one of the oldest trick in the book and called out explicitly in the CRB.


I agree with some of the earlier posts. If you want versatility both in and out of combat, go with Ranger (and Beastmaster Archetype if you want a good animal companion). The skills and spells are great. Your versatility will really shine if the game you are in focuses on the wilderness.

If you want to do a crap-ton +9000 OMGWTFBBQ of damage, you should consider being a fighter focused on archery.


Remember, the Ranger he was thinking of playing is the one that trades out it's spells to get 1/2 it's FE against all targets.


Bhai wrote:

I wanted to pick Ranger with the Divine Marksman archetype, but everyone tells me that it is way more efficient to just pick a Fighter with a bow and then get the feats i want...

1) I just wanted to find out if that's true.
2) I would love to hear some tips on playing a ranged character (any tips you have, don't be shy, they might be found useful by me or others reading this thread).
3) How much do all these different types of arrows cost? http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/ammun ition

I hate the Ranger class with a passion but even I believe an archer ranger is better than an archer fighter. For one thing, Rangers have alot more skill points to play with. Additionally, they get extra feats AND ignore the prerequisites for those feats. Fighters get extra feats but they have to meet the prereqs. Ranger is a better archer hands down.


I do think it'd make more sense if animals were simply capped at 2 intelligence. You wouldn't have the oddity of non-sentient extra intelligent creatures.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:

@Gwen Smith

A fighters Weapon Training + Weapon Spec + Greater Weapon Spec is much larger than than the Zen Archer's Weapon Spec alone. Especially when considering Gloves of Dueling.

Zen Archer = +2 weapon spec
Fighter = +2 weapon spec + 2 greater weapon spec + 6 from weapon training (with gloves of dueling) = +10 to attack and damage

Which is exactly what I said in the first place: Weapon Training and Gloves of Dueling is what puts the fighter past the Zen Archer.

But Inquisitors and Rangers get none of those listed items.

Claxon wrote:

For Inquisitors, Bane (and eventually Greater Bane) + Judgement + Divine Favor (and later Divine Power) is a huge damage bonus and attack bonus.

Greater Bane is 4d6+2, judgment is +7, and divine power (with fate's favored) is +7. That's +30 damage (average). Admittedly, it takes a couple rounds to get everything activated. (Round 1, judgement and cast spell, round 2 bane and full attack). With the side effect of the Inquisitor being able to haste himself if there is a bard or other buffer around to do so.

How many rounds does that take to set up, though? And how many times per day can it be used? (I don't have a method of calculating those kinds of variables in a consistent way, so I can't make any comments on long-term statistical damage averages. If you have any suggestions, I'd be interested in hearing them.)

(And you're starting to include general buff spells here, which means you're no longer using an apples to apples comparison. You have to count the opportunity cost of casting the spells.)

Claxon wrote:
Rangers, are actually worse off against things not their favored enemy compared to a Zen Archer. But against their favored enemy they can do a lot more. And once they get Instant Enemy at level 10 they can choose to pull it out at any time. That's a +10 to attack and damage.

First, any time you use a round to cast a spell, you need to then account for the damage that you lost by using that round to cast. (I've done this with both Gravity Bow and Aspect of the Falcon--it can take 4 rounds to make up the damage lost when you spend a round to cast a spell.)

Second, you need to factor in the frequency with which you face your favored enemy. You can do this if you already know the type of game you're playing (e.g., I guess Iron Gods has a much higher percentage of constructs, Wrath of the Righteous has a lot of demons, etc.), but I don't know a way to generalize that into a global variable.

Third, Weapon Masters Handbook has a Dedicated Enemy feat that gives anyone the equivalent of a favored enemy (and a brawler can theoretically get that as a move action one he identifies the creature), so that dulls the ranger's advantage slightly compared to other martials.

Claxon wrote:
Admittedly this all looking at level 20, but only because that's the easiest place to look at bonuses. At lower levels the discrepancy isn't as bad.

I never do single level comparisons, because I need my characters to be effective at all levels. And I honestly never even look at level 20 for a measure, because in 30+ years of playing different RPGs, I have played at level 20 exactly once, in a game that started at that level. Unless you always play at level 20, level 20 comparisons are useless.

I play PFS most of the time, so I stop my comparisons around levels 12-14, where 90% of my characters will top out. (This is also why I'm very clear in my comparisons which levels I'm talking about.)

Claxon wrote:

The overall point is that once you reach mid levels the zen archer doesn't keep up with static damage modifiers, with the problem compounded by the fact that they don't get really anything in the way of attack bonus modifiers.

The ranger and fighter both get a +10 to attack and damage.

The inquisitor gets a +5 from judgment and a +7 from divine power and +2 from bane for a +14 to hit (which makes up for their lesser BAB though they are two attacks down compared to the monk).

Ranger's and Inquisitor have the added bonuses of easily getting a mount which preserve their ability to move and full attack, which is the best bonus any archer can really get since archer damage drops off hugely if they can't full attack.

First, they have to have the Mounted Skirmisher feat to take a full attack when their mount moves more than 5 feet (which also requires Mounted Combat, Trick Riding, and 14 ranks in Ride). That's a total of 3 less feats dedicated to the already-packed archery requirements.

Second, if they don't have Mounted Archery, they take a -4 to the attack.

Third, at 6th level, the Zen Archer can already outrun the horse on foot anyway, so while both archers will only get to take a single attack, the Zen Archer is 60 feet up instead of 50 feet.

Fourth, at 6th level, the Zen Archer also ignores everything except total cover from 110 ft away: if there's a clear path for a large mount to move, odds are pretty good Improved Precise Shot will cover the situation nicely, too. (This also applies to the ranger, BTW, if he takes Improved Precise Shot instead of Point Blank Master at level 6.)

----------

TL/DR:

In general, I try to make these kinds of comparisons match actual game play as much as possible. I've done things like make the most optimum DPR choices for each character at each level, factor in cover and concealment (and cover is much more of a problem here), reduced the Point Blank Shot bonus until the character gets Point Blank Master (since before then, the character tends to avoid getting that close), dropped different factors in and out to figure out which ones have the most effect, etc.

I'm not saying that any of your numbers are wrong: I'm just using a completely different set of criteria for comparison, and I'm still trying to find a way to quantify things like favored enemy in a consistent way.


Chess Pwn wrote:
Remember, the Ranger he was thinking of playing is the one that trades out it's spells to get 1/2 it's FE against all targets.

Well then it sounds to me like he wants to pick option 2 in my first post, unless I'm missing something.


@Gwen

Rangers
A ranger's Instant enemy spell is a swift action to cast and makes the target one of his favored enemies. Thus getting the max Attack and damage against anything lv10+. And if you're willing to get some pearls of power for it you can use it on lots of enemies. Plus it's already free on the actual enemy type, so it should be available all the times it matters.

A spell-less archetype
There's a ranger that gets half it's highest FE against everyone. So at lv4 it's +1 to attack and damage against everything, lv5 +2's and lv10 it's +3's. So it helps power you up to lv10, but then you miss out on instant enemy to get full FE against a target.

Inquisitors
Bane is a swift action ability. So starting at lv5 you're getting a +2 to attack and damage and 2d6 to damage per arrow. It upgrades sometime to give 4d6 instead of 2d6.
Then next turn swift action is judgement, which gives you attack boosts and lv8 also a damage boost.
So you're never have to be at a loss, as bane is pretty awesome alone, but if you want to spend a round to buff you get really strong when you start attacking. You'd be adding a scaling attack and damage boost so that should help the DPR catch up quickly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, melee combat has the condition of only 1 attack if mount moves more than 5ft. Ranged combat and do a full attack always, but take penalties if the mount double moves or runs, but if the mount just does 1 move you have no penalties.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Imbicatus wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Just a Mort wrote:

Crunching numbers, just to make sure I'm not being unreasonably biased against combat familiars.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Calculation errors, thanks for pointing it out, fixed. Moral of story, don't mess with an Eldritch Guardian's crab.

Lower levels, the balance will be in favor of Mr Wolfie, but at higher levels, Mr Crabby wins! Now if only Eldritch guardians had some spells to share with their familiars...

I believe it is illegal to put a point into the Intelligence of an animal companion. Giving it a 3 int makes it a Magical Beast and no longer eligible to be an animal companion, as it is now sentient.

==Aelryinth

This is incorrect. Animal Companions can have an INT above 3, and remain the animal type if they do. If you read the section on Animal Companions under the Druid in the CRB, you can see there are specific lines in Skills and Feats that allow an animal companion to take any skill or feat when they have an INT of 3 or higher.

Hmm, it used to be a rule somewhere, and probably still is for some other purpose then Animal Companions.

Ah well, maybe it only applies to trained or Awakened animals.

==Aelryinth


Char-Gen addict wrote:

However the decision between ranger and fighter ends:

Do not take the archer fighter archetype

Why is this again? I know I've heard this before. While I'm not the biggest fan, I have one in my current campaign that destroys encounters that aren't prepared to counter her ranged attacks.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Shroud wrote:

I cannot express how saddened I am by the responses to the initial question. I just looked through three pages of discussion of feats, class dipping, bonuses, combat advantages, etc.....

Is that the only difference you people see between a fighter and a ranger? Really? I think the decision between the two classes is simple.....WHO is your character? What is his background, his upbringing, his personality? Did he spend his youth tracking through the wilderness, or honing his skills in the militia? Was he influenced by others to walk the path he has chosen?

Story and roleplaying trumps numbers and feats, otherwise you might as well just play a wargame.

/rant

I don't see how the character's background necessarily determines their class. Why couldn't you play a Fighter who grew up exploring the wilderness or a Ranger who was raised in a city? That's not to say that choice of class and character background can't inform each other, but I think that there is a wide variety ways to roleplay any class. I try not to limit myself to the "classic" interpretations of those classes. So, for me, your approach wouldn't really help me decide which class the character should be.

You also seem to assume that the character's background should come before the mechanics. I don't feel that should always be the case. Reading authors discuss how they write their characters, it seems that sometimes a personality builds in their imagination and then they fit them into the story, but sometimes they need to fill a plot point and the character grows from that need. I feel much the same way about my Pathfinder characters. Sometimes the story comes first, and sometimes it is the mechanics. In fact some of my favorites started with the mechanics. For me, this process often feels more like I am discovering the character than creating them, and it sometimes takes me in directions that I would never have thought of if I had started with the background.

Liberty's Edge

Gray wrote:
Char-Gen addict wrote:

However the decision between ranger and fighter ends:

Do not take the archer fighter archetype
Why is this again? I know I've heard this before. While I'm not the biggest fan, I have one in my current campaign that destroys encounters that aren't prepared to counter her ranged attacks.

A big reason is the replacement of weapon training, which means no gloves of dueling for +2 to attack and damage, but also with the Weapon Masters Handbook out, it also means no advanced weapon training, which is just about the best thing to happen to the fighter since, well, ever.


Gisher wrote:
I don't see how the character's background necessarily determines their class. Why couldn't you play a Fighter who grew up exploring the wilderness or a Ranger who was raised in a city? {. . .}

. . . And Paizo even introduced an archetype for this on the Ranger side (Urban Ranger). Still waiting for an archetype for this on the Fighter side . . . .


I must say it is quite amusing to see how inconspicuous threads such as this one can spark such a discussion...


@Gwen Smith, I mention exactly how long it takes an Inquisitor to get going in my post. It's 1 round because he needs to activate Judgment as a swift action and cast a spell. Then he activates bane as a swift action and full attacks on round 2. Bane he has rounds equal to character level (which can be increased with items and feats) and the number of judgments scale up as well, 4 at 10th level and 7 at 19.

And it's completely an apples to apples comparison because were talking about the maximum damage a class can output. The Inquisitor doesn't need to go full tilt all the time, but I'm trying to show that in a damage competition you can't ignore what the Inquisitor can do. It can have more than double the damage bonus of the fighter or ranger, it just can't do so for as long. However, I tend to find that while always on abilities are nice that you tend not to run out of limited use abilities during mid-levels with just a little bit of management and forethought. Such that you always have the abilities left when you really need it.

As for the ranger, Instant Enemy is a swift action cast that lasts minutes per level. There is no opportunity cost for a ranger unless you've created some reason to use a swift action that a ranger normally has no other use for. As for the Dedicated Enemy feat, I can't recall it exactly and its not on the prd at this time but I believe that's only a +2 and it doesn't have the versatility without instant enemy.

As far as all your statements about mounted archery, I'm sorry but you are dead wrong.

Edit:

Quote:
You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a –4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed) at a –8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally.

So, you make a full attack with no feat and only take penalties for moving if your mount double moves or runs. No need for mounted skirmisher. Practically no need for mounted archery feat (I'd never take it).


Claxon has the right of it. Mounted Skirmisher is a feat intended for mounted melee characters, who normally can make only a single attack if their mount moves more than 5 feet.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Samurai, then? He cuts those penalties in half.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Really, there is almost no reason for the mount to take a double move. A single move action should be sufficient for mounted archers in 95% of combats.


Imbicatus wrote:
Really, there is almost no reason for the mount to take a double move. A single move action should be sufficient for mounted archers in 95% of combats.

This was my point with mounted archery. You need no support for it beyond actually getting a mount. No feats are required to be good with it.

The only feats you might consider are mounted combat and mounted archery. Even so, mounted archery has very limited use. I wouldn't bother with it unless it comes up that I'm constantly double moving and trying to make attacks. My personal experience is that a single move action is usually sufficient to reposition myself and avoid extra penalties on my attack. And mounted combat is good for protecting you animal companion/mount, but as an archery you shouldn't be in the thick of it anyways so he shouldn't be taking many hits. If you build you animal companion defensively you can boost their AC up pretty well between light armor, and their natural armor they can be pretty difficult to hit. Not to mention they should never be on the receiving end of a full attack, since you should move away if an enemy moves up next to you. And with both of you possessing the teamwork feats that prevents your movement from provoking while adjacent you can pretty much avoid every enemy AoO.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Char-Gen addict wrote:

However the decision between ranger and fighter ends:

Do not take the archer fighter archetype

On the other hand, Weapon Master would be a great choice, as it gives you the bonuses you would have gotten from Weapon Training two levels earlier.


New feat, Taking a wild shot
This negates the -4 for firing into combat or at enemies with soft cover. You hit what ever is directly in front of the target, till they drop or get out of the way. If they have 50% cover, 1-10, hit the cover, 11-20, hit the target, on a D20.

This becomes less evil when you consider merciful arrows and undead. Merciful arrows deliver cure spells instead of normal damage. Healing someone under the vampire's control will give them a new save.

Dark Archive

Hybrid is honestly the "best"; Ranger to 6 gets you Improved Precise as early as possible, as well as two favored enemy (for long play I recommend Humans and Evil Outsiders, but humans can easily be undead). You can also pick up a wand of instant enemy to "switch this bonus out)

Then switch to fighter (probably Lore Warden for no better reason than 4 skill points / level and the ability to eventually trip with bows regardless of Int, and all they give up is new armor); more feats along the way (including Weapon Specialization), and at 5 you get Weapon Training. This enables gloves of dueling, effectively giving you +3 to hit and damage with bows.

*plink plink*

101 to 150 of 150 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / I am about to start an adventure with a Ranger, but everyone tells me to pick Fighter with a bow. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice