I am pretty new to the game and wanted some advice from long time players. I have played RPGs since the early 80s but took a looooong break and am now getting back into Pathfinder. While I have a good understanding of what each class "is" I am not sure within the game mechanics, especially long term what advantage each class might have over the other.
So help me decide, Ranger or Fighter? I want to be able to use a bow well, play as a half-elf and be effective in melee but more so with the bow. I like the idea of possibly multi-classing later on in order to use the Arcane Archer class.
I'd recommend looking toward an Eldritch Knight instead of Arcane Archer if you really want to multi-class.
Fighter might make a better switch-hitter due to bonus feats...but rangers do that pretty well, too. It's going to be harder to be good at Spell-casting, ranged combat, AND melee, tho.
I am pretty new to the game and wanted some advice from long time players. I have played RPGs since the early 80s but took a looooong break and am now getting back into Pathfinder. While I have a good understanding of what each class "is" I am not sure within the game mechanics, especially long term what advantage each class might have over the other.
So help me decide, Ranger or Fighter? I want to be able to use a bow well, play as a half-elf and be effective in melee but more so with the bow. I like the idea of possibly multi-classing later on in order to use the Arcane Archer class.
Difficult to say from the information you provided. I think you can use both, but there are distinct properties that may help you decide.
You choose a fighter when
- you want to deal reliable damage
- you do not need many skill points
- you do not necessarily intend to stay in this class for long as only some of its features scale with level
- you want to move/tumble/ride etc. in medium and heavy armor without penalty
- you are interested in the fighter-only feat chains, such as the criticals, weapon specialization etc.
For your question regarding the archer, there is an archer archetype for the fighter which is great
You choose a ranger when
- one of the combat styles is great for you, e.g. archery or two-weapon fighting. This enables you to get some feats without meeting their prerequisites
- you want skills
- you like spells and/or want to use spell-trigger items such as cure light wounds wand
- you tend to specialize against specific foes
- you intend to stay in the class for longer
- you are satisfied with medium armor
- you like defensive abilities such as evasion or camouflage
Probably the fighter/archer archetype is the best for you when you want to multiclass.
I'd recommend looking toward an Eldritch Knight instead of Arcane Archer if you really want to multi-class.
Fighter might make a better switch-hitter due to bonus feats...but rangers do that pretty well, too. It's going to be harder to be good at Spell-casting, ranged combat, AND melee, tho.
Hm, I would recommend exactly the opposite approach :-)
It depends on what the OP wants:
- A caster that can fight: Eldritch Knight
- A fighter that can cast and have magic archery effects: Arcane archer
The arcane archer is pretty powerful and much more survivable IMO :-)
I'd recommend looking toward an Eldritch Knight instead of Arcane Archer if you really want to multi-class.
Fighter might make a better switch-hitter due to bonus feats...but rangers do that pretty well, too. It's going to be harder to be good at Spell-casting, ranged combat, AND melee, tho.
Hm, I would recommend exactly the opposite approach :-)
It depends on what the OP wants:
- A caster that can fight: Eldritch Knight
- A fighter that can cast and have magic archery effects: Arcane archerThe arcane archer is pretty powerful and much more survivable IMO :-)
I'd DEFINITELY disagree. They get the same hit dice, the EK gets extra feats, and the EK gets 9/10 caster levels. The arcane archer loses caster levels and gets a bunch of pretty shoddy abilities. Imbue Arrow is fun sounding, but not actually that good. Other than that...it's a giant ball of meh.
Also, AA has more feat pre-reqs that pin you to archery, as well as no bonus feats, so I fail to see how it is more of a fighter that can cast than a caster who can fight.
But if you like the collection of little abilities AA gives more than the abilities you get from NOT losing caster levels, then it can be a better choice.
I almost always choose a Ranger over a Fighter because of skill points, animal companions, and spells. It sounds like what you want is a "switch-hitter" Ranger.
TLDR? Select a Ranger with the the archery combat style. Focus on strength over dexterity because Ranger's don't need to meet the requirements of their bonus feats. Use your bonus feats for archery and your HD based feats for two-handed weapons. You start at range with your composite longbow, but when the enemy closes to you, drop the longbow and quick-draw a great-sword.
for straight archery they are both pretty even. fighter has damage bonus's all the time, while ranger only gets the situational bonus's against favored enemies. Ranger will have more utility out of combat on the other hand. if your going for arcane archer then fighter will prolly be better, get some feats fast and not lose out on as many class features when you multi class. if your looking for effectiveness in both range and melee look up the switch hitter build for ranger. It skips the precise shot because anytime the bad guys are close enough to be shooting into melee your charging with a 2h weapon instead. It can be done with either ranger or fighter.
Asta
PSY
I'd recommend looking toward an Eldritch Knight instead of Arcane Archer if you really want to multi-class.
Fighter might make a better switch-hitter due to bonus feats...but rangers do that pretty well, too. It's going to be harder to be good at Spell-casting, ranged combat, AND melee, tho.
Hm, I would recommend exactly the opposite approach :-)
It depends on what the OP wants:
- A caster that can fight: Eldritch Knight
- A fighter that can cast and have magic archery effects: Arcane archerThe arcane archer is pretty powerful and much more survivable IMO :-)
I'd DEFINITELY disagree. They get the same hit dice, the EK gets extra feats, and the EK gets 9/10 caster levels. The arcane archer loses caster levels and gets a bunch of pretty shoddy abilities. Imbue Arrow is fun sounding, but not actually that good. Other than that...it's a giant ball of meh.
Also, AA has more feat pre-reqs that pin you to archery, as well as no bonus feats, so I fail to see how it is more of a fighter that can cast than a caster who can fight.
But if you like the collection of little abilities AA gives more than the abilities you get from NOT losing caster levels, then it can be a better choice.
I think you overestimate the EK :-) And you belittle the archer abilities too much.
EK is nice, but you effectively have to survive 5 levels of wizard at the low levels. For AA you can go 5 levels fighter/ranger/other martial, then wizard/sorcerer/... Much more survivable.Since the OP wants to weigh on the archery side, the feat requirements are no problem - you need them anyway to be effective.
I would not belittle it. If you want a martial with magic power for flexibility, AA is better. But I already wrote about the differences above :-)
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Either will be fun to play and accomplish what you want given the parameters. Over the long term the fighter will do more damage overall. The ranger will be more versatile and will do more damage versus favored enemies.
One small short-term/long-term issue is that archery rangers can get Improved Precise Shot at lvl 6, whereas fighters must wait until lvl 11. That is important if your GM is strict about cover and concealment rules.
Either will be fun to play and accomplish what you want given the parameters. Over the long term the fighter will do more damage overall. The ranger will be more versatile and will do more damage versus favored enemies.
One small short-term/long-term issue is that archery rangers can get Improved Precise Shot at lvl 6, whereas fighters must wait until lvl 11. That is important if your GM is strict about cover and concealment rules.
Yes, improved precise shot is great to get at low levels. If you also can get by with a few favored enemies to cover most of your typical opposition, ranger is great.
Both fighter and ranger are great.
Eldritch Knight is cool but we already have a Magus and I wanted my spell-casting to be secondary. I wanted to specialize in martial combat first, especially the bow.
Thanks for all the great advice, from reading these boards I know I'd find some great ideas and help here. I was leaning towards Ranger but didn't know if Fighter could more of the same and better. Looks like Ranger might be the way to go if I want to do some cool stuff quickly with the bow?
I will certainly agree that the 5 levels of wizard are somewhat of a pain, however, not as much as you would think. In lower levels I find that the base stats tend to be more important than BAB, and while you take a dip in HP, you're playing an archer, who is not so great if it gets to the point things are in his face beating on him anyhow. (Plus: False Life!) That's also what Vanish is for.
Later on, the build with more caster levels just flat-out owns tho. If the campaign is going to stay under 10, then just go with a more straight up archer or a ranger. If the campaign is going to last beyond 10, the longer it goes the more an Eldritch Archer outshines other kinds of archers in a variety of ways.
I will admit that caster-fighter hybrids are certainly game-style dependent in terms of their effectiveness, to a degree that straight up fighters are not. Simply, if you fight a bunch of battles spread out over the course of a day, multiple hours apart, then it's very hard on a character who relies heavily on buffs. If you tend to be in situations where you have multiple fights spaced fairly close together (like any sort of dungeon crawl) that you don't know are coming, then it's hard to make an effective character who relies on buffs. That said, the inherent versatility that good casting provides will often be a HUGE factor in many styles of play. (Flying all day, teleportation, invisibility, divinations, CRAFTING, etc. are all good examples of things that casting brings that a more tightly combat focused build will not be able to do.)
Also, if you want to melee, just snag Power Attack, keep a decent 2-handed weapon around, and with a more castery character you can spend one round to polymorph. Just by doing that you should be able to be competent in melee, though of course you won't be as good as someone with a build more dedicated to it.
If you want secondary spell casting, I strongly suggest just staying Ranger. You'll get some spells. You'll have good skills, and you'll rock at your shtick at every level.
Edit: What's the rest of your group look like, out of curiosity?
Eldritch Knight is cool but we already have a Magus and I wanted my spell-casting to be secondary. I wanted to specialize in martial combat first, especially the bow.
Thanks for all the great advice, from reading these boards I know I'd find some great ideas and help here. I was leaning towards Ranger but didn't know if Fighter could more of the same and better. Looks like Ranger might be the way to go if I want to do some cool stuff quickly with the bow?
It really depends.
Maybe you should take a look at the archer archetype. It has some really cool tricks, like CMB maneuvers (disarm, feint, sunder; later even trip, bull rush, grapple). So if it's cool stuff, this might also be your way :-)
Have you considered the monk zen archer archetype? It gets some really cool tricks, is a beast with the bow, gets more skills than the fighter, is mobile, flurry (i.e. full attack) at your full base attack bonus... And if you chose empyreal sorcerer, your spellcasting also runs of wisdom, reducing your ability dependencies. Then you can enter arcane archer if you wish.
In fact, I would see that monk/sorcerer/AA as a pretty strong option :-)
|
I put my vote for full ranger as well. You have been away a while, so simplicity should be considered, but you seem to want to have a few tricks up your sleeve. The ranger, or a ranger archetype, is good way to go. By the way, without a very specific build in mind, multiclassing is a bad idea in Pathfinder.
I will certainly agree that the 5 levels of wizard are somewhat of a pain, however, not as much as you would think. In lower levels I find that the base stats tend to be more important than BAB, and while you take a dip in HP, you're playing an archer, who is not so great if it gets to the point things are in his face beating on him anyhow. (Plus: False Life!) That's also what Vanish is for.
Later on, the build with more caster levels just flat-out owns tho. If the campaign is going to stay under 10, then just go with a more straight up archer or a ranger. If the campaign is going to last beyond 10, the longer it goes the more an Eldritch Archer outshines other kinds of archers in a variety of ways.
I will admit that caster-fighter hybrids are certainly game-style dependent in terms of their effectiveness, to a degree that straight up fighters are not. Simply, if you fight a bunch of battles spread out over the course of a day, multiple hours apart, then it's very hard on a character who relies heavily on buffs. If you tend to be in situations where you have multiple fights spaced fairly close together (like any sort of dungeon crawl) that you don't know are coming, then it's hard to make an effective character who relies on buffs. That said, the inherent versatility that good casting provides will often be a HUGE factor in many styles of play. (Flying all day, teleportation, invisibility, divinations, CRAFTING, etc. are all good examples of things that casting brings that a more tightly combat focused build will not be able to do.)
Also, if you want to melee, just snag Power Attack, keep a decent 2-handed weapon around, and with a more castery character you can spend one round to polymorph. Just by doing that you should be able to be competent in melee, though of course you won't be as good as someone with a build more dedicated to it.
You mention a lot of good points :-) However, I still disagree that EK is so much better as you think. AA gets some tricks EK does not get. And if you are not set on high level spells, but just need some versatility, then AA is cool. Also, there are wands and scrolls if you really need some specific spells you do not have available.
I have played an EK to level 16, and I know it's a good class. It's just not better by default as you - IMO - seem to imply. Both have their places.
And from what the OP has posted it seems like he prefers secondary casting anyway :-)
The suggestion of EWHM to stay in ranger is a good one. The ranger spells are a nice addition to the whole package :-)
I'll definitely agree with Sangalor on the Zen Archer being awesome (just beware that I believe that currently the rules are technically broken and do not work for flurrying with the bow...but unless you have crazy rule nazis who constantly follow FAQs and such, no one will probably know that).
Ranger 6/Wizard 2/AA 4/EK 8 is strong (and if you really hate EK you can stay in AA longer...pun intended :p )
Zen Archer/Emyreal Sorcerer/AA is really sexy, but even a straight up Zen Archer is awesome.
Some people like the Sohei monk as an archer, too. I don't know all that much about it, but it may be worth checking out.
Edit: @Sangalor - I won't derail the thread (further!) with a detailed write-up of why the AA abilities are not good and, in fact, are much less beneficial than 3 bonus feats and at least one higher level of spells / +2 caster levels, but if anyone is interested they're welcome to start a thread asking about it or to PM me : )
If you want secondary spell casting, I strongly suggest just staying Ranger. You'll get some spells. You'll have good skills, and you'll rock at your shtick at every level.
Edit: What's the rest of your group look like, out of curiosity?
Fighter, Magus, Monk/Cleric, Rogue and me.
Playing as a fighter archer helps open up feat options for you, although the zen archer gets a lot of feats as well. Regardless what you choose remember that there are almost 2 dozen different types of arrows (without getting into the many variations of the slaying or name you're arrows), for you to use. ANY archer can use these.
Adamantine durable arrows
Silvered blunt arrows
Cold iron arrows- you're base arrow to use, cheap
Smoke arrow
Broad- it's a 3rd party arrow, ask gm
Bleeding
Pheromone-get scent
dye
And a bunch more, I only listed the more useful ones.
Fighter, Magus, Monk/Cleric, Rogue and me.If you want secondary spell casting, I strongly suggest just staying Ranger. You'll get some spells. You'll have good skills, and you'll rock at your shtick at every level.
Edit: What's the rest of your group look like, out of curiosity?
Interesting. Play what makes you happy...but the glaring need in that party is actually casting. You'll have damage covered, especially at the lower levels, but higher levels you might really wish you have the casting that the EK build provides.
But really, and sincerely, just play what is fun for you. I'm just trying to help.
Playing as a fighter archer helps open up feat options for you, although the zen archer gets a lot of feats as well. Regardless what you choose remember that there are almost 2 dozen different types of arrows (without getting into the many variations of the slaying or name you're arrows), for you to use. ANY archer can use these.
Adamantine durable arrows
Silvered blunt arrows
Cold iron arrows- you're base arrow to use, cheap
Smoke arrow
Broad- it's a 3rd party arrow, ask gm
Bleeding
Pheromone-get scent
dyeAnd a bunch more, I only listed the more useful ones.
Blunt arrows can't be silvered, as they don't have metal on them. BUT....Weapon Blanch from the alchemical items in the Advanced Players Guide is where it's at for cheaply overcoming DR as an archer.
Just noticed that, thanks. Yeah, in that case weapon blanch silvered works best. Also get adamantine blanch (to overcome DR), but you still need adamantine arrows non-blanched, to use for sundering. Besides that, pick up the ghost salt blanch, makes your arrows as if they have ghost touch. Blanches are best for archers because they cover 10 arrows per blanch use vs. coating a sword for instance, in which it only works for the first strike.
As long as it's not PFS, there's nothing really stopping someone from making a blunt, silver tipped arrow, as long as the GM says ok. An arrow with a blunt metal tip isn't that hard to imagine. In fact, I think metal tipped, blunt arrows are actually used for shooting at creatures in trees. I'm not positive about that one, but when I was in boy scouts, I remember meeting a guy who hand made all of his own bows and arrows, and he showed us the various types of arrows he made, some of the finished ones were metal tipped, blunt arrows.
Blunt arrow:
These arrows have rounded wooden tips.
Benefit: Blunt Arrows deal bludgeoning damage rather than piercing damage. An archer can use a blunt arrow to deal nonlethal damage (at the normal –4 attack penalty for using a lethal weapon to deal nonlethal damage).
Rounded WOODEN tips. Unless you try to convince your dm to make a new version of an already existing arrow, or even make a new one, you won't be able to silver blunt arrows, only blanch them, which is fine, since it's way cheaper to blanch for silver.
I understand what the blunt arrows are and what they do, I was referencing the fact I believe blunt arrows, in real life, have metal tips and are used to shoot things in the woods. This way, the arrow doesn't get stuck into a tree, and you don't risk damaging it from trying to pull it out. Primarily, I believe they are used on creatures like rabbits, raccoons, foxes, etc.
Hell, I remember shooting blunt arrows when I was a kid, so I know they are real. It's not like it alters the very fabric of reality to have silvered, blunt arrows, in case one needed to capture a werewolf or other such creature.
For the OP and the question of "Fighter or Ranger" here is my advice.
Fighters will give you the option of customizing your build more or less how you want, but that means you could also screw it up. Fighters tend to do more reliable damage in combat across multiple creature types because of fighter only feats which increase weapon effectiveness. Fighters can do just about anything in just about any armor, so they are easier to get higher AC.
Rangers will allow you to focus in on one predominant style of fighting (archery or two weapon fighting) and make it easy to choose feats for that style. Rangers get some of the best combat spells in the game. Favored enemy and favored terrain are two of the best combat class features in the game. With the "boon companion" feat you can get a very good animal companion and/or mount. Your AC will not be as good as a fighter and fighting against non-favored enemies will not match what a fighter can do. But there are ways to trick that out too.
I personally prefer rangers. A good ranger can be one of the most fun and flavorful builds in the game.
Good luck.
I put this together for the OP. I think it would make a fun character that won't overwhelm with complexity.
RACE: Half Elf
CLASS: Ranger Level 6, Wizard(Transmuter)level 1, Arcane Archer Level 1
Assuming 15 point buy: level 8, with gear and the Transmuter +1 bonus
Strength 16
Dexterity 19
Constitution 12
Intelligence 14
Wisdom 12
Charisma 10
Feats are basic for an archer, but the ability to switch to a melee weapon is there if you want it.
FEATS:
Point Blank Shot
Precise shot
Rapid Shot
Quick Draw
Power Attack
For gear, I spent most of the eighth level starting wealth for basic stuff. If you've been away for awhile, it might not be so obvious.
GEAR:
Cloak of Resistance +2
Belt of Physical Might +2 (Str & Dex)
Ring of Protection +2
+2 Composite Longbow
+1 Melee Weapon (Any Type)
..................................................
You gain a smattering of Ranger magic, decent arcane at higher levels, an animal companion, familiar, and tons of skill points.
I'm leaving some things out, but this should get the ball rolling and it's along the lines of what I think you were asking for.
I put this together for the OP. I think it would make a fun character that won't overwhelm with complexity.
RACE: Human
CLASS: Ranger Level 6, Wizard(Transmuter)level 1, Arcane Archer Level 1
Assuming 15 point buy: level 8, with gear and the Transmuter +1 bonus
Strength 14
Dexterity 22
Constitution 12
Intelligence 12
Wisdom 12
Charisma 8Feats are basic for an archer, but the ability to switch to a melee weapon is there if you want it.
FEATS:
Point Blank Shot
Precise shot
Rapid Shot
Quick Draw
Power Attack
Improved Precise Shot
Weapon FocusFor gear, I spent most of the eighth level starting wealth for basic stuff. If you've been away for awhile, it might not be so obvious.
GEAR:
Handy Haversack
Cloak of Resistance +2
Belt of Physical Might +2 (Str & Dex)
Ring of Protection +1
Amulet of Natural Armor +1
+1 Corrosive Composite Longbow
+1 Melee Weapon
Batman Style Assortment of Arrows
Pearl of Power 1 (if enough left over from above)
..................................................You gain a smattering of Ranger magic, decent arcane at higher levels, an animal companion, familiar, and tons of skill points.
I'm leaving some things out, but this should get the ball rolling and it's along the lines of what I think you were asking for.
Fixed a couple things. That's good stuff, though.
Regardless of which class you are, a good feet line is snapshot and improved snapshot. You more threaten to 15 with a bow! ...btw, if you think you can flank with it, so fat there is a discussion about that, but the answer now is no. you can't flank, our rather, you get no flank bonus, but because you threaten you can confer a flank bonus to your ally who is on the other side of enemy. Not too bad. Also, combat reflexes with this, and now you can give free admission to your enemies to pound town, courtesy of you.
15' away from enemies is way too close for an archer. The snap shot line is snazzy, but you only get 1 AoO...and then you're an archer with someone in their face. You'd need Point Blank Master, at the very least to back those feats up. Also, Con tends to be lower on archers due to pumping Dex and Str (and if you're a ranger or an Eldritch/Arcane Archer or a Monk, you need even more stats before Con becomes a great place for points).
Also, bows are scarily easy to sunder. (Certainly ways to make this less likely, such as Human alternate favored class stuff....but that's even more HP lost).
If you have a huge point buy and are playing a fighter (or possibly Zen Archer), then maybe you can spread your points around to make a "Melee Archer" viable. But Archery already has a huge feat investment, and adding a line of feats plus combat reflexes (and probably other things to make you stand up to melee combat better) just prolongs the feats needed to be a good archer, while also taking away from using those feats to shore up other areas of the character, such as Will save.
You should consider that archery is very effective in PF but can be boring.
Switch hitting can add versatility, but you probably won't be able to invest in maneuver feats and the like: I think you should consider a class that offer a bit more outside of combat than fighter.
Rangers are wonderful in pathfinder: lot of skills, spells, abilities, animal companion, terrains.
Monks (zen archers) are very good too: decent skills, lot of cool abilities, ki. Suffers a bit from mad but it's manageable.
Arcane archers (including eldrich knight) have spells too, and at high level they may be more versatile than other classes. Mad is a bit higher (dex, some str, con can't be dropped, casting ability) but you can deal with it. For this I'd go with fighter.
Fighters are the ones with the potential for the highest sustained damage but that can be the most boring. Of course that will depend on how you play, but I'd at least consider the archer archetype which offers a bit more variety compared to straight fighter
15' away from enemies is way too close for an archer. The snap shot line is snazzy, but you only get 1 AoO...and then you're an archer with someone in their face. You'd need Point Blank Master, at the very least to back those feats up. Also, Con tends to be lower on archers due to pumping Dex and Str (and if you're a ranger or an Eldritch/Arcane Archer or a Monk, you need even more stats before Con becomes a great place for points).
Also, bows are scarily easy to sunder. (Certainly ways to make this less likely, such as Human alternate favored class stuff....but that's even more HP lost).
If you have a huge point buy and are playing a fighter (or possibly Zen Archer), then maybe you can spread your points around to make a "Melee Archer" viable. But Archery already has a huge feat investment, and adding a line of feats plus combat reflexes (and probably other things to make you stand up to melee combat better) just prolongs the feats needed to be a good archer, while also taking away from using those feats to shore up other areas of the character, such as Will save.
You're missing my point. There will be times when the archer will get close to the enemy, whether the enemy charges them, comes up from behind, flies down, what how've you...you sol need to protect yourself and the casters in the back your with. snapshot is only two feats, with combat reflexes that's 3, point black makes it 4. If your a fighter archer, than you don't need PBM. If ranger, it's not that bad for you. The feats aren't to be better at melee, it's to help mitigate the issues that will happen IF you get in melee.
As for sundering the bow, gloves of dueling help with this, not much but it does. Also, the spell ironwood now makes your bow like iron for hp, hardness, so on. Get your bow to be created using this spell and your bow should be that much more resilient. Also, con isn't a huge issue considering fighters are getting 1d10/lvl. A reasonable con of 12 is plenty fine for the archer, especially since very few enemies are going to be hitting you from do ghat back. And if your the fighter archer archetype, you're distance fit shooting is greater than any other archer, so I wouldn't worry too much.
|
I'd DEFINITELY disagree. They get the same hit dice, the EK gets extra feats, and the EK gets 9/10 caster levels. The arcane archer loses caster levels and gets a bunch of pretty shoddy abilities. Imbue Arrow is fun sounding, but not actually that good. Other than that...it's a giant ball of meh.Also, AA has more feat pre-reqs that pin you to archery, as well as no bonus feats, so I fail to see how it is more of a fighter that can cast than a caster who can fight.
But if you like the collection of little abilities AA gives more than the abilities you get from NOT losing caster levels, then it can be a better choice.
if you go both, and focus on archery, you can be a beast.
right now im playing a wizard 5/ranger 1/EK 10/AA 4. being able to shoot antimagic fields is an easy way to kill high level targets. not to mention this allows for a 17 bab, and acess to 9th level spells.
if you choose to go AA thats fine they will rock if you build them right, also if you go EK you will also rock if you build them right.
if you get both, you will kick ass :P
EK is nice, but you effectively have to survive 5 levels of wizard at the low levels. For AA you can go 5 levels fighter/ranger/other martial, then wizard/sorcerer/... Much more survivable
i would disagree with this^ 5 wizard is not bad at all if you play a support caster and focus early on with archery feats.
for instance, i actually just got done playing in my tuesday night game. im a 3 wizard, 1 ranger (trap smith archetype for disable device) im playing the wizard, the archer and the rogue in my party. i took down more npcs then any other character in my 4 person group, all with physical damage. then i was able to cast utility, and buff spells for the tank and damage dealers. i was also able to disable 3 traps which would have caused a tramendous amount of damage to the group.
your surviveability is in not getting hit, not your ac. and you have enough spells and abilities to keep that from happening for most of your combats. also keep in mind my home games dont have 3 encounter days. we did an entire dungeon crawl, over 10 encounters, without resting.
15' away from enemies is way too close for an archer. The snap shot line is snazzy, but you only get 1 AoO...and then you're an archer with someone in their face. You'd need Point Blank Master, at the very least to back those feats up. Also, Con tends to be lower on archers due to pumping Dex and Str (and if you're a ranger or an Eldritch/Arcane Archer or a Monk, you need even more stats before Con becomes a great place for points).
Also, bows are scarily easy to sunder. (Certainly ways to make this less likely, such as Human alternate favored class stuff....but that's even more HP lost).
If you have a huge point buy and are playing a fighter (or possibly Zen Archer), then maybe you can spread your points around to make a "Melee Archer" viable. But Archery already has a huge feat investment, and adding a line of feats plus combat reflexes (and probably other things to make you stand up to melee combat better) just prolongs the feats needed to be a good archer, while also taking away from using those feats to shore up other areas of the character, such as Will save.
You're missing my point. There will be times when the archer will get close to the enemy, whether the enemy charges them, comes up from behind, flies down, what how've you...you sol need to protect yourself and the casters in the back your with. snapshot is only two feats, with combat reflexes that's 3, point black makes it 4. If your a fighter archer, than you don't need PBM. If ranger, it's not that bad for you. The feats aren't to be better at melee, it's to help mitigate the issues that will happen IF you get in melee.
As for sundering the bow, gloves of dueling help with this, not much but it does. Also, the spell ironwood now makes your bow like iron for hp, hardness, so on. Get your bow to be created using this spell and your bow should be that much more resilient. Also, con isn't a huge issue considering fighters are getting 1d10/lvl. A reasonable con of 12 is plenty fine for the archer,...
Ok. So your point is to spend 3 or 4 feats as a contingency plan IN CASE you get into combat...while acknowledging that it's not the best place to be? That's a pretty large investment for what should be a not-very-common option. That's the point I'm making. I think those feats are better spent elsewhere. If I were to make a 3/4 feat investment, it'd be on something that was a pretty big part of my build. I think you can build a pretty solid melee archer, so those feats are pretty good, but unless I was going to use that tactic frequently, I would spend the feats elsewhere, that's all.
Edit: I should point out that I think all archers should find a way to be functional up close. For me, that's usually just getting point blank master. However, it's usually a last resort to be in that spot, and doesn't happen very often. For those reasons I'd spend the other 2-3 feats you're talking about on things like Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Crafting feats (build dependent), etc.
I put this together for the OP. I think it would make a fun character that won't overwhelm with complexity.
RACE: Half Elf
CLASS: Ranger Level 6, Wizard(Transmuter)level 1, Arcane Archer Level 1
Assuming 15 point buy: level 8, with gear and the Transmuter +1 bonus
Strength 16
Dexterity 19
Constitution 12
Intelligence 14
Wisdom 12
Charisma 10Feats are basic for an archer, but the ability to switch to a melee weapon is there if you want it.
FEATS:
Point Blank Shot
Precise shot
Rapid Shot
Quick Draw
Power AttackFor gear, I spent most of the eighth level starting wealth for basic stuff. If you've been away for awhile, it might not be so obvious.
GEAR:
Cloak of Resistance +2
Belt of Physical Might +2 (Str & Dex)
Ring of Protection +2
+2 Composite Longbow
+1 Melee Weapon (Any Type)..................................................
You gain a smattering of Ranger magic, decent arcane at higher levels, an animal companion, familiar, and tons of skill points.
I'm leaving some things out, but this should get the ball rolling and it's along the lines of what I think you were asking for.
Great idea!!! Thanks for that! That's pretty much what I had in mind..