After playing around with some character designs I’ve come to the conclusion that the Ranger’s “Combat Style” ability isn’t worth pursuing at mid to high levels. I welcome objections because I’ve honestly tried to make it work but find that the use of the combat style becomes a real deficit.
My comment and observations are the result of some character creation experiments I’ve been running after reading through the recent installments in the AoW Adventure Path. I’ve felt that the challenges were pretty difficult for a party of four and wanted to test my theory by making up characters and comparing their capabilities against the challenges in the magazine. The parameters I set myself were to use 13th level characters with a 20pt point buy for abilities (starting at 10 and 1 point per ability score increase with no graduated purchases for high ability scores). All characters were allotted 110000gp to spend on equipment. Races, classes, equipment, feats etc… were limited to those found in the core rule books.
I was inspired by Dungeon’s Iconic characters and modeled my designs a bit after what I was seeing. I made up a Drow Bard, Tiefling Fighter, Human Cleric, Human Paladin, Half-Elf Rogue, and a Human Sorcerer. All of them worked out pretty well when compared to the challenges facing them. The Cleric and Paladin had some problems with the general Dungeon Environments: i.e. climbing, swimming, darkness and general getting around; however, the other characters and some handy equipment choices helped out. For combat encounters the big problems were overcoming high AC’s, SR and DR. Again, all classes had some “gimmick” to help out where it was needed: Tactics (flanking, bluffing, surprise and sneak attacks were the Rogue’s friend), special abilities (The Bard’s Inspire abilities, the Paladin’s Smite, The Fighter’s Weapon Specialization), or spells. The Ranger was great at getting around, finding things, scouting and all that; BUT, when combat broke out I began to see that the “Combat Style” had some limitations.
The Combat Style ability of the Ranger seemed to work really well for lower challenge minion types. This is because the ability is essentially a “Buffet” style of Fighting that concentrates on quantity. The 13th level Ranger walking into a room of humanoids or the like turned into a vegematic. However, enter the lone elemental, undead or outsider with a high AC and/or DR and the Ranger was sunk unless the character was lucky enough to have that particular flavor of enemy maxed out as his Favored Enemy.
Here’s some of the problems:
1. Ranger’s need to put a focus on a wider array of abilities; dexterity, and wisdom are biggies. They also need good strength and constitution to survive combat. But, they can’t really focus on an ability as much as other classes without jeopardizing some other aspect of the class. So, they’re probably going to have lower strength and dexterity than the Fighter or the Rogue. This will lower their attack role which is a bad thing for a character that has to sacrifice attack bonus to gain extra attacks. Also, it lowers their damage potential.
2. Damage limits due to Combat Style: Causing lots of damage with one hit becomes pretty important at higher levels. This is to take advantage of successful hits when they are becoming rarer due to increasing enemy AC’s; and, to stay in the game against enemies with DR (sometimes you’re lucky and have the tools necessary to bypass an enemies DR but often – unless you have a bag of holding stuffed with a variety of weapon types, materials and align weapon and magic weapon potions – you’re just going to have to hit the sucker with all you’ve got). The Ranger just doesn’t have the damage potential with one hit. I’ve already mentioned the ability limitations so strength is not likely to be a saving grace. The Ranger doesn’t have access to weapon specialization and the only ability at the Ranger’s disposal for improving damage is the Favored Enemy and that can’t be counted on in all situations. Most other classes have something they can call upon a number of times per day (Rage, Bardic Inspiration, Smite Evil, Spells, etc…). Even feats are of limited value. Power Attack would be great for the two-weapon style except the Ranger will be further handicapped by a decreased attack bonus and the feat doesn’t apply light weapons which negates the benefit of the combat style. The only feat available for the Archer is point blank shot. Again, limited.
3. Fighting is all the Ranger's got. Unlike Bards, Clerics, Druids, and even Paladin's the Ranger hasn't got other spells or special abilities to fall back on. Like the Fighter, Monk & Rogue the Ranger has to get through hostile encounters with skill at arms. Without great strength, special abilities, and buckets of feats the Ranger is left with a great quantity of less effective attacks and not much else. Good for the goons but bad against the special monsters. Again, the favoured enemy special ability is a boon but not reliable.
So, at the end of the day I concluded the Combat Style wasn’t worth worrying about and the best I could do was take the Archery Style to snipe at a distance when situations permitted but to throw some feats into combat (Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Improved Critical and the like) and be ready to wield a weapon with two hands to get through the tough encounters and count my lucky stars when the character could make use of the Favored Enemy bonus (BTW – the most useful selections for favored enemy IMHO are Evil Outsider and Undead).
I love the Ranger Class for it’s diversity but I was really humbled by this combat weakness. I’d love to hear from others if they have ideas to improve the effectiveness of the Combat Style; or, do you agree? Please, no solutions through equipment. Any Class can prop up their weaknesses with an equipment crutch.
Cheers,
C.
I beg to differ.
I am looking at 2-weapon fighting only.
The ranger has a good BAB meaning it will hit more often than a rogue or cleric - thus it is better at fighting high AC monsters than a rogue.
Two weapon fighting feats are free and you don't need crazy Dex to use them, just light armour! Hello mithral chainmail. So you can focus your ability points into STR. 2-weapon fighting gives you more attacks per round than a fighter, even if they are -2 to hit, you are still better off than a rogue. And if you are having such a hard time hitting then more attacks per round is better, not worse.
Use a double weapon and 2-weapon fighting if you want the extra STR damage. But seriously the extra couple points for wielding two-handed is paltry. A bastard sword and short sword combo is just as good as a double sword or a greatsword.
Feats: if you take a single weapon type, eg shortsword, and 2-weapon fighting, your weapon focus and imp critical count towards both weapons, yay 2-4-1 deal!
I guess I am trying to say that you have taken a pretty extreme stance and that you are not really giving the ranger credit where credit is due. Sure the three combat styles are perhaps not as powerful as 10d6 sneak attack or 9th level spells, but the ranger gets a ton of other stuff that compliments their styles. And don't forget that they can supliment their fighting styles with their regular feats. You can make a really high AC ranger by taking the appropriate feats and wearing mithral chainmail.
igi
I beg to differ.
I am looking at 2-weapon fighting onlyThe ranger has a good BAB meaning it will hit more often than a rogue or cleric - thus it is better at fighting high AC monsters than a rogue..
O.K.
Two weapon fighting feats are free and you don't need crazy Dex to use them, just light armour! Hello mithral chainmail. So you can focus your ability points into STR. 2-weapon fighting gives you more attacks per round than a fighter, even if they are -2 to hit, you are still better off than a rogue. And if you are having such a hard time hitting then more attacks per round is better, not worse.
If you sacrfice points in Dex for a better Str you're comprimising the Ranger's effectiveness as a sneak and a scout. These are assets for which I would choose the Ranger class; so, no. A beefy Ranger doesn't improve the effectiveness of the Combat Style ability without harming other aspects of the class.
More attacks are only better if the attacks are effective. Put the Ranger against a huge elemental and see what more attacks will do for you against a DR 10/-.
Use a double weapon and 2-weapon fighting if you want the extra STR damage. But seriously the extra couple points for wielding two-handed is paltry. A bastard sword and short sword combo is just as good as a double sword or a greatsword.
A double weapon only applies the higher damage when one end is weilded two handed.
Feats: if you take a single weapon type, eg shortsword, and 2-weapon fighting, your weapon focus and imp critical count towards both weapons, yay 2-4-1 deal!.
Ya, I thought of that but it's not really all that great. Short swords that do 1d6 damage still aren't very impressive against that elemental I mentioned. Compare your example to a fighter wielding a longsword two handed with a high strength, power attack and improved critical. Its comparing nics and cuts and limb severing. Nope, that still doesn't improve the effectiveness of the style.
I guess I am trying to say that you have taken a pretty extreme stance and that you are not really giving the ranger credit where credit is due. Sure the three combat styles are perhaps not as powerful as 10d6 sneak attack or 9th level spells, but the ranger gets a ton of other stuff that compliments their styles. And don't forget that they can supliment their fighting styles with their regular feats. You can make a really high AC ranger by taking the appropriate feats and wearing mithral chainmail.
Thanks for the thoughts but I'd still rather design my Ranger without the Combat Style in mind. I still think its a misleading deficit to the Class (which I still love).
Cheers,
C.
First I think elementals are immune to crits (I could be mistaken) Second I had a ranger in one of my games that character did so much damage that I felt bad for the monsters I had the party fight. You want a ranger with damage take archery as your free feats for combat style and then carry a great sword or a bastard sword good str, two hands, power attack, quick draw and SSSPPLLAAT!!. Quickly put about three arrows (3d8+strx3) then drop the bow and two handed power att that poor monster into a googey paste.Str 16+3,MC MW longbow 600+gp rapid shot, at second level your ranger can take a -1 attack for two attacks (1d8+3)a magic bow at higher levels negates this penalty.
Two weapon fighting has its drawbacks and its advantages. And yes I agree that the frightening damage potential of a two handed weapon with power attack is very very tough to beat.
To maximize two weapon fighting effectiveness I reccomend the following.
1 Extra dice damage, low magic or low level get shocking flaming or whatever, a little more money flowing around get the burst enhancement and improved critical that way you have some more oomph against creatures that are immune to criticals.
2 Start grapples. Two weapon fighting generally means light weapons (two shortswords are my favorite) You're doing the same damage (albeit t a -4 penalty each attack) and you remove a combatant from the fight until he breaks free or dies.
3 Have a backup plan. Carry around a masterwork two hander and take power attack (you may not use it as much but it is a prerequisite for cleave so at least there is that), if you can't carve it up then try bashing it to bits. One of the major benifits of a two hander is that You don't need a lot of specialization to make it an attracive option.
4 Accept the faults with the benefits. Two weapon fighting can be scary in the right situation, lots of low defence foes are dropped before they can annoy the party with there resource draining attacks. Not a trait the two handers share, sure they annihilate them but 30 points of overkill does not help as much as five or six cleanly exectuted foes. That and rangers are supposed to demolish their chosen prey and they do that just fine. Two handers have faults too do not forget, namely in a grapple which coincedentally is where two blades excell.
I never had a problem with ranged combat so I'm not sure what to tell you if that combat style is in question as well. It is not supposed to do big damage because it can deliver reliable damage from extreame distances.
Rangers have a full base attack bonus and are reliable combatants but they are not meant to stack up cleanly to fighters or barbarians. They are made powerful by their many skills and special abilities. Not the least of which is the ability to track their chosen prey and vanquish them easily. This is a large part of what a ranger has been built to do. If this happens rarely then your campaign may not be as ranger friendly as the class might require to really shine.
Oh and they can act as tertiary healers
You can create a better ranger with a fighter/sorcerer/rogue multiclass than you can with a ranger. You miss out on the favored enemy but thats it.
I think I see where you're coming from. In my opinion, though, the ranger was never designed to be a front-line slugger. That's what d10 & d12 HD classes are for. The ranger is much better at using his copious skill points to find foes, camouflage friends, set traps, spring ambushes, stick-and-move, etc. The Scout from Complete Adventurer is the same, if not more so. The Scout's combat abilities depend on movement.
I think the ranger does best when paired with a rogue. Send the ranger down the Dodge-Mobility-Spring Attack feat path, and let him and the rogue flank their targets. Additionally, some of the feats in Complete Warrior let a PC use a weapon and a buckler in the same off-hand without penalty. This can make up for lower DEX if you build your character with an eye towards STR and durability. Just my $0.02.
In many ways you guys are just making my point for me. Lots of good advice but it tends to back me up.
I agree, the Ranger can deal out a staggering amount of damage. I like to call them the vegematics. They make great scouts and gorilla fighters. Especially if they are archers in natural terrain and have the woodland stride ability - wow!
Remember, my frustration comes in at higher levels. If any of you are following the AoW Adventure Path have another look through The Spire of Long Shadows. The combat challenges at higher levels throw two main problems at any combat oriented character: high AC and DR. Barbarians, Fighters, Monks, Paladins and Rogues all have class features they can use to improve thier damage potential and often thier attack bonus as well. Rangers really shine against vermin, humanoids, aberations - anything where quantity of attacks is effective. At higher levels that tends to slide and if the Ranger has put all his skills in one basket the character is accepting a "big" weakness.
Now, don't get me wrong. Weaknesses are nothing more than role playing potential if you know they are there. I guess I'm just expressing my surprise at discovering this about Rangers. I have tried many different ways to maximise the effectiveness of the Combat Style but in the end I just had to admit that Fighters and Rogues made better Archers and Two Weapon combatants than Rangers because of thier likely abilities, feats and special class features. Why compete? I'd rather have the bonus feats instead of the combat style - I'd probably spend the slots on skill focus for something like hide, move silently, search or survival.
Sexigolem has it right: Have a back-up plan & accept the faults with the benefits. Amal Ulric seems to know how to play a Ranger as well. I guess I didn't have these things in mind when I created my Ranger experiment and tested against the challenges in The Spire of Long Shadows. Every other Class I tried seemed to have the tools to pull out but when it came to the Ranger I pulled out the Archery snipe and was woefully inadequate. Then I tried a two handed style it wasn't much better. Which leads to where I am now - don't put all your Rangers eggs in the combat style basket. Have a back-up tactic or your DM will crush you ;-)
Cheers,
C.
First I think elementals are immune to crits
Ya???
Also, you could put 10 arrows into a monster, each doing 1d8+3, but if its got DR 10/- how effective is that going to be? A maximum of 10 hps if each arrow hits. So what, the Barbarian can do that in one hit.
Cheers,
C.
as someone pointed out before, rangers are not meant to be the front line kill 'em alls like fighters and barbarians. they (whomever revised the ranger for 3.5) sacrificed that to make rangers more, well, ranger-y. the combat style feats the ranger gets should not be make or break on the class. as pointed out, favored enemy makes for some serious damage. they have the normal progression of feats to work with, and they get sneaky-type stuff to work with, too. i think, perhaps, you have gotten hung up on the damage potential of classes, as opposed to what classes bring to the table, so to speak.
as an aside: constructs, elementals, oozes, plants, and undead are generally immune to critical hits, which means no favored enemy damage. kind of wonder what the point is of taking construct as a favored enemy if what you really want it for is worthless (although, in truth, the fact that you can spot one among similar non-constructs is really useful, too...).
tog
as an aside: constructs, elementals, oozes, plants, and undead are generally immune to critical hits, which means no favored enemy damage. kind of wonder what the point is of taking construct as a favored enemy if what you really want it for is worthless (although, in truth, the fact that you can spot one among similar non-constructs is really useful, too...).tog
To my understanding of the rules the favored enemy bonus is precision based damage that is based off of knowing your target as a whole not based off their anatomy. So we have ruled that the bonus damage applies to the creature no matter what. For instance A lifetime of fighting walking corpses might give an archer an edge. He knows that rupturing a bloated zombie gut is a quick way to double the creature over and let it's weight do all the damage as it lurches. Meanwhile the rest of the party is making ineffectual headshots out of habit.
Yeah favoured enemy damage applies to all the favoured enemies, otherwise why have them as favoured enemies?
And don't forget that if you are playing AoW and a ranger you really should be stacking some favoured enemy bonuses into undead; you could have +4 or +6 to attack and damage - almost negating the DR silver that the kyuss undead have.
And if you are playing AoW why wouldn't you have a silver weapon to overcome DR? Every character I make has a silver dagger, and I mean every character.
If you are worried about high AC and high DR in one creature then yes you do have something to worry about. But using power attack will not help as this will reduce your chances of hitting. Also the rogue will have a hard time hitting. Elementals with DR and moderate AC can be a problem but a rogue is useless with low BAB and no sneak attack.
i can see where you are coming from it is three feats that you are forced to have that don't help with dishing out bag loads of damage.
what you are saying is that rangers (and their free combat styles) are not suited to fighting major opponents. Just like wizards aren't much good against an iron golem. it is a matter of style and the ranger is just not made to dish out huge amounts of damage in a single hit.
igi
A few points on how a ranger can be effective/helpful to the party in a tough, high-level battle:
1. As with wizards, preparation is a big help for rangers. Get your cleric to do divination before any major undertaking, and get your bard to gather info. Use your knowledge nature/dungeoneering with favored enemy bonuses--between all of these simple measures you can usually figure out what kind of vulnerabilities your enemy has. Most of the DR problems can be taken care of with the right mix of spells and expendable items, and rangers can improve tough odds in the AC department with tactics--whether those tactics help them to hit or merely make it easier for their allies. Think silversheen, magic weapon oil, and appropriate energy burst/coldiron/etc. arrows. With 110,000 gp you certainly should have a quiver of Ehlonna and 3-5 of each kind of arrow that you might need to put the hurt on different kinds of monsters you might face. Add a flaming +1 longbow (or frost, or shock) and you can focus your arrow collection on the other energy types. Melee is a bit tougher, but cheap consumables (and your party spellcasters) can help there too with some buffs. On the whole, though, it's stupid for a lightly armored ranger to go toe-to-toe with a large or huge monster that has multiple attacks--only tanks are suitable for that. So, if you take 2-wep. fighting, back yourself up with archery feats (and maybe spring attack so you can avoid exposing yourself to the dreaded full attack). If you are an archer, take combat expertise, weapon finesse, improved feint and a rapier--so if you do get in melee, you can defend yourself and help the tank by flanking and aid another without exposing yourself unduly, and maybe take an opportunistic attack if you can fake your enemy into lowering his guard.
2. You may see this as proving your point, but ranger multiclasses well with rogue, especially if you're playing a campaign focused on certain kinds of monsters. 3 levels of rogue and good hide plus a few magic items like a cloak of elvenkind or shadow armor or ring/potions of invisibility give you an effective shoot and scoot option--while the party tank is occupying the big-ass monster, you move into position, launch a full attack against the monster with your bow, using the right kind of ammo, and you get anywhere from 2-4 shots off. If one of those hits, you end up with 1d8+ Str bonus + favored enemy bonus + 2d6 + any extra damage done by the chosen weapon. If more than one hits, and you've chosen your ammo wisely, you could do 40 or more points of damage, enough to shorten the combat by a round or two and thereby increasing your fighter's chance of survival. Next round, you reposition and hide, so the monster doesn't know what direction the next attack will come from, at least without breaking off his attempt to shred the party tank. Round 3, hit him again with a full surprise attack. One of my players ran a multiclass elf rogue/ranger optimized for ranged giant slaying in the recent Istivin arc from Dungeon. He had Str 10, and wimpy hit points but he still rocked. Velikar pounded the party cleric to a pulp and was about to hammer the party paladin, but went down with three flaming arrows in his back. After that, the 95 lb. weakling was known as "Urgan the Giant-slayer."
3. Buy a wand of cure wounds, and you're more than a tertiary healer.
4. Evasion. Nyah nyah nyah! You can't hit me you ugly old dragon.
5. Hide in plain sight. Doubles the number of attacks you get with the sniping tactic above by allowing you to multishot, reposition and hide in the same round, then multishot again the next round. (Of course to get to 17th level, you probably haven't multiclassed with rogue for more than a level or three, without going epic).
So, I think ranger works fine for high level combat--you just have to be crafty and well-prepared (which is what the archetypal ranger does), fight from ambush, find effective countermeasures to get past opponents DR--in short know your enemy. And that's what rangers are all about (favored enemy, knowledge dungeoneering, knowledge nature all help you to figure out your enemies' weaknesses and exploit them.
|
3.5 went way too far with DR and SR in my humble opinion. It used to be that special creatures had DR or SR, now most creatures above CR8 have one or both, making some classes suck at damaging some critters. I like the Ranger but not the creatures in 3.5.
Hope 4.0 doesn't have so much weird stat crap going on.
FH
In many ways you guys are just making my point for me. Lots of good advice but it tends to back me up.
Yeah, you're right. Pound for pound, the Ranger can stack up with other fighting classes. If he did, I think it would be imbalanced. Many of the other benefits mentioned here serve to compensate for that.
If you want a pure archer or a pure two-weapon master, picking up the feats with fighter levels is a much better option.
Also, one of the beneifts I didn't see mentioned was the animal companion. I'd keep in mind that it's an extra attack and a soaker of some damage, depending on what you went for. Did that come into play during your adventure?
Director of Narrative
|
I'm not sure exactly where you're coming from. If you want to play a toe-to-toe fighter type, the ranger isn't the best option. Should've just gone Barbarian or Fighter. But it sounds like you ran into an encounter where you were less effective than you thought you'd be and now think the Class is broken.
And as far as Two Weapon Fighting goes, it's only a -2 to hit. Two points can be made up in a number of ways from spells, feats or items. And multiple attacks statistically give you a better chance to hit.
Everyone's advice has been stellar. They're all great ways to tweak a Ranger a bit better, but the main thing a Ranger has over the other martial classes is those gorgeous 6+ skill points and the lovely entries under "special class features".
I easily could be wrong. I'm not scared of that.
|
Ranger Pros:
2-weapon style:
The fact that the ranger is wielding 2 weapons instead of 1 means he has twice the chance of ignoring the DR of his foe. I recommend a silver and a adamantine weapon.
When wielding 2 weapons, if possible, the ranger should have a "defending" weapon in his off-hand. This way if he's not performing a full attack, he can use his +4 defending dagger to raise his AC instead.
Archery style:
Always have a quiver with different types of arrows: silver, adamantine, and cold iron. This way DR should be less of a problem.
Archery = Full attack all the time. More often than not, an extra attack at -2 actually increases your chance of hitting, unless dealing with insane AC's, which shouldn't happen because of the ranger's good BAB.
Alright, when I get home tonight I'm going to try another couple of Ranger experiments taking into account the advice you guys have offered. From what has been said I am starting to look upon the Ranger much in the same way I look upon the Wizard - preparation is the key. In fact, I'm starting to see the Ranger a bit like Batman (ya, ya, I know); that is an investigative type with a cool utility belt. Now that I think about it the Ranger/Shadow Dancer would be an awesome combo...
Nuff Said.
Ciao,
C.
|
Ranger Pros:
When wielding 2 weapons, if possible, the ranger should have a "defending" weapon in his off-hand. This way if he's not performing a full attack, he can use his +4 defending dagger to raise his AC instead.
Think I read in Sage Advice a while back that to get the benefits from a weapon held in the offhand, you have to use a full attack action. Otherwise, everyone would run around holding a +1 Defending cheese-grater.
|
|
as an aside: constructs, elementals, oozes, plants, and undead are generally immune to critical hits, which means no favored enemy damage.
I just skimmed my 3.5 PHB to be sure about this. There is no mention in the Favored Enemy ability description that says creatures immune to critical hits are also immune to favored enemy damage.
yes melee ranger/shadow dancer would be fun. Also consider ranged ranger/order of the bow initiate - stupid powerful against anything with anatomy.
igi
|
Director of Narrative
|
yes melee ranger/shadow dancer would be fun. Also consider ranged ranger/order of the bow initiate - stupid powerful against anything with anatomy.
igi
When I played through Return to the Temple there was a Ranger/Order of the Bow Initiate that had more kills under her belt than the melee fighter. Very effective.
I just skimmed my 3.5 PHB to be sure about this. There is no mention in the Favored Enemy ability description that says creatures immune to critical hits are also immune to favored enemy damage.
I think your right about that. It was 3.0 that said the Rangers Favored Enemy Ability did not deal additional damage to creatures immune to critical hits. The ability operated under the assumption that the Ranger must hit critical body parts (thus had discernable anatomy, etc.)
In 3.5 you deal the Favored Enemy damage to any FE, be it Ooze, Elemental, or Undead.
|
|
Think I read in Sage Advice a while back that to get the benefits from a weapon held in the offhand, you have to use a full attack action. Otherwise, everyone would run around holding a +1 Defending cheese-grater.
Hmmm. That makes sense. Better hope my DM doesn't hear about it.
Mmmm. Cheese grater...
It is the archery combat style that makes a ranger dangerous. In my current planescape campaign, the party's ranger has manyshot combined with rapid shot and greater manyshot. Using a magical surestriking composite strength (+3) longbow with adamantine arrows, she dealt roughly 48 points of damage against a stone golem in one round of combat.
It is the archery combat style that makes a ranger dangerous. In my current planescape campaign, the party's ranger has manyshot combined with rapid shot and greater manyshot. Using a magical surestriking composite strength (+3) longbow with adamantine arrows, she dealt roughly 48 points of damage against a stone golem in one round of combat.
Yep. I've played a high-level (up to 15th) ranger with the archery combat style, and he was not at all ineffective. (Bane arrows are good, cheap fun!) I can't speak to the TWF-style ranger, but I suspect it's all in how you play it.
with respect to favored enemy: without my books around, i fall back on memory. sometimes the stuff i dredge up is not exactly the same edition as current. thanks for the ... uh, edit? update? whatever the proper word is, thanks. :)
tog
The main problem that Cernunos has is the limited nature of the Combat Styles available to rangers. Neither Combat Style makes the ranger a good front-rank fighter. Many people have already pointed out that the ranger is not meant to be a front rank fighter, but rather a support fighter who stands beside the barbarian or paladin in battle (if a two-weapon fighter) or takes shots from a distance (if an archer). Both the rangers Hit Dice, and the classes other abilities give testimony to this fact.
In situations where the ranger is the main fighter in the party you have more of a problem. In such situations perhaps its worth considering allowing alternate Combat Styles, such as a Combat Style with Power Attack, Cleave, and Great Cleave as the bonus feats. Any combination of feats is possible, as long as the DM and player both agree on the feats to be chosen to replace the existing feat selections.
It is the archery combat style that makes a ranger dangerous. In my current planescape campaign, the party's ranger has manyshot combined with rapid shot and greater manyshot. Using a magical surestriking composite strength (+3) longbow with adamantine arrows, she dealt roughly 48 points of damage against a stone golem in one round of combat.
Now I don't have my books present but I'm fairly certain you cannot combine manyshot with rapid shot in the same round. Rapid shot requires a full round action and manyshot requires a standard action.
Now I don't have my books present but I'm fairly certain you cannot combine manyshot with rapid shot in the same round. Rapid shot requires a full round action and manyshot requires a standard action.It is the archery combat style that makes a ranger dangerous. In my current planescape campaign, the party's ranger has manyshot combined with rapid shot and greater manyshot. Using a magical surestriking composite strength (+3) longbow with adamantine arrows, she dealt roughly 48 points of damage against a stone golem in one round of combat.
Savaun you are correct, I checked the books. The first time I let someone take those feats I missread them - needless to say the ranger was doing silly amounts of damage.
O.K. I considered everything you folks had to say and came up with the following (sans animal companion). I'm actually pretty impressed. Let me what ya think.
Human Rgr13
LN Medium Humanoid
Init +6 Spd 40
Listen +2, Spot +22
________________________________________
AC 27 (FF 21, Touch 17) plus Dodge & Mobility
hp 92 (Disabled -1/Dying -12/Injury 12)
Saves: Fort +11, Ref +16, Will +8, Evasion;
________________________________________
Atk +13 Base, +15 Grapple;
+23/+18/+13 +3 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+5+1d6/crit 20/x3); or,
+21/+21/+16/+11 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+5+1d6/crit 20/x3)Rapid Shot; or,
+19/+19/+14/+9 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+5+1d6/crit 20/x3) Many Shot.
+16/+11/+6 Melee (+1 Adamantine Warhammer 1d8+4/crit 20/x3)
________________________________________
Ranger Features: Favored Enemies: Outsider (Evil) (+4), Undead (+4), Elemental (+2); Wild Empathy (13+Cha.Mod); Track; Ranger Combat Style: Archery, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, Improved Precise Shot; Endurance; Animal Companion; Spells; Woodland Stride; Swift Tracker; Evasion; Camouflage.
________________________________________
Abilities: STR 14, DEX 23, CON 12, INT 12, WIS 14, CHA 10
Feats: Armor Proficiency: light, Armor Proficiency: medium, Dodge, Endurance, Improved Precise Shot, Manyshot, Mobility, Point Blank Shot, Power Attack, Rapid Shot, Shield Proficiency, Shot on the Run, Simple Weapon Proficiency, Track, Weapon Focus: Longbow.
Skills: Balance +11, Climb +10, Hide +21, Jump +19, Knowledge (Dungeoneering) +11, Knowledge (Nature) +13, Move Silently +21, Search +16, Spot +22, Survival +18, Swim +8.
________________________________________
Ranger Spells Prepared (--/2/2/1): 1-Jump, Longstrider ; 2-Barkskin, Cat`s Grace ; 3-Darkvision.
________________________________________
Weapons: ARROWS (in Quiver of Ehlonna) Masterwork Arrows (50), +1 Adamantine Arrows (20), +1 Cold Iron Arrows (20), +1 Alchemical Silver Arrows (20); +3 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow ( +2 Str Bonus); +1 Adamantine Warhammer.
Armor: +3 Mithral Chain shirt.
Shields: +2 Mithral Buckler. (Spell Failure 10%).
Goods: Bedroll; Winter Blanket; Caltrops; Masterwork Climber`s kit; Cold weather outfit; Explorer`s outfit; Flint and steel; Grappling hook; Mirror, small steel; Piton (5); Pouch, belt; Rations, trail (per day) (3); Rope, silk (50 ft.); Sack; Spade; Tent; Traveler`s outfit; Waterskin (full); Whetstone.
Special Goods: Antitoxin (vial) (5); Smokestick (5); Sunrod (5); Tindertwig (10).
Magic: Potion of Align Weapon (3) x2; Potion of Divine Favor (6) x2; Potion of Magic Weapon (1) x2; Potion of Shield of Faith (12) x2; Silversheen x2; Wand of Cure Serious Wounds (5) (Charges: 20); Boots of Striding and Springing; Eyes of the Eagle; Ring of Feather Falling; Gloves of Dexterity +2; Heartstone; Heward`s Handy Haversack; Ring of Protection +1; Quiver of Ehlonna.
Coin: Coin: gp (603); Coin: sp (2); cp (8).
Cheers,
C.
Hey, Cernunos, do you want to put your ranger in the NPC Stat Block Bank? I think it would be a great addition!
O.K. I considered everything you folks had to say and came up with the following (sans animal companion). I'm actually pretty impressed. Let me what ya think.
*snip*
With a ranger, think SNIPER!!! One of my friends used to love playing one like that. Ranger observes a spellcaster, aims, and kills said spell caster, thus ruining the poor DM's well thought out encounter. ~grumbles~ Also, do not neglect Impoved invisibility or any other types of concealment spells. Have your mage work with your ranger for a good done of trouble and chaos for the DM! Just like any other class, there are pluses and minuses for each. Do not forget concealment either.
Also, if you have played City of Heroes, the ranger can be the equivalent of the blaster archetype. Their power comes from the fact that they BBG will be dead before they approach you! Shoot, back up. Shoot, back up. Shoot, back... oh he is dead!
~grumbles~ Great, now I want to play a ranger who specializes in archery, but I have to DM! ~gets an evil gleam in my eyes~ Perhaps my players are in for a suprise!!!
My Greyhawk campaign includes two female rangers in the party--one specializes in archery and the other one in two-weapon fighting. Deadly combination.....deadly....
Well even though I have never played one I always wanted to play a ranger. THen they changed them and i felt they were cheated in 3.5, then I was convinced that they were even better. I love being the one who is very mobile and sneaky and can hold their own in combat. Personally when I get home I am going to make up a ranger character, two weapon fighting though.
You are probably right though that ranged weapons would be best but hey I like to look them in the eye as my foes fall away from me.
As for going toe to toe with something, everyone has been correct, they are not fighters and barbarians. But taking a greatweapon (mw) is always something that can be done even if you don't use it alot.
later
A.
|
well...i'm of the opinion that the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden has had a profound effect on the image of the two-weapon fighting ranger (and not necessary for the good of the class either). who wouldn't want to play a ranger if they could be as kick butt as that guy, right? but while that may be the goal, the reality is that unless you multiclass in barbarian and fighter (like Drizzt, if my rememberance of the FR campaign book is correct), the ranger is not really all that great on the front lines. sure it gets the great attack progression, but look at its hit dice (d8). that's an average 4.5 hp/lvl after first. compared to the fighter & paladin's 5.5 hp/lvl and the barbarian's 6.5 hp/lvl and the facts speak for themselves. the ranger has been redesigned to be a support character class, much like the monk and rogue. therefore, rather than go on the offense with two-weapon fighting, go the archery route. it keeps them out of harms way while being able to deal out some major damage, especially when combined with such lethal prestige classes as the order of the bow initiate or the deepwood sniper. hide/snipe/move silently. repeat as needed.
(and by the way, before Aragorn and Legolas get thrown my way, i don't really see them as rangers in the DnD sense. Aragorn came off to me more as woodland paladin and in my eyes, Legolas is one nasty elven fighter specialized in the bow).
Nice, that is some good stuff. However I think you miscalculated the manyshot.
"+19/+19/+14/+9 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+5+1d6/crit 20/x3) Many Shot"
I think it should be:
+17/+17/+17 +3 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+5+1d6/crit 20/x3) Many Shot
Many shot is a standard action and it grants you up to 4 arrows at a BAB of +16. Each arrow after the second arrow accumulates an additional -2 penaly (-6 for 3 arrows). Therefore you only get 3 arrows each suffer a -6 to hit.
BAB +13 Dex bonus +6 Weapon focus +1 Weapon +3 penaly -6 = +17
Personally I am not convinced that Manyshot is any superior to Rapid shot, other than you get to shoot 3 arrows and can move ;)
Otherwise nice. Put it in the database.
igi
Nice, that is some good stuff. However I think you miscalculated the manyshot.
"+19/+19/+14/+9 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+5+1d6/crit 20/x3) Many Shot"I think it should be:
+17/+17/+17 +3 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+5+1d6/crit 20/x3) Many ShotMany shot is a standard action and it grants you up to 4 arrows at a BAB of +16. Each arrow after the second arrow accumulates an additional -2 penaly (-6 for 3 arrows). Therefore you only get 3 arrows each suffer a -6 to hit.
BAB +13 Dex bonus +6 Weapon focus +1 Weapon +3 penaly -6 = +17Personally I am not convinced that Manyshot is any superior to Rapid shot, other than you get to shoot 3 arrows and can move ;)
Otherwise nice. Put it in the database.
igi
Igi, thanks. Technically you're correct but the Ranger isn't required to shoot any more arrows than necessary so I kept the manyshot to two in order to keep the attack bonus up there. The way I see it the line should actually read "+20/+20/+15/+10 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+6+1d6/crit 20/x3) Many Shot", since manyshot can only be used at a range of 30 feet and the character's point blank shot feat comes into play at that point.
Sure I'll stick him in the database - I forgot about that.
Cheers,
C.
well...i'm of the opinion that the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden has had a profound effect on the image of the two-weapon fighting ranger (and not necessary for the good of the class either). who wouldn't want to play a ranger if they could be as kick butt as that guy, right? but while that may be the goal, the reality is that unless you multiclass in barbarian and fighter (like Drizzt, if my rememberance of the FR campaign book is correct), the ranger is not really all that great on the front lines. sure it gets the great attack progression, but look at its hit dice (d8). that's an average 4.5 hp/lvl after first. compared to the fighter & paladin's 5.5 hp/lvl and the barbarian's 6.5 hp/lvl and the facts speak for themselves. *Edited for space*
I agree; players are often disappointed when their ranger doesn't stack up. What people who want a similar build need to keep in mind is that (in fiction)Drizzt gets tagged by the bad guys, a LOT, and that his combat style seems to resemble a Scout's. He stays moving and relies on his fancy footwork to keep him ahead of the action. Additionally, as envisioned by Ed Greenwood, the uber-NPCs of the Forgotten Realms often bend or break rules mechanics. As NPCs they are outside the rules (at least, that's what Ed says).
|
|
Each arrow after the second arrow accumulates an additional -2 penaly (-6 for 3 arrows). Therefore you only get 3 arrows each suffer a -6 to hit.
BAB +13 Dex bonus +6 Weapon focus +1 Weapon +3 penaly -6 = +17
Personally I am not convinced that Manyshot is any superior to Rapid shot, other than you get to shoot 3 arrows and can move ;)
Otherwise nice. Put it in the database.
igi
Igi, thanks. Technically you're correct but the Ranger isn't required to shoot any more arrows than necessary so I kept the manyshot to two in order to keep the attack bonus up there. The way I see it the line should actually read "+20/+20/+15/+10 Shocking Burst Composite Longbow (+2 Str Bonus) 1d8+6+1d6/crit 20/x3) Many Shot", since manyshot can only be used at a range of 30 feet and the character's point blank shot feat comes into play at that point.
Sure I'll stick him in the database - I forgot about that.
Cheers,
C.
I thought that each attack you get, you were firing multiple arrows so you would have 4 attacks with each attack being 3 or 4 arrows fired, depending on your BAB. So you are firing between 12 and 16 arrows in a round. Each attack would be made at -6 if you fired 3 arrows at a time and -8 if you fired 4 arrows at a time. Can you say "Orcish pincushion, I knew that you could.". Read the feat very carefully and use the picture on pg97 of the PHB as a reference, but that is how I understand Many shot to work.
FH
|
|
I don't think you could use Many shot with rapid shot which makes many shot pretty much useless. Does someone have any idea why/how many shot is better than rapid shot? If so, please explain.
You can't use them together. Many shot is a standard action while rapid shot is a full round action. I don't have my PHB handy but i think an archer's options would be: Standard attack, full attack, Many Shot (standard action), Rapid Shot (full round action). I think the choice between Many Shot and Rapid Shot comes down to what you need at that moment. Use Many Shot if you need inflict some major damage on a single target and need to stay mobile, especially if they have a low AC or your attack bonus is fairly good against them. Rapid Shot if you're not in immediate danger and the target's AC is high enough that you're not sure about hitting with Many-shot or if you have a bunch of smaller guys to hit or you think you're likely to drop your first target before you're out of attacks. Just thought of this too: Many Shot as a readied action against an enemy caster. Getting Hit by 4 arrows is sure to distract him a little.
I don't think you could use Many shot with rapid shot which makes many shot pretty much useless. Does someone have any idea why/how many shot is better than rapid shot? If so, please explain.You can't use them together. Many shot is a standard action while rapid shot is a full round action. I don't have my PHB handy but i think an archer's options would be: Standard attack, full attack, Many Shot (standard action), Rapid Shot (full round action). I think the choice between Many Shot and Rapid Shot comes down to what you need at that moment. Use Many Shot if you need inflict some major damage on a single target and need to stay mobile, especially if they have a low AC or your attack bonus is fairly good against them. Rapid Shot if you're not in immediate danger and the target's AC is high enough that you're not sure about hitting with Many-shot or if you have a bunch of smaller guys to hit or you think you're likely to drop your first target before you're out of attacks. Just thought of this too: Many Shot as a readied action against an enemy caster. Getting Hit by 4 arrows is sure to distract him a little.
That and nothing beats manyshot as an attack action in a suprise round. Or shot on the run, run out from behind the wall, plug some chump with two or three arrows and then back behind the wall.
You can't use them together. Many shot is a standard action while rapid shot is a full round action. I don't have my PHB handy but i think an archer's options would be: Standard attack, full attack, Many Shot (standard action), Rapid Shot (full round action). I think the choice between Many Shot and Rapid Shot comes down to what you need at that moment. Use Many Shot if you need inflict some major damage on a single target and need to stay mobile, especially if they have a low AC or your attack bonus is fairly good against them. Rapid Shot if you're not in immediate danger and the target's AC is high enough that you're not sure about hitting with Many-shot or if you have a bunch of smaller guys to hit or you think you're likely to drop your first target before you're out of attacks. Just thought of this too: Many Shot as a readied action against an enemy caster. Getting Hit by 4 arrows is sure to distract him a little.
Indeed Tessius and Sexi have the gist of it. Many shot allows you "2+ attacks" as a standard action and then you can run around. You are not actually making two attacks (as that is a full round) but rather firing two arrows together as a standard action. perfect for the surprise and redied action rounds.
And that manyshot stat block entry is still wrong you don't get 4 attacks at varying BAB. You get 2 or three at the same worsening to hit.igi
|
|
You get 2 or three at the same worsening to hit.
igi
I think you get one attack roll that is applied to all the arrows fired. Only reason you would really need to break it down past the -4 for 2 arrows, etc, would be if you were using arrows with different enhancement bonuses. I.E. if you were using 4 arrows that were exactly alike, you would just roll once to attack with a -8 penalty.