paizo.com Recent Posts in Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?paizo.com Recent Posts in Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?2013-02-07T16:49:35Z2013-02-07T16:49:35ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Krodjin (alias of Daryl MacLeod)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#722012-11-30T20:43:10Z2012-11-30T20:43:10Z<p>Who is the better Archer? Ranger or Fighter?</p>
<p>It depends on the game.</p>
<p>For a PFS game the Ranger wins hands down. Early entry for Improved Precise Shot means the Ranger is netting +4 to hit over the Fighter in <i>almost</i> every combat for 5 full levels. The Fighter finally qualifies for Imp. Precise Shot when PFS games are ending.</p>
<p>For a non-PFS game the Fighter can close the gap for level 11 on. But being that the Ranger has Instant Enemy by then I can see it being argued that the Ranger will pull away again.</p>
<p>The Ranger will also be much better out of combat for all levels.</p>
<p>I vote Ranger > Fighter.</p>Who is the better Archer? Ranger or Fighter?
It depends on the game.
For a PFS game the Ranger wins hands down. Early entry for Improved Precise Shot means the Ranger is netting +4 to hit over the Fighter in almost every combat for 5 full levels. The Fighter finally qualifies for Imp. Precise Shot when PFS games are ending.
For a non-PFS game the Fighter can close the gap for level 11 on. But being that the Ranger has Instant Enemy by then I can see it being argued that the Ranger will...Krodjin (alias of Daryl MacLeod)2012-11-30T20:43:10ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Atarlosthttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#712012-11-30T08:41:00Z2012-11-30T08:41:00Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Aratrok wrote:</div><blockquote> For a fighter to get the most out of their class features, they need to invest 4 or more feats in their primary weapon (Weapon Focus/Spec/Gtr Focus/Gtr Spec, possibly Improved Critical). This gives them a limited selection of weapons they can use effectively, but rangers aren't married to one weapon type in the same way. They can pick up pretty much any simple or martial weapon and be just as lethal with it as any other weapon. </blockquote><p>Yeah, if the ranger loses his composite longbow and he happens to find a composite shortbow with exactly the right strength modifier he can use it instead and not suck.
<p>Overspecialization might be a concern in melee because there is no weapon that does bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing, but for archery it's composite longbow or suck. Focusing all your feats on the longbow doesn't lose you any versatility that hadn't already been denied you by the limited selection of ranged weapons.</p>Aratrok wrote:For a fighter to get the most out of their class features, they need to invest 4 or more feats in their primary weapon (Weapon Focus/Spec/Gtr Focus/Gtr Spec, possibly Improved Critical). This gives them a limited selection of weapons they can use effectively, but rangers aren't married to one weapon type in the same way. They can pick up pretty much any simple or martial weapon and be just as lethal with it as any other weapon.
Yeah, if the ranger loses his composite longbow...Atarlost2012-11-30T08:41:00ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Vestrialhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#702012-11-30T07:14:59Z2012-11-30T07:14:59Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Greg Wasson wrote:</div><blockquote>Now that is a really unusual interpretation. Where is the reference that magic abilities are determined by the "player" or even the "character" if that is what you mean? Does this mean one can turn keen off and on? The closest I can find to this unique adjudication is...</blockquote><p>It's not unusual at all. It is literally what is occurring at the table. You refer to the items as if they are actual things, with behaviors. They are not. They are descriptions. They are little bundles of rules that inform the player how to play the game. If I do not know the weapon is keen, it does not function as keen, because I am the one who simulates it's use by rolling dice. This is not about activation, it's simply about knowledge.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Not quite getting what you are getting at there. Doesn't change the weapon...</blockquote><p>You're right, the weapon doesn't change. But if the player doesn't know what abilities the weapon has, the weapon effectively has no abilities.
<p>I do agree with you that the Ranger's utility is what puts him ahead of the fighter, and either interpretation of this rule doesn't change that. Being able to get on-demand bane a couple times a day is really not going to push him over the top, since it's really no different than having a couple specific bane weapons in your golf bag... </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">"Adamantine Dragon wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Funky, it has been my experience that misreading the rules in a certain way is directly proportional to the benefit the reader gains from the misreading.</p>
<p>It's not necessarily malice. Just human nature.</blockquote><p>I love the subtle condescension you seem to interject into every thread. As if misinterpreting a rule against players is somehow a higher moral position. Because, clearly if someone has an interpretation that differs from yours, they are wrong and just trying to eek out as much mechanical advantage as they can. Except you're just wrong. Most people in this thread that disagree with you are probably not even playing rangers. I'm not, nor do I have any intention of ever playing one. So I derive no benefit or handicap from any interpretation of the rule. It's just what the words say. You have some story that weapons do things, but have yet to actually explain what that even means.Greg Wasson wrote:Now that is a really unusual interpretation. Where is the reference that magic abilities are determined by the "player" or even the "character" if that is what you mean? Does this mean one can turn keen off and on? The closest I can find to this unique adjudication is...
It's not unusual at all. It is literally what is occurring at the table. You refer to the items as if they are actual things, with behaviors. They are not. They are descriptions. They are little bundles of...Vestrial2012-11-30T07:14:59ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Whisperkniveshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#692012-11-30T02:17:17Z2012-11-30T02:17:17Z<p>This can be broken down to a simple set of pros and cons.</p>
<p>Fighter:</p>
<p>Pro:</p>
<p>Many more feats
<br />
Weapon training
<br />
Probably higher AC(If you still get armor training)
<br />
Fighter only combat feats
<br />
Always reliable bonuses and damage
<br />
Late game becomes a killing machine</p>
<p>Cons:</p>
<p>Crappy skill selection and number
<br />
Lack of out of combat utility
<br />
Kind of a one trick pony</p>
<p>Ranger:</p>
<p>MANY more skills, and better choice
<br />
Back up casting
<br />
Animal Companion maybe (some like it some don't)
<br />
Gets some feats earlier
<br />
Bonus against favored enemies
<br />
Amazingly versatile</p>
<p>Con:</p>
<p>Need an extra stat (Wisdom)
<br />
Fewer feats
<br />
No matter what you do you are going to be called Drizzt at least once.
<br />
Damage is a little lower if not your favored enemy</p>
<p>In the end it is a matter of style.</p>
<p>Fighters are a little better at damage, AC and feats
<br />
Rangers are better at being versatile, and have better skills.</p>This can be broken down to a simple set of pros and cons.
Fighter:
Pro:
Many more feats
Weapon training
Probably higher AC(If you still get armor training)
Fighter only combat feats
Always reliable bonuses and damage
Late game becomes a killing machine
Cons:
Crappy skill selection and number
Lack of out of combat utility
Kind of a one trick pony
Ranger:
MANY more skills, and better choice
Back up casting
Animal Companion maybe (some like it some don't)
Gets some feats earlier
Bonus...Whisperknives2012-11-30T02:17:17ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Funky Badgerhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#682012-11-29T21:49:51Z2012-11-29T21:49:51Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Adamantine Dragon wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Funky, it has been my experience that misreading the rules in a certain way is directly proportional to the benefit the reader gains from the misreading.</p>
<p>It's not necessarily malice. Just human nature. </blockquote><p>Not all humans. I've played rangers with bane weapons and never even considered that reading of the rules...
<p>...but enough of that, seeing as this isn't the rules forum, suffice to say: I wouldn't allow it at my table :-)</p>
<p>Also Rangers > Archers.</p>Adamantine Dragon wrote:Funky, it has been my experience that misreading the rules in a certain way is directly proportional to the benefit the reader gains from the misreading.
It's not necessarily malice. Just human nature.
Not all humans. I've played rangers with bane weapons and never even considered that reading of the rules... ...but enough of that, seeing as this isn't the rules forum, suffice to say: I wouldn't allow it at my table :-)
Also Rangers > Archers.Funky Badger2012-11-29T21:49:51ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#672012-11-29T21:39:32Z2012-11-29T21:39:32Z<p>Funky, it has been my experience that misreading the rules in a certain way is directly proportional to the benefit the reader gains from the misreading.</p>
<p>It's not necessarily malice. Just human nature.</p>Funky, it has been my experience that misreading the rules in a certain way is directly proportional to the benefit the reader gains from the misreading.
It's not necessarily malice. Just human nature.Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)2012-11-29T21:39:32ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Funky Badgerhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#662012-11-29T21:22:37Z2012-11-29T21:22:37Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Vestrial wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Funky Badger wrote:</div><blockquote>That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive. </blockquote>I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? </blockquote><p>Its such an out there misreading of fairly simple english I find it hard to believe its not done without malice aforethought.
<p>As has been pointed out, Instant enemy affects the ranger, Bane affects the weapon. No overlap, not even close.</p>Vestrial wrote:Funky Badger wrote:That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive.
I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? Its such an out there misreading of fairly simple english I find it hard to believe its not done without malice aforethought. As has been...Funky Badger2012-11-29T21:22:37ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Horbaghhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#652012-11-29T06:15:00Z2012-11-29T06:03:13Z<p>I'm a human ranger. I take Favored Enemy: Animals. I cast Instant Enemy on the party's half orc barbarian. Then I buff him with Animal Growth. Legal?</p>
<p>I'm still a human ranger. I take Favored Enemy: Undead. I cast Instant Enemy on myself. Now I get healed by negative energy. Legal? Or would it only be my negative energy that heals myself because only "I" can treat "me" as my favored enemy type? Can I decide to treat myself as undead in lieu of making a saving throw against Dominate Person? That should be legal, right?</p>I'm a human ranger. I take Favored Enemy: Animals. I cast Instant Enemy on the party's half orc barbarian. Then I buff him with Animal Growth. Legal?
I'm still a human ranger. I take Favored Enemy: Undead. I cast Instant Enemy on myself. Now I get healed by negative energy. Legal? Or would it only be my negative energy that heals myself because only "I" can treat "me" as my favored enemy type? Can I decide to treat myself as undead in lieu of making a saving throw against Dominate Person?...Horbagh2012-11-29T06:03:13ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Greg Wassonhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#642012-11-29T05:54:01Z2012-11-29T05:54:01Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Vestrial wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<p>Actually, it would not. 'You' has to know that the target is a construct in order to apply the +2 to hit, and the extra damage. Now, 'you' is typically the player.</blockquote><p>Now that is a really unusual interpretation. Where is the reference that magic abilities are determined by the "player" or even the "character" if that is what you mean? Does this mean one can turn keen off and on? The closest I can find to this unique adjudication is [Spoiler omitted] But bane is not an "activated" ability. It always is. Just like +2 magic weapon.
</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Vestrial wrote:</div><blockquote>If the gm was being sneaky and not letting the player know it was a bane weapon, the gm may become 'you' in this case and apply the bonuses behind the scenes. In neither case, however, does the weapon become the actor. The weapon informs the actor how to interact with the target. Rules are mechanical. They inform players how to play the game. That his bonus is from a magical weapon or a class ability is immaterial. The player looks at the targets type, calculates his bonuses, and rolls the dice. </blockquote><p>Not quite getting what you are getting at there. Doesn't change the weapon. The weapon does not repurpose. Only the character's abilities are focused against the enemy.
<p>But once again, I will not change your opinion of the rule. It seems completely obvious to me that I am correct. I am certain you feel just as certain that you are correct. FAQ it and let this thread alone. There is a RULE thread
<br />
<a href="http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6im?Instant-Enemy-and-Bane-weapons" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Instant Enemy and Bane Weapons</a>
<br />
Much better place for the discussion.</p>
<p>I still think the ranger's companion, skill set, and class abilities make him a more versatile character. But, something awesome about a fighter archer with all those bow specific feats •sighs• THWAK THWAK THWAK THWAK!!! Never played a zen archer, really want to give it a try though. But magus currently, followed by an inquisitor in Carrion Crown. So probably a few years away.</p>
<p>Greg</p>Vestrial wrote:Actually, it would not. 'You' has to know that the target is a construct in order to apply the +2 to hit, and the extra damage. Now, 'you' is typically the player.
Now that is a really unusual interpretation. Where is the reference that magic abilities are determined by the "player" or even the "character" if that is what you mean? Does this mean one can turn keen off and on? The closest I can find to this unique adjudication is [Spoiler omitted] But bane is not an "activated"...Greg Wasson2012-11-29T05:54:01ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?zeanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#632012-11-29T05:20:24Z2012-11-29T05:20:24Z<p>I'm fairly certain (though that conversation on Bane Weapons and Instant Enemy makes me wonder - if it does in fact work that way, then the Ranger may very well be better at higher levels) that the Fighter is a better, well, Fighter in combat.</p>
<p>The Ranger has the advantage of a small spell list and an animal companion.</p>
<p>Basically, here's some advice. If you're gonna go with Ranger, get Boon Companion to make your Animal Companion as strong as a Druid's. Then, at the very least, the Ranger actually might do as much damage as the Fighter, once you factor in the fact that they have an animal companion also plucking away at the enemies.</p>
<p>However, solely on their abilities, it seems that the Fighter's massive amount of Feats gives him the edge in combat and Damage Per Round (both in terms of damage dice as well as accuracy).</p>I'm fairly certain (though that conversation on Bane Weapons and Instant Enemy makes me wonder - if it does in fact work that way, then the Ranger may very well be better at higher levels) that the Fighter is a better, well, Fighter in combat.
The Ranger has the advantage of a small spell list and an animal companion.
Basically, here's some advice. If you're gonna go with Ranger, get Boon Companion to make your Animal Companion as strong as a Druid's. Then, at the very least, the Ranger...zean2012-11-29T05:20:24ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Vestrialhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#622012-11-29T05:13:50Z2012-11-29T05:13:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Greg Wasson wrote:</div><blockquote> If it is wielded by someone that has no clue he is fighting a construct, it would still work. </blockquote><p>Actually, it would not. 'You' has to know that the target is a construct in order to apply the +2 to hit, and the extra damage. Now, 'you' is typically the player. If the gm was being sneaky and not letting the player know it was a bane weapon, the gm may become 'you' in this case and apply the bonuses behind the scenes. In neither case, however, does the weapon become the actor. The weapon informs the actor how to interact with the target. Rules are mechanical. They inform players how to play the game. That his bonus is from a magical weapon or a class ability is immaterial. The player looks at the targets type, calculates his bonuses, and rolls the dice.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>A bane weapon excels against certain foes. Against a designated foe, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than its actual bonus. It also deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against such foes.</blockquote><p>What does the weapon do with it's +2? Does the weapon roll a dice and apply the +2? Or does the fact that the weapon is bane inform the player to apply the +2?
<p>I'm sorry you took my comment so personally. Better wording would have been 'I do not understand your point.' And I still don't. You seem to be stating that weapons take actions, or roll dice.</p>Greg Wasson wrote:If it is wielded by someone that has no clue he is fighting a construct, it would still work.
Actually, it would not. 'You' has to know that the target is a construct in order to apply the +2 to hit, and the extra damage. Now, 'you' is typically the player. If the gm was being sneaky and not letting the player know it was a bane weapon, the gm may become 'you' in this case and apply the bonuses behind the scenes. In neither case, however, does the weapon become the actor....Vestrial2012-11-29T05:13:50ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Greg Wassonhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#612012-11-29T04:55:05Z2012-11-29T04:55:05Z<p>If the weapon were an intelligent bane weapon, would you rule it differently?</p>
<p>A bane weapon against constructs is always a bane weapon against constructs. If it is wielded by someone that has no clue he is fighting a construct, it would still work. The character does not determine if the creature is a construct or not. The fact the target is a favored enemy does not change weapon's nature.</p>
<p>The weapon interacts with target. You wield it. You chose what feats to apply. You choose to use skills that have bonuses because it is a favored enemy. The weapon does not change its "hardwired" abilities.</p>
<p>You interpret it differently. (You, not your clothes or your car :P ) And because many also read it differently, it really should be FAQ'd. There is no clear consensus. And we are not going to change each other's opinions. I hear your argument. I believe you are wrong.</p>
<p>But this is a thread about fighter vs ranger archers. There are threads in the rules section already arguing the different opinions about this particular spell.</p>
<p>I think the fighter archer is better. The ranger archer is more versatile. </p>
<p>Greg</p>
<p>EDIT removed some pronouns causing confuzlement</p>If the weapon were an intelligent bane weapon, would you rule it differently?
A bane weapon against constructs is always a bane weapon against constructs. If it is wielded by someone that has no clue he is fighting a construct, it would still work. The character does not determine if the creature is a construct or not. The fact the target is a favored enemy does not change weapon's nature.
The weapon interacts with target. You wield it. You chose what feats to apply. You choose to use...Greg Wasson2012-11-29T04:55:05ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#602012-11-29T04:42:42Z2012-11-29T04:42:42Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Vestrial wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Adamantine Dragon wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Vestrial wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Funky Badger wrote:</div><blockquote>That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive. </blockquote>I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? </blockquote>It isn't "his" bane. It is his <b>bow's</b> bane. That's the point. </blockquote>I understand your point, I was asking the Badger's. You still haven't explained in what sense does a weapon 'treat' a monster. The player makes a roll, the player checks target type, the player rolls damage. The weapon does not 'treat' targets in any way, the weapon modifies how <b>you</b> interact with said target. Your argument makes no sense. </blockquote><p>Notice that even when I strongly disagree with someone, I do my best to avoid making insulting and derogatory comments like "your argument makes no sense."
<p>My argument makes sense. "Bane" is by its very definition a magical enhancement placed on a <i>weapon</i>. The magical enhancement is described in the rules this way:</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">bane enhancement wrote:</div><blockquote>A bane weapon excels against certain foes. Against a designated foe, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than its actual bonus. It also deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against such foes. </blockquote><p>It says nothing about the user of the weapon. It describes the effect specifically as something the <b>weapon</b> does on its own. No matter WHO uses the bow, that chosen foe type will suffer the additional damage of the bane enhancement on the weapon.
<p>You may disagree with that. You may argue vehemently that "instant enemy" overrides it, even though there is nothing in the rules that says instant enemy overrides weapon enhancements.</p>
<p>But to say it "makes no sense" is purely and simply rude and unnecessary.</p>Vestrial wrote:Adamantine Dragon wrote: Vestrial wrote: Funky Badger wrote:That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive.
I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? It isn't "his" bane. It is his bow's bane. That's the point. I understand your point, I was asking...Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)2012-11-29T04:42:42ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Vestrialhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#592012-11-29T04:25:22Z2012-11-29T04:25:22Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Adamantine Dragon wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Vestrial wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Funky Badger wrote:</div><blockquote>That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive. </blockquote>I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? </blockquote>It isn't "his" bane. It is his <b>bow's</b> bane. That's the point. </blockquote><p>I understand your point, I was asking the Badger's. You still haven't explained in what sense does a weapon 'treat' a monster. The player makes a roll, the player checks target type, the player rolls damage. The weapon does not 'treat' targets in any way, the weapon modifies how <b>you</b> interact with said target. Your argument makes no sense.Adamantine Dragon wrote:Vestrial wrote: Funky Badger wrote:That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive.
I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? It isn't "his" bane. It is his bow's bane. That's the point. I understand your point, I was asking the Badger's....Vestrial2012-11-29T04:25:22ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#582012-11-29T04:20:30Z2012-11-29T04:20:30Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Vestrial wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Funky Badger wrote:</div><blockquote>That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive. </blockquote>I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? </blockquote><p>It isn't "his" bane. It is his <b>bow's</b> bane. That's the point.Vestrial wrote:Funky Badger wrote:That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive.
I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)? It isn't "his" bane. It is his bow's bane. That's the point.Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)2012-11-29T04:20:30ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#572012-11-29T04:18:12Z2012-11-29T04:18:12Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mergy wrote:</div><blockquote><p> PFS doesn't have a ruling, because they go by the rules of the game. Therefore, without a FAQ post on the topic, it is up to GM interpretation. As a GM, I would rule that a bane weapon activates, because that is one of many possible purposes.</p>
<p>To people who are calling my own personal rulings exploitative and abusive, stop letting emotions into the rules discussion please. </blockquote><p>"Exploit: To employ to the greatest possible advantage."
<p>Not sure why you have an emotional reaction to that word. It means what it means. It perfectly describes what you are doing.</p>
<p>You continue to assert that your interpretation of the rule, an interpretation that "provides the greatest possible advantage" is the only interpretation.</p>
<p>Several people have shown how the rule can be interpreted differently.</p>
<p>In my opinion the interpretation that "you" means the character only, not items, teammates or animal companions is not merely a different interpretation, but is far more likely to be the developer's original intent.</p>
<p>My interpretation does not seek the greatest possible advantage. It seeks what I see as a reasonable advantage that meets the rule as written. Your interpretation quite literally "seeks the greatest possible advantage."</p>
<p>Therefore it is, by literal definition, an "exploit."</p>
<p>It isn't my fault you react emotionally to that.</p>Mergy wrote:PFS doesn't have a ruling, because they go by the rules of the game. Therefore, without a FAQ post on the topic, it is up to GM interpretation. As a GM, I would rule that a bane weapon activates, because that is one of many possible purposes.
To people who are calling my own personal rulings exploitative and abusive, stop letting emotions into the rules discussion please.
"Exploit: To employ to the greatest possible advantage." Not sure why you have an emotional reaction to that...Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)2012-11-29T04:18:12ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Vestrialhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#562012-11-29T02:51:35Z2012-11-29T02:51:35Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Funky Badger wrote:</div><blockquote>That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive. </blockquote><p>I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)?Funky Badger wrote:That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive.
I don't see how it's either. It's precisely what the spell is designed to do. The ranger will get to use both his bane and FE bonuses on monsters for no consumables. How is using a 3rd level spell a couple times a day to achieve the same result abusive (or silly)?Vestrial2012-11-29T02:51:35ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Mergyhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#552012-11-29T00:17:16Z2012-11-29T00:17:16Z<p>PFS doesn't have a ruling, because they go by the rules of the game. Therefore, without a FAQ post on the topic, it is up to GM interpretation. As a GM, I would rule that a bane weapon activates, because that is one of many possible purposes.</p>
<p>To people who are calling my own personal rulings exploitative and abusive, stop letting emotions into the rules discussion please.</p>PFS doesn't have a ruling, because they go by the rules of the game. Therefore, without a FAQ post on the topic, it is up to GM interpretation. As a GM, I would rule that a bane weapon activates, because that is one of many possible purposes.
To people who are calling my own personal rulings exploitative and abusive, stop letting emotions into the rules discussion please.Mergy2012-11-29T00:17:16ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#542012-11-28T22:53:53Z2012-11-28T22:53:53Z<p>Again, I will ask, because someone MUST know.</p>
<p>How does PFS rule with bane weapons and Instant Enemy?</p>
<p>Many, many, many (in fact so far in ALL cases) when I have this sort of debate on these boards, the way I rule is the same way PFS rules.</p>
<p>If PFS allows bane weapons to benefit from instant enemy, it will be the first time PFS allows an exploit I don't.</p>
<p>So, what does PFS do?</p>Again, I will ask, because someone MUST know.
How does PFS rule with bane weapons and Instant Enemy?
Many, many, many (in fact so far in ALL cases) when I have this sort of debate on these boards, the way I rule is the same way PFS rules.
If PFS allows bane weapons to benefit from instant enemy, it will be the first time PFS allows an exploit I don't.
So, what does PFS do?Adamantine Dragon (alias of brassbaboon)2012-11-28T22:53:53ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Charlie Bell (RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#532012-11-28T22:22:50Z2012-11-28T22:22:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">paizo.com wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Your search didn't match any items.
</p>
</blockquote><p>paizo.com wrote:Your search didn't match any items.Charlie Bell (RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16)2012-11-28T22:22:50ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Funky Badgerhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#522012-11-28T21:59:34Z2012-11-28T21:59:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mergy wrote:</div><blockquote> The weapon is in the possession of the ranger. If he counts as a dragon for all purposes, then my dragonbane bow activates. </blockquote><p>That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive.Mergy wrote:The weapon is in the possession of the ranger. If he counts as a dragon for all purposes, then my dragonbane bow activates.
That's extremely silly, not to mention downright abusive.Funky Badger2012-11-28T21:59:34ZRe: Forums: Advice: Who's the better archer: Archer Fighter or the Ranger?Killstringhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p6zp&page=2?Whos-the-better-archer-Archer-Fighter-or-the#512012-11-28T21:10:52Z2012-11-28T21:10:52Z<p>Didn't work for me either.</p>Didn't work for me either.Killstring2012-11-28T21:10:52Z