I wanted to get a general baseline of the kind of damage that a martial class that was moderately unoptimized could do but my system mastery is pretty poor. So the above post, assuming, what, a 2d4 Falchion?
Greatsword.
71 on a full attack. Gloves of dueling would bump it up more than 2 points, since we used chance to hit and crits to calculate the DPR. So a +2 to hit is like 10% more damage roughly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except for the manuevers a ranger can do ALL of those things as wellMy wife's fighter is probably our single most destructive force in the group. She even took Leadership for a feat. Do you know why? Because she had the feats to do it she wasn't starved on feats she had the versatility of choosing what she took.
She can also trip, sunder, or disarm at range she threatens 15 feet around and slant worry about provoking AoO for firing in melee it's amazing. And if paizo released a new feat for allowing dext to damage for bows she can take that one too.
i can build an oracle who can do all those things too. i can make a rogue do them all. i can make a magus do them all. but if i do, those classes wont be doing their INTENDED job as well as they could have. this is the same with the ranger. if you want to make a ranger stack up number for number with a fighter designed to be the front line bullet sponge, you have to sacrifice something. the very best you are going to get by trying this is a ranger with 3 fewer feats and ~20 more skill points.
yes, you can make a ranger be your bullet sponge, but he wont be the ranger anymore, he'll be the "guy trying to be the fighter/paladin"
at best your ranger will be able to go blow for blow with the fighter when he is standing in a favored terrain and the enemy with a favored enemy. if neither of those are true statements in an encounter, then your down numbers in +ATK and +Dmg. anything you can do to increase these number, a fighter can do as well by some means. plus he's wearing better armor AND he's got at least one other feat chain at any given point more then the ranger does, so he has more combat related tricks up his sleeve. he can do MORE in combat that the ranger can until you factor in the pet, at which point that is a one trick pony where the fighter has a multitude of options to go with.
i'm sorry to sound so childish, but when it comes to combat, "anything you can do, I can do better! I can do anything better than you!"
thats the whole point of of the fighter. yes, you can do more out of combat at the expense of things to do/have inside of combat, but not you are making yourself a jack of all trades, which was never the intent of any class or archetype in the same except for the rogue. and as we all know, the rogue is exactly that - jack of all trades, master of none.
for a general "get more out of the game overall, but excel at my characters main objective slightly worse" point of view, a ranger can replace a fighter in the "tank" role in a group, but he will never be able to be a "tank" as well as a fighter can. the only two classes that can accomplish this are the barbarian and the paladin if you build them to be the tank. and even then, the barbarian usually doesn't end up being as good a tank as you would like it to be.
Ah, of course! I'm really bad at this =/ I don't think it changes the calculations much-- even an unoptimized fighter is doing pretty well. What I'd really like is for somebody to give me a more realistic ranger baseline. Mostly I'm just trying to shift the conversation away from minutia into an examination of how the classes actually play. If fighters deal more damage, can we get a sense of how valuable that is? My post was really back-of-the-napkin stuff that oversimplified pretty much everything, but the point was to try to shift the discussion into the realm of play a bit more. The point isn't "can the fighter do more damage", because the answer is probably "yes". The point is to ask "how important is that extra damage". If both classes are dropping CR equivalent enemies in a similar number of attacks, then there's not much value in the added damage. But it seems as if this isn't the case; fighters are actually having a demonstrable effect on how quickly combat is resolved.
A fighter can't take all the crafting feats he can take 2 and both of those are subject to skill checks that dont cover the range of those feats. I'll tell you what you build an unbrakable fighter and I'll take your stats and build a ranger that is almost as effective in combat except for AC and DPR and still has all the ranger abilities out of combat like I've stated before the only difference was 22/34 vs 16/28 before instant enemy which completely leveled the playing field and that's ignoring the animal companion DPR, flanking, out of combat utility, and reflex saves.
I disagree with almost everything you said. No one is trying to win the game,but the things a fighter can do so a ranger can do almost as well. The AC and DPR difference is miniscule before you take animal companion into account. Then you add in better saves, spells, skills, and class features and its a better class to bring along. If a class can do 90% of the...i believe you are comparing a very specific ranger build to a very general fighter with no specific theme to his build.
go make an unbreakable fighter and compare it to that rame ranger you are talking about and we'll see who makes a better front line "tank" for any senario. build a basic fighter with all crafting feats and see how "useless" he is out of combat....see where i'm going here?
well since in my group i dont play the tank, i will defer this challenge to my tank...
Ohhh Chaotic Fighter! where are you!?!?! i have a challenge for you!!!
actually, i'm fairly certain you have already built this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rangers can perform maneuvers in melee not at range.
A fighter can't take all the crafting feats he can take 2 and both of those are subject to skill checks that dont cover the range of those feats. I'll tell you what you build an unbrakable fighter and I'll take your stats and build a ranger that is almost as effective in combat except for AC and DPR and still has all the ranger abilities out of combat like I've stated before the only difference was 22/34 vs 16/28 before instant enemy which completely leveled the playing field and that's ignoring the animal companion DPR, flanking, out of combat utility, and reflex saves.
I disagree with almost everything you said. No one is trying to win the game,but the things a fighter can do so a ranger can do almost as well. The AC and DPR difference is miniscule before you take animal companion into account. Then you add in better saves, spells, skills, and class features and its a better class to bring along. If a class can do 90% of the...i believe you are comparing a very specific ranger build to a very general fighter with no specific theme to his build.
go make an unbreakable fighter and compare it to that rame ranger you are talking about and we'll see who makes a better front line "tank" for any senario. build a basic fighter with all crafting feats and see how "useless" he is out of combat....see where i'm going here?
well since in my group i dont play the tank, i will defer this challenge to my tank...
Ohhh Chaotic Fighter! where are you!?!?! i have a challenge for you!!!
actually, i'm fairly certain you have already built this.
Nothing the fighter does is fancy enough for those who have decided it.
Besides this thread isn't about overly optimized characters that require obsessive system mastery.
Rangers can perform maneuvers in melee not at range.
Okay?
Ah, of course! I'm really bad at this =/ I don't think it changes the calculations much-- even an unoptimized fighter is doing pretty well. What I'd really like is for somebody to give me a more realistic ranger baseline. Mostly I'm just trying to shift the conversation away from minutia into an examination of how the classes actually play. If fighters deal more damage, can we get a sense of how valuable that is? My post was really back-of-the-napkin stuff that oversimplified pretty much everything, but the point was to try to shift the discussion into the realm of play a bit more. The point isn't "can the fighter do more damage", because the answer is probably "yes". The point is to ask "how important is that extra damage". If both classes are dropping CR equivalent enemies in a similar number of attacks, then there's not much value in the added damage. But it seems as if this isn't the case; fighters are actually having a demonstrable effect on how quickly combat is resolved.
from personal experience:
round one of combat, ranger goes before fighter in intiative. uses first round to cast a spell. fighter uses first round to close the distance and makes a single attack (or more commonly this is just a bullrush)
second round: ranger closes the gap and makes a single attack (almost never a bullrush). fighter makes a full-attack actions, drops one baddy, 5-foot steps and lays into another.
thirst round: ranger gets a full attack and drops one enemy. fighter drops a second enemy and moves on to a third.
this goes on until everything is dead. sometime the fighter gets more then one kill in a round....no matter the numbers, the fighter is almost always at least one kill ahead of anyone else in the group. if you replace the fighter with the ranger for the group dynamic, you are giving up that one kill lead in just about every encounter. no matter who you replace the fighter with as you tank, you are still giving up that kill.
thats your answer.
Wait, why is the ranger in the example stopping to cast a spell?
Ah, of course! I'm really bad at this =/ I don't think it changes the calculations much-- even an unoptimized fighter is doing pretty well. What I'd really like is for somebody to give me a more realistic ranger baseline. Mostly I'm just trying to shift the conversation away from minutia into an examination of how the classes actually play. If fighters deal more damage, can we get a sense of how valuable that is? My post was really back-of-the-napkin stuff that oversimplified pretty much everything, but the point was to try to shift the discussion into the realm of play a bit more. The point isn't "can the fighter do more damage", because the answer is probably "yes". The point is to ask "how important is that extra damage". If both classes are dropping CR equivalent enemies in a similar number of attacks, then there's not much value in the added damage. But it seems as if this isn't the case; fighters are actually having a demonstrable effect on how quickly combat is resolved.from personal experience:
round one of combat, ranger goes before fighter in intiative. uses first round to cast a spell. fighter uses first round to close the distance and makes a single attack (or more commonly this is just a bullrush)
second round: ranger closes the gap and makes a single attack (almost never a bullrush). fighter makes a full-attack actions, drops one baddy, 5-foot steps and lays into another.
thirst round: ranger gets a full attack and drops one enemy. fighter drops a second enemy and moves on to a third.
this goes on until everything is dead. sometime the fighter gets more then one kill in a round....no matter the numbers, the fighter is almost always at least one kill ahead of anyone else in the group. if you replace the fighter with the ranger for the group dynamic, you are giving up that one kill lead in just about every encounter. no matter who you replace the fighter with as you tank, you are still giving up that kill.
thats your answer.
If you read the last post I made on the last page, you'll see I'd arrived at approximately the same conclusion.
Ah, of course! I'm really bad at this =/ I don't think it changes the calculations much-- even an unoptimized fighter is doing pretty well. What I'd really like is for somebody to give me a more realistic ranger baseline. Mostly I'm just trying to shift the conversation away from minutia into an examination of how the classes actually play. If fighters deal more damage, can we get a sense of how valuable that is? My post was really back-of-the-napkin stuff that oversimplified pretty much everything, but the point was to try to shift the discussion into the realm of play a bit more. The point isn't "can the fighter do more damage", because the answer is probably "yes". The point is to ask "how important is that extra damage". If both classes are dropping CR equivalent enemies in a similar number of attacks, then there's not much value in the added damage. But it seems as if this isn't the case; fighters are actually having a demonstrable effect on how quickly combat is resolved.from personal experience:
round one of combat, ranger goes before fighter in intiative. uses first round to cast a spell. fighter uses first round to close the distance and makes a single attack (or more commonly this is just a bullrush)
second round: ranger closes the gap and makes a single attack (almost never a bullrush). fighter makes a full-attack actions, drops one baddy, 5-foot steps and lays into another.
thirst round: ranger gets a full attack and drops one enemy. fighter drops a second enemy and moves on to a third.
this goes on until everything is dead. sometime the fighter gets more then one kill in a round....no matter the numbers, the fighter is almost always at least one kill ahead of anyone else in the group. if you replace the fighter with the ranger for the group dynamic, you are giving up that one kill lead in just about every encounter. no matter who you replace the fighter with as you tank, you are still giving up that kill.
thats your answer.
As what's his face pointed out casting instant enemy is a swift action.
A fighter can't take all the crafting feats he can take 2 and both of those are subject to skill checks that dont cover the range of those feats. I'll tell you what you build an unbrakable fighter and I'll take your stats and build a ranger that is almost as effective in combat except for AC and DPR and still has all the ranger abilities out of combat like I've stated before the only difference was 22/34 vs 16/28 before instant enemy which completely leveled the playing field and that's ignoring the animal companion DPR, flanking, out of combat utility, and reflex saves.
I disagree with almost everything you said. No one is trying to win the game,but the things a fighter can do so a ranger can do almost as well. The AC and DPR difference is miniscule before you take animal companion into account. Then you add in better saves, spells, skills, and class features and its a better class to bring along. If a class can do 90% of the...i believe you are comparing a very specific ranger build to a very general fighter with no specific theme to his build.
go make an unbreakable fighter and compare it to that rame ranger you are talking about and we'll see who makes a better front line "tank" for any senario. build a basic fighter with all crafting feats and see how "useless" he is out of combat....see where i'm going here?
well since in my group i dont play the tank, i will defer this challenge to my tank...
Ohhh Chaotic Fighter! where are you!?!?! i have a challenge for you!!!
actually, i'm fairly certain you have already built this.
Nothing the fighter does is fancy enough for those who have decided it.
Besides this thread isn't about overly optimized characters that require obsessive system mastery.
>_> way to leave me out in the wind.....like always....because i have to cast a spell at the begining of the fight and you've already killed everything....this post has exemplified why a fighter is better for being the tank....you just finished the fight before i finished buffing you....
>_> way to leave me out in the wind.....like always....because i have to cast a spell at the begining of the fight and you've already killed...A fighter can't take all the crafting feats he can take 2 and both of those are subject to skill checks that dont cover the range of those feats. I'll tell you what you build an unbrakable fighter and I'll take your stats and build a ranger that is almost as effective in combat except for AC and DPR and still has all the ranger abilities out of combat like I've stated before the only difference was 22/34 vs 16/28 before instant enemy which completely leveled the playing field and that's ignoring the animal companion DPR, flanking, out of combat utility, and reflex saves.
I disagree with almost everything you said. No one is trying to win the game,but the things a fighter can do so a ranger can do almost as well. The AC and DPR difference is miniscule before you take animal companion into account. Then you add in better saves, spells, skills, and class features and its a better class to bring along. If a class can do 90% of the...i believe you are comparing a very specific ranger build to a very general fighter with no specific theme to his build.
go make an unbreakable fighter and compare it to that rame ranger you are talking about and we'll see who makes a better front line "tank" for any senario. build a basic fighter with all crafting feats and see how "useless" he is out of combat....see where i'm going here?
well since in my group i dont play the tank, i will defer this challenge to my tank...
Ohhh Chaotic Fighter! where are you!?!?! i have a challenge for you!!!
actually, i'm fairly certain you have already built this.
Nothing the fighter does is fancy enough for those who have decided it.
Besides this thread isn't about overly optimized characters that require obsessive system mastery.
Leave me alone I have too much of a headache to be building characters right now. My Witch hunting unbreakable fighter is designed to ignore spells and annoy casters. Still only combat specific. So I'm not gonna bother with that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As what's his face pointed out casting instant enemy is a swift action.
its also a 3rd level spell which limits it use as a swift action to x times a day and cant even be used until what? like 13th level? so over half the game is played without this even being an option. weapon training is active from lvl5 and isn't variable dependent.
the ranger can pick up any magic weapon the group happens to loot. and use it equally well
the fighter is stuck with their signature weapon or signature weapon combo.
The weapon could be in a group where the fighter have weapon training, so they can still have the advantage.
Besides if the ranger focus on archery and the wapo that bypass taht DR is a melee weapon the ranger will not do it equally well.
If the ranger is a switch hitter then the fighter can be much more potent warrior (in ranged an in melee).
========
By the way sunder/disarm a fighter of his signature weapon (group) becomes hareder with the levels compared to a ranger.
Regardless of what drops there's always that optimal weapon you really want. Of course if your sundering your probably built to do it and if you do sunder the fighter's main weapon the fighter is way more screwed than the ranger who had his weapon broken.
well my summon Chaos Fighter spell just fizzled....hmm lets see....ohh! i'll just cast my...wait...what? the fights over? damn...
Ranger spells slots tend to be more limited then those of full casters, so Instant Enemy won't be infinitely available. You could get a wand of instant enemy, but unless you're carrying the wand in your hand all of the time then it takes a move action to retrieve it and use it. This will mean that you won't be able to full attack in the same round you use your wand to cast instant enemy unless you're already holding the wand when combat begins.
Regardless of what drops there's always that optimal weapon you really want. Of course if your sundering your probably built to do it and if you do sunder the fighter's main weapon the fighter is way more screwed than the ranger who had his weapon broken.the ranger can pick up any magic weapon the group happens to loot. and use it equally well
the fighter is stuck with their signature weapon or signature weapon combo.
The weapon could be in a group where the fighter have weapon training, so they can still have the advantage.
Besides if the ranger focus on archery and the wapo that bypass taht DR is a melee weapon the ranger will not do it equally well.
If the ranger is a switch hitter then the fighter can be much more potent warrior (in ranged an in melee).
========
By the way sunder/disarm a fighter of his signature weapon (group) becomes hareder with the levels compared to a ranger.
if the fighter can be disarmed or sundered then so can the ranger...this entire point is invalid.
the ranger can pick up any magic weapon the group happens to loot. and use it equally wellthe fighter is stuck with their signature weapon or signature weapon combo.
The weapon could be in a group where the fighter have weapon training, so they can still have the advantage.
Besides if the ranger focus on archery and the wapo that bypass taht DR is a melee weapon the ranger will not do it equally well.
If the ranger is a switch hitter then the fighter can be much more potent warrior (in ranged an in melee).
========
By the way sunder/disarm a fighter of his signature weapon (group) becomes hareder with the levels compared to a ranger.
a weapon in the fighter's weapon training group?
depends on luck
a fighter finding a weapon in his or her weapon training group is about as common as a ranger running into his or her favored enemy. it is a wash.
especially when the ranger has 3 favored enemies and can choose 3 common types such as undead, outsiders (evil), and humanoid (human) as examples.
if the fighter can be disarmed or sundered then so can the ranger...this entire point is invalid.
That's not how that works. The point was how well they handle it.
if the fighter can be disarmed or sundered then so can the ranger...this entire point is invalid.Regardless of what drops there's always that optimal weapon you really want. Of course if your sundering your probably built to do it and if you do sunder the fighter's main weapon the fighter is way more screwed than the ranger who had his weapon broken.the ranger can pick up any magic weapon the group happens to loot. and use it equally well
the fighter is stuck with their signature weapon or signature weapon combo.
The weapon could be in a group where the fighter have weapon training, so they can still have the advantage.
Besides if the ranger focus on archery and the wapo that bypass taht DR is a melee weapon the ranger will not do it equally well.
If the ranger is a switch hitter then the fighter can be much more potent warrior (in ranged an in melee).
========
By the way sunder/disarm a fighter of his signature weapon (group) becomes hareder with the levels compared to a ranger.
I actually built a character with a phobia of being disarmed or sundered. He carried a lot of extra weapons and only ever used one because it never came down to him losing it.
if the fighter can be disarmed or sundered then so can the ranger...this entire point is invalid.That's not how that works. The point was how well they handle it.
Did the ranger burn a feat on improved unarmed strike? I almost always do. In that case yes. The ranger is better off because the FE still applies to his fists, or natural attack, or what have you. BUT! I don't think I've ever played a fighter that only carried one weapon he had training in.
Regardless of what drops there's always that optimal weapon you really want. Of course if your sundering your probably built to do it and if you do sunder the fighter's main weapon the fighter is way more screwed than the ranger who had his weapon broken.If the ranger animal companio nget killed in the middle of a dungeon the the ranger is pretty much screw too. Ans since we are talking about trowing optimals things against the fighter, the DM can easily desing an encounter to One shot the AC.
What? That's a ridiculous comparison!
Did the ranger burn a feat on improved unarmed strike? I almost always do. In that case yes. The ranger is better off because the FE still applies to his fists, or natural attack, or what have you. BUT! I don't think I've ever played a fighter that only carried one weapon he had training in.if the fighter can be disarmed or sundered then so can the ranger...this entire point is invalid.That's not how that works. The point was how well they handle it.
Golf bag of +1 greatswords? I'd believe it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regardless of what drops there's always that optimal weapon you really want. Of course if your sundering your probably built to do it and if you do sunder the fighter's main weapon the fighter is way more screwed than the ranger who had his weapon broken.If the ranger animal companio nget killed in the middle of a dungeon the the ranger is pretty much screw too. Ans since we are talking about trowing optimals things against the fighter, the DM can easily desing an encounter to One shot the AC.What? That's a ridiculous comparison!
Golf bag of +1 greatswords? I'd believe it.Did the ranger burn a feat on improved unarmed strike? I almost always do. In that case yes. The ranger is better off because the FE still applies to his fists, or natural attack, or what have you. BUT! I don't think I've ever played a fighter that only carried one weapon he had training in.if the fighter can be disarmed or sundered then so can the ranger...this entire point is invalid.That's not how that works. The point was how well they handle it.
Screw that. A Cad fighter with a Golf bag of actual golf clubs. And Golf balls for those pesky flying enemies.
Screw that. A Cad fighter with a Golf bag of actual golf clubs. And Golf balls for those pesky flying enemies.
Caddy Cadson. Master of improvised weapons. He who giveth the golf club also taketh away. Oddly enough good at more than just golf clubs...
Screw that. A Cad fighter with a Golf bag of actual golf clubs. And Golf balls for those pesky flying enemies.
Golf bag of +1 greatswords? I'd believe it.
+1
on the subject of picking up random weapons....name a weapon the fighter can't just pick up and use at all? he's proficient with everything... rangers arn't. thats a massive issue with rangers. i can take sword and board spec for my ranger (because im trying to be a tank replacement) but now when i somehow misplace my sword and board and the only thing laying there is a rusty tower shield and slingshot i've suddenly seemed to have chosen the wrong class...
on the subject of picking up random weapons....name a weapon the fighter can't just pick up and use at all? he's proficient with everything... rangers arn't. thats a massive issue with rangers. i can take sword and board spec for my ranger (because im trying to be a tank replacement) but now when i somehow misplace my sword and board and the only thing laying there is a rusty tower shield and slingshot i've suddenly seemed to have chosen the wrong class...
Uhhh... Is there a class that can use a tower shield AND a sling shot?
Edit: Also the Ranger is proficient in all martial simple and martial weapons. Just like the Fighter. The only thing the fighter has over on the ranger is heavy armor and the tower shield. And apparently some people don't like the idea of a giant shield.
Screw that. A Cad fighter with a Golf bag of actual golf clubs. And Golf balls for those pesky flying enemies.Caddy Cadson. Master of improvised weapons. He who giveth the golf club also taketh away. Oddly enough good at more than just golf clubs...
I feel like such a failure... I didn't notice the potential for a golf pun when I mentioned that....
Edit: Edited the wrong thing.
I feel like such a failure... I didn't notice the potential for a golf pun when I mentioned that....
Well actually I was lampshading the Cad's class features. He gets a bonus to dirty trick and disarm, and he doesn't have to specialize in any weapon to get his weapon training bonus.
name a weapon the fighter can't just pick up and use at all? he's proficient with everything... rangers arn't.
This is a joke right?
I feel like such a failure... I didn't notice the potential for a golf pun when I mentioned that....Well actually I was lampshading the Cad's class features. He gets a bonus to dirty trick and disarm, and he doesn't have to specialize in any weapon to get his weapon training bonus.
name a weapon the fighter can't just pick up and use at all? he's proficient with everything... rangers arn't.This is a joke right?
I certainly hope it is.
The Ranger gets his Instant Enemy at level 11...which is probably slightly before the Fighter gets his Gloves of Dueling. And his bonus at that time is going to be +6, and only going to go up from there.
The key for the Ranger is he gets his awesome DPR when he wants and needs it, and is simply very good at other times (don't forget lead blades and gravity bow also up his damage, and are 1st level spells). If all his pet does is Aid Another, that's another +2 to hit or +2 to his AC.
The idea of being able to go nova on a boss monster is often far more important then eking out massive damage against mooks.
And of course, when combat is done the Ranger can whip out his own CLW without resorting to wasting skills and feats on UMD and mend himself and his pet up.
==Aelryinth
on the subject of picking up random weapons....name a weapon the fighter can't just pick up and use at all? he's proficient with everything... rangers arn't. thats a massive issue with rangers. i can take sword and board spec for my ranger (because im trying to be a tank replacement) but now when i somehow misplace my sword and board and the only thing laying there is a rusty tower shield and slingshot i've suddenly seemed to have chosen the wrong class...
Congrats you've picked the only "weapon" a Ranger can't use a Fighter can.
And Tower Shields are terrible anyway.
on the subject of picking up random weapons....name a weapon the fighter can't just pick up and use at all? he's proficient with everything... rangers arn't. thats a massive issue with rangers. i can take sword and board spec for my ranger (because im trying to be a tank replacement) but now when i somehow misplace my sword and board and the only thing laying there is a rusty tower shield and slingshot i've suddenly seemed to have chosen the wrong class...Congrats you've picked the only "weapon" a Ranger can't use a Fighter can.
And Tower Shields are terrible anyway.
A Ranger can't use a slingshot?
Tower Shield.
Hence why "weapon" is in air quotes.
Tower Shield.
Hence why "weapon" is in air quotes.
But but...a tower shield isn't a weapon..... Ever. Which is crap by the way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It can be an improvised weapon.
It can be an improvised weapon.
I thought that as soon as I posted and I was hoping nobody would mention it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ranger spells slots tend to be more limited then those of full casters, so Instant Enemy won't be infinitely available. You could get a wand of instant enemy, but unless you're carrying the wand in your hand all of the time then it takes a move action to retrieve it and use it. This will mean that you won't be able to full attack in the same round you use your wand to cast instant enemy unless you're already holding the wand when combat begins.
Plus wands are a standard action to activate, so there's pretty much an entire turn down the drain....
And (to a completely different poster's point) the statement that a fighter has the same chance of finding a weapon he has weapon training in as a ranger has to bump into his favored enemy is hogwash. Even the most specialized of Fighter weapon groups contains enough weapons that there will be something in almost any dungeon run that matches up, whereas a ranger can go very wrong very quickly with a few bad choices for FE. Ouch, went with FE orcs and FE humans because they were all over the place just last week and now there's nothing but aberrations and constructs in this dungeon? Rough. Even if a fighter specializes in daggers and hand-crossbows he's still going to see useable light blades and crossbows come up very regularly.
Even if a fighter specializes in daggers and hand-crossbows he's still going to see useable light blades and crossbows come up very regularly.
Ranger: Sucks to be you! No awesome greatswords around here! You are gimped forever!
Fighter: Well, shoot. I mean, if you give me an aldori duelling sword, a bastard sword, a chakram, an elven curve blade, a falcata, a falchion, a flambard, a greatsword, a katana, a longsword, a scimitar, a scythe, or another such weapon, I am only missing out on my weapon focus/weapon specialization feats. But still, I am utterly gimped when denied a greatsword!
Even if a fighter specializes in daggers and hand-crossbows he's still going to see useable light blades and crossbows come up very regularly.Ranger: Sucks to be you! No awesome greatswords around here! You are gimped forever!
Fighter: Well, shoot. I mean, if you give me an aldori duelling sword, a bastard sword, a chakram, an elven curve blade, a falcata, a falchion, a flambard, a greatsword, a katana, a longsword, a scimitar, a scythe, or another such weapon, I am only missing out on my weapon focus/weapon specialization feats. But still, I am utterly gimped when denied a greatsword!
Or more toned down...
Ranger: Man I'm glad its gnolls we're running into today. I get a +4 against those guys.
Fighter: Yeah but they keep dropping battle axes. That's my 3rd weapon group and I mean I really want to use a Nodachi for the crit. I sank all those feats into critting and using a nodachi.
Ranger: Ahh, we'll buy one when we get home from all the +1 battle axes these guys have. btw, I totally hope they have an aberration BBEG. I've got a +6 against that!
Once again. Pfff crit builds.
That's why my fighters grabs a greatsword. Greatswords are one of the most common weapons.
Crit builds may eek out more DPR, but not everything can be crit-ed and most of the crit build weapons have no real reason to drop.
Of course some people in this thread have GMs who consider greatswords a rare and unique weapon because F the fighter.