| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There has been negative feedback on what has happened to the ranger. I thought it was all justified until I took a second look. Here's what I like:
* Start with Expert proficiency in all saving throws.
* Lots of skills and rapid skill progression.
* The same 3rd level Weapon Expertise as fighters. This can mean gaining Expert proficiency in bows (or in swords) for example as well as unlocking critical specializations.
* Evasion at level 7, nice for avoiding damage from spells.
* 0/-3/-6 Hunt Target multi-attack option with agile? It sucks that you have to use an action to do this, but usable in ambush or against a boss.
* Good with simple and martial weapons? And light/med. armor? All good.
Feats:
* L1 Crossbow Ace - Nice damage increases.
* L1 Double Slice - Nice big damage attack, the two-weaponer's power attack.
* L2 Favored Aim - Around a +2 to hit with bows? Nice.
* L2 Quick Draw - Handy for staying mobile, drawing + attacking, throwing weapons quickly.
The rest of the feats don't interest me and are arguably weak. I do like L4 Twin Parry a bit, and I think L6 Skirmish Strike is useful. However, the animal companion stuff seems junky to me personally. Snares are so conditional and uninteresting. I agree with the negative feedback here.
So why do I like a class that caps out on neat feats so early? And whose signature ability Hunt Target is questionably useful? Archetypes! I could totally see taking Cleric or Wizard at L6 and then boosting spell capacity at L8. Suddenly ranger has a whole new range of builds and options to explore. Solid offense, decent armor, good saves, tons of skills and capabilities... all of that and spells of any type you like? Heck yeah. For me the lack of cool feats gives me no regrets about using those class feats on an archetype instead.
I could totally see myself playing one of these in PF2 and having a good time. (Sure, sure, you can argue that the feats and abilities need to improve, and I won't say anything. However, there's a lot to like for some playstyles, so here's a positive review.)
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Before the people come in saying how terrible the Ranger is I would like to say I agree. The Ranger is good stuff.
I do think some things need to be changed/tweaked/improved but for the most part the Ranger is pretty cool to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's a pretty good summary. 2E Ranger has a lot of neat ideas and options.
However, things need to be tweaked a bit so things actually work together. Hunt Target's penalty reduction doesn't help crossbow users much (or at all with a heavy crossbow) nor does it help TWF builds that use Double Slice to ignore the penalties entirely.
Hunt Target also doesn't play nice with Rangers with Companions, due to Commanding an Animal requiring an action each turn.
Monster Hunter is supremely underwhelming compared to the other level 1 class feats; I'd much rather it allow you to Hunt and Recall Knowlege together rather than *maybe* getting a +1 bonus to one attack against one creature.
Snares? Yikes. You can't do anything with them until level 4, they take too long to assemble in-battle till level 8 (and even then you have to completely burn a full round to set them), they don't use your class DC till level 16.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Backhanded? Felt more like a reverse haymaker to me.
I think Hunt Target should net some sort of damage or hit increase to the first attack, Monster Hunter should last until the creature is dead, and Snares need to be reworked a little to make them actually appealing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ranger is a good class, it just that all its good feats are not rangery, and all the rangery ones are not good or require higher level feats just to make them usable.
it's like saying that PF2's version of Mesmerist is a solid class because it has great melee power.
That's not the point.
Start with Expert proficiency in all saving throws.
Indeed, this is a welcome improvement.
Lots of skills and rapid skill progression.
As of update 1.2, Rangers are trained in Survival and 5 more skills + INT modifier.
This means Rangers are always trained in at least 6 skills.Characters with the least amount of skills available to them (Fighter, Druid, Cleric, etc.) are always trained in a total of 5 skills.
I was pleased with update 1.2 because, finally, everyone gets enough skills that they can contribute outside of their combat prowess.
However, Rangers are not exactly miles better with just one more skill than average.
Rangers also gain their skill increases at the exact same rate than everyone else, except for the Rogue.
Again, skill progression might seem faster in this edition but it's true for every character and is not something that pertains to the Ranger class specifically.
The same 3rd level Weapon Expertise as fighters. This can mean gaining Expert proficiency in bows (or in swords) for example as well as unlocking critical specializations.
Rangers never get to Legendary, unlike Fighters, but I do feel that this should remain a Fighter's niche and so I am fine with that.
I also appreciate the expert/master proficiency in a weapon group.Barbarians would likely cry for that right now.
Evasion at level 7, nice for avoiding damage from spells.
Frankly, it's the master proficiency in Perception and thus most initiative checks that I find more valuable. The other part is still useful though, so overall, I agree.
0/-3/-6 Hunt Target multi-attack option with agile? It sucks that you have to use an action to do this, but usable in ambush or against a boss.
Aaaannnd...this is where you lost me. The benefits are there, when you get a second or third attack and it's not completely unusable right now.
However, the opportunity cost of having to spend an action is too high.Either make it a free action or reaction or just boost the bonuses you get from Hunt Target so that it's worth spending that action.
I'll deal with it if this is the final iteration that makes it into 2nd edition but I'll be extremely disappointed.
Barbarians suffer the same with spending an action every four rounds to Rage. It's a damage loss that is hard to make up for. I found a way do that with some specific animal companions but, really, I think a design overhaul is necessary.
Good with simple and martial weapons? And light/med. armor? All good.
I don't get why Rangers are not trained with shields.
I'd like for them to have that option. Otherwise, I pretty much agree again.
The rest of the feats don't interest me and are arguably weak. I do like L4 Twin Parry a bit, and I think L6 Skirmish Strike is useful. However, the animal companion stuff seems junky to me personally. Snares are so conditional and uninteresting. I agree with the negative feedback here.
Twin Parry is weak because it's meant to work with Twin Paragon...a Fighter-only level 16 feat. You can't get that one from an archetype and thus Twin Parry doesn't do much for Rangers.
Skirmish Strike is situationally useful.The animal companion itself is a nice addition but it suffers from two major issues: AC are squishy as hell and Rangers have no innate mean to heal them + they require an action to get to act each turn.
Agreed that snares are all but useless right now, not to mention the bulk requirement for them!
So why do I like a class that caps out on neat feats so early? And whose signature ability Hunt Target is questionably useful? Archetypes! I could totally see taking Cleric or Wizard at L6 and then boosting spell capacity at L8. Suddenly ranger has a whole new range of builds and options to explore. Solid offense, decent armor, good saves, tons of skills and capabilities... all of that and spells of any type you like? Heck yeah. For me the lack of cool feats gives me no regrets about using those class feats on an archetype instead.
It's great that you can build a Ranger with archetypes and come up with strong character concepts that feel powerful.
It is, however, wrong, that you would not have any incentive to stay with your base class in the long run.Ideally, with every class, there should be strong incentives to select class feats all the way to level 20 while archetypes should offer worthwhile features that truly make you question whether to sacrifice any more of your class feats in favor of what you gain from archetypes.
That most Rangers would consider multiclassing past the first few levels is a good indication that something is not right with that class design.
On my read-thru of the Ranger class, it seemed on-par with Fighter in many aspects, and ahead in a few.
Haven't really dove deep into the class feats as of yet to see how well they stack up, but I think I'll end up disagreeing with the general opinion of the message boards because "snares are weak" just doesn't compute to me.
You literally sound like you're saying the ranger is fine, except most of it's feats class feats and features are broken.
On my read-thru of the Ranger class, it seemed on-par with Fighter in many aspects, and ahead in a few.
Haven't really dove deep into the class feats as of yet to see how well they stack up, but I think I'll end up disagreeing with the general opinion of the message boards because "snares are weak" just doesn't compute to me.
That is definitely not the larger opinion coming from most people posting here. Theory crafting and first impressions from reading are fine and dandy, but actual practical experience trumps that. And for many people, their actual experiences with the ranger has not been positive.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Id like to see more bow flavored feat options.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed. That would help some.
I think the ranger should have the best archery options in the game.
It should have the potential to be the best archer hands down.
Rangers need improvements otherwise they're outperformed by Druids or Fighters, depending on build choice. It's hard to make a Ranger that can compete with them, even at doing iconic Ranger tasks!
Hunt Target has to be improved, if only to a free action 1/round or maybe combine it w/ a knowledge check in one action. Also maybe free or reaction switch to new target if you're the one to drop previous target.
As it is, third attacks are only useful against minions who you don't want to waste the action on the round before (and many oozes). A Ranger with an animal companion will seldom strike thrice, and that's a Ranger's main strength above a Fighter. Except then a Druid's Heals give their ACs far more staying power.
So that means Hunt Target's one action gives a +1 (likely the next round) to half your attacks (at most) against one target. If not using a crossbow which several feats are for. And don't need to maneuver while commanding an animal or switching to a new target. And didn't use Double Slice since that incurs no MAP until the third action. And don't forget to use your Monster Hunter action too.
So...archers? Except Point Blank is significantly better.
Hunt Target is not a feat I would take, yet it's the Ranger's special trick? No thank you. I'll reskin a different class to get the flavor.
And yes, this makes me a tad sad.
|
Ranger suffers from being focused on a junk weapon... The crossbow, seriously they are so bad right now. Focus them on bows, and have a look at snares and we may get somewhere.
While snares do need a buff.
Bows are pretty functional out of the box. They don't have a reload speed. While Volley can be a bit of a hit, outdoors Volley is no issue at all (use your longbow outdoors, shortbow indoors). Send forth your animal companion to run interference.
Bow using rangers are pretty rad.
As I said above I believe they should keep Hunt Target but just give it a small buff. Maybe one that scales as the Ranger levels, but the tight math might not work for that.
Maybe make it go off of the Rangers Recall Knowledge check? Choose a Target and make a free Recall Knowledge check and give it a +1 on a Success, a +2 on a Crit Success, base Hunt Target Bonus on failure and below. That would make it seem as if his knowledge of Monsters is helping him gain the advantage in the Fight, which is essentially what Favored Enemy was except this time it won't be so hyper focused.
I also think they need to change some of the feats, like Double Slice, to be a little more open. Like maybe make one melee feat that has different effects depending on the weapon you're using? Same with a ranged option. Instead of hyper focusing on Bows or TWF it gives them more wiggle room to really make the Ranger you want.
I don't see any reason why Hunt Target couldn't just add a +1 to attack. That way it has value even if you don't have enough actions for multiple attacks. You can't argue that would be too good when the fighter gets that same +1 to attack from their expert weapon proficiency against all targets without needing to spend an action.
As it stands, Hunt Target not only isn't very good statistically, but it doesn't synergize with the other Ranger feats at all.
In doomsday dawn part 2 we had a half-elf ranger crossbow specialist who multi-classed into a cleric of Abadar. He used hunt target to power his crossbow ace feat, but the reduced penalty never came up (because crossbow reload speed).
The player said that it was the only way he could get the ranger to work like he wanted. He was pretty effective for the parts that we played.
The player said that it was the only way he could get the ranger to work like he wanted. He was pretty effective for the parts that we played.Can you provide more details on both aspects of that?
He wanted to play a ranged hunter type character. He didn't want to go two weapon nor did he want an animal companion. (The druid was going the companion route.) If I remember, he also didn't like the monster hunter, which left crossbow ace as his first level class feat. It was also the reason he went half-elf, as he didn't want another class feat, and the general feat he would have taken was fleet, so he took half elf and got low light vision at the same time. (He took fleet as his third level general feat.)
He didn't really like any of the 2nd or 4th level feats, so he decided to multiclass cleric. At first it was so he could pick up deadly simplicity at 4th for crossbow, but he also wanted to be able to use divine scrolls and wands. Since as a multiclass you have to actually be able to cast the level of the spell for scrolls and wands, he took basic spell casting instead, choosing magic weapon as his spell and buying a few scrolls and a wand of heal. This gave us a backup healer.
He was the MVP for the manticore fight, being one of two characters with decent ranged capability (the other being the bard's magic missiles). He cast magic weapon on the crossbow and with crossbow ace wad dealing decent damage. With a dex of 18 and magic hide +1 armor, he also had the highest AC in the party. He was the one who had expert in survival, too.
After the fight, with the druid and bard mostly out of spells, he used his wand to heal those who were still injured.
Would a step in the right direction.
I still don't think it should be a class feature, though.
It should be a feat option, and something else should the ranger's main gimmick.
Changes I would suggest:
1. Make Hunt Target a free action you can do at the start of your turn. Also base bonus is ok but alot of the feats need to be changed to synergize better with it or have added functionality on a Hunted Target.
2. Add a feat line for salves and poultices. Basically, something keyed off the Natural Medicine feat for effective downtime heals. That will help heal the animal companion if he has one.
3. Make snares way better. Thats good for everyone.
4. The animal companion itself is fine. I would let it benefit from Hunt Target without spending another feat on companion's bond (its only to benefit, at most, one attack a round).
5. This is for everyone but helps the Ranger alot: make Point Out a free action.
6. Combine Monster Hunter and Monster Warden.
7. Either put in a feat that flatly reduces reload by 1 (passively) on all weapons or focus on bows.
8. Combine shared target and warden's boon.
9. Give Rangers something other than Double Slice that is as good but different and uses MAP so it benefits from hunt target.
I like Rangers for many of the same reasons you do, with that said I would change a few things so I could love Rangers again.
1. Change the name of Hunt Target to almost anything else (Mark, Quarry, Kill, Enemy, Prey, Apple, Penguin you get the idea) and make it a free action.
2. This class needs some spell options, at the very least give it the Heal Animal power Druids have and Power Points equal to Wis mod.
3. I would like to see the return of Favored Enemy even if its just in a feat tree format like the animal companion options.
Ranger is not a generic hunter out there to catch a meal, this is a specialized infiltrator/defender. These are the guys you send out to guard your realm from invasion with a handful every 100 miles. They don't need to carry 8 Bulk worth of snares because they have spells for that and if they didn't have spells they would make the snares from the world around them.
Also, back in 3.x there was a book that added Infusions as a thing for Rangers. A sort of wilderness packet of herbs that could be used as a potion. It was absurdly awkward and time consuming to make them from scratch in that book but PF2 could do it right! Would work great with the new downtime system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hunt Target:
when you hit the target with weapon attack or your Companion attack, you can mark the target for hunt.
Effect same as in rulebook.
Masterfull hunter adds 0/+2/+4 bonus on hit or 0/+1/+2 bonus on missed attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really hope they go back to calling the damn things traps.
It was a stupid change that just makes the game sound dumb for not knowing what snare means. (Actually, seemingly arbitrary name changes like this seems pretty prevalent.)
I still think their class features should focus on what defines them.
Rangers are scouts and border defenders.
What does that really mean though.
Looking at military history (which predates the use of Rangers in fantasy literature) a ranger is a type of light infantry that specializes in scouting, raiding, and skirmishing. They are supposed to be more mobile than regular or heavy infantry. Their jobs often include patrolling and guerilla tactics. Their main military purpose is to go in, give the enemy a bloody nose and retreat before they know what hit them.
That is what their class features should be about. Their primary gimmick should be about increasing their ability strike fast and hard from unexpected directions while avoiding retaliation.
Previously I mentioned elsewhere that I thought all the terrain stuff should be optional, I'm retracting that and reversing my opinion. They should have more and stronger options to emphasize their mastery of hit-and-run tactics. All their specific combat options and powers beyond battlefield movement and avoiding reactions should be in their class feats.
That said, Hunt Target should be a feat.
Hunting is not intrinsic to the broad concept of a Ranger neither in fantasy nor history.
In place of the Hunt Target class feature, they should have Combat Style. It should work somewhat like a Barbarian's Totem or a Druid's Druidic Order. It grants you a bonus feat to start with (Hunt Target could be an option here), maybe training in a weapon group, and access to specific feats associated with your combat style as it originally did. All you have to do then is make sure that the feats you gain access too are mostly if not entirely unique to the ranger so as not to negate the usefulness of multi-classing builds.
I'll reiterate what others have said about a them getting a magic option. Even if it's just a single feat that lets you choose a magical tradition and gain basic spell casting that would be much better than nothing. (I added in the choice of magical tradition for the inclusion of non-nature oriented Rangers.)
This version of the Ranger has a clearer purpose among the other classes and gives players greater agency in determining the type of ranger they want to play as. It also give much greater flexibility for building more varied concepts than just hunter-tracker-guy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really hope they go back to calling the damn things traps.
It was a stupid change that just makes the game sound dumb for not knowing what snare means. (Actually, seemingly arbitrary name changes like this seems pretty prevalent.)I still think their class features should focus on what defines them.
Rangers are scouts and border defenders.
What does that really mean though.Looking at military history (which predates the use of Rangers in fantasy literature) a ranger is a type of light infantry that specializes in scouting, raiding, and skirmishing. They are supposed to be more mobile than regular or heavy infantry. Their jobs often include patrolling and guerilla tactics. Their main military purpose is to go in, give the enemy a bloody nose and retreat before they know what hit them.
That is what their class features should be about. Their primary gimmick should be about increasing their ability strike fast and hard from unexpected directions while avoiding retaliation.
Previously I mentioned elsewhere that I thought all the terrain stuff should be optional, I'm retracting that and reversing my opinion. They should have more and stronger options to emphasize their mastery of hit-and-run tactics. All their specific combat options and powers beyond battlefield movement and avoiding reactions should be in their class feats.
That said, Hunt Target should be a feat.
Hunting is not intrinsic to the broad concept of a Ranger neither in fantasy nor history.In place of the Hunt Target class feature, they should have Combat Style. It should work somewhat like a Barbarian's Totem or a Druid's Druidic Order. It grants you a bonus feat to start with (Hunt Target could be an option here), maybe training in a weapon group, and access to specific feats associated with your combat style as it originally did. All you have to do then is make sure that the feats you gain access too are mostly if not entirely unique to the ranger so as not to negate the usefulness of multi-classing builds.
I'll...
Thank you, I hope Paizo is reading this, this is exactly how I feel.
I'll reiterate what others have said about a them getting a magic option. Even if it's just a single feat that lets you choose a magical tradition and gain basic spell casting that would be much better than nothing. (I added in the choice of magical tradition for the inclusion of non-nature oriented Rangers.)
In retrospect, this is fulfilled by the various spellcaster dedications really.
I still stand by the rest of my assertions, even moreso now that the 1.3 update is out.
There is still a very long way to go before my gaming group will be willing to consider converting over to 2e.
Let me elaborate, I'm saying there is a spell casting option at all.
Not that it is a good one.
I like rangers a lot after the 1.3 update. Hunt Target is so much more useful now due to those new feats. It's gone from being pretty meh for a bow user to the best class for a bow user (as it should be).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like rangers a lot after the 1.3 update. Hunt Target is so much more useful now due to those new feats. It's gone from being pretty meh for a bow user to the best class for a bow user (as it should be).Hunt Target isn't more useful. Paizo gave Rangers a flurry at level 1 and applied normal MAP just so people could feel like Hunt Target was helping them.
To prove my point, try using Hunt Target with a Two-Handed weapon and see how that goes. Hunt Target hasn't changed. At all.
Giving Rangers a Rapid Shot/Flurry at level 1 has simply upped Ranger damage. But guess what, Rangers had Rapid Shot in PF1 and it wasn't restricted to our Favored Enemy. What you're not realizing is that you're more constrained to firing on your Target. Now, if you can't attack your Target, your damage is pedestrian if not pitiful for a martial. If you start the round and Target the Boss, and someone gets in your face, you can't afford to switch your HT because you won't be able to put it back on the boss.
Hunt Target is horrible mechanic for how the game operates. Being restricted/compelled to attack the same target to get bonuses makes the Ranger play small-minded and forces the player to have tunnel vision in combat.
Don't you think a bow using Ranger should have Rapid Shot without having to fire on the same Target?
I don't.
If you start the round and Target the Boss, and someone gets in your face, you can't afford to switch your HT because you won't be able to put it back on the boss.
How is someone getting in your face in the middle of your turn? You hunt target on your turn, if you don't have a good shot at them or can't get into a position to fire then you shouldn't have chosen that target.
Now if someone gets in your way before your next turn and somehow you can't move to a position with a better shot then you can take an action to change your hunt target. If you kill it with your Hunted Target double shot then you can use your last action to either fire at the boss or reapply hunt target for the next round. There's nothing around Hunt Target that makes the creature bolstered against you targeting them again.
With the Hunt Target action and using Hunted Target allows you to fire 3 shots in your first turn against a single target or 4 shots in later rounds against that target. These shots are at 0, -4, -8, -8. You can also fire a shortbow up to 120 feet without penalty which is further then the 100 feet range of Hunt Target.
Good comparison is with the fighter which is the other obvious bow choice. At 4th level a fighter can take Double Shot. Once a round a fighter can take two actions to fire twice at -2. So their three actions will be -2,-2,-10. Fighters will have a proficiency bonus to attack to to compare them fairly it would be:
If you don't have Hunt Target applied to your target:
Ranger: 0, -4, -8
Fighter: -1, -1, -9
If you already applied Hunt Target:
Ranger: 0, -4, -8, -8
Fighter: -1, -1, -9
If it's a shortbow and further then 60 feet take -2 off each shot from the fighter and not from the ranger.
At 6th level a fighter can take triple shot and do three shots at -4 (-3 compared to ranger).
Also when applying Hunt Target you get a free knowledge check which if you succeed at you get info on your target and if you crit you get a +1 on your next attack and so does all your allies. This would normally apply to the first attack in your round.
As for high level play, a 17th level ranger takes another -1 off the second shot and -2 off the 3rd and 4th shots making it 0/-3/-6/-6 while the Fighter at 16th level can take a feat to spend an action to reduce it's penalty by 1 as long as it's standing in it's spot.
If you were a fighter Multi-classing into Fighter you could open with Double Shot and lead into Hunted Target on any round where you had already applied Hunt Target. That would be -2,-2,-8,-8. If you were a fighter multi-classing into ranger to do the opposite you would be -2, -2, -10,-10 (but compared to ranger -1,-1,-9,-9). This is because multi-classed Hunt Target doesn't provide the multi-attack reduction. You also need to invest in the feat to allow you to hunt target more then once a day for this to be viable.
The big benefit for Ranger though is if they multi-class into a spellcaster class. Once they've applied hunt target, in the following rounds they can cast a two action spell and then fire two shots. This also works for casters multi-classing into Ranger, as those two shots for an action can be better damage then a cantrip (but will cost them 3 class feats to achieve).
EDIT: Also, one very important difference between the Fighter's double shot and Ranger's Hunted Target. Hunted Target can only be used against a single target, while Double Shot has to be against DIFFERENT targets. So double shot can't be used if there's only a single target while Hunted Target is wasted if the first shot kills the target. Although once you pick up Triple Shot the fighter can start shoot at the same target. The fighter certainly uses more feats to stay comparative given Hunt Target and the improved Hunt Target at lvl 17 is given for free, a Ranger really only needs to pick up Hunted Target and is then free to pick feats from other areas.
That only tells me that both Hunt Target and Double Shot are both unsatisfying options in different ways.
What if I don't want my Ranger to target the same target in one turn?
What if I don't want my fighter to target different target in one turn?
Limiting a player's basic combat options like this for the apparent sake of placing the classes in limited roles is deeply unsatisfying.
What if I don't want my Ranger to target the same target in one turn?
Then fire your shots at three different targets. You don't get the benefit of Hunt Target's reduced multiple attack penalties but you are no worse off then anyone else (except for a fighter who has taken double shot). You can still Hunt Target one target, fire twice at him and fire a 3rd attack at someone else (at -10). Or if you've already hunt targeted someone you can fire at one person at 0, second person at -5 and then fire two shots at your hunted target for -10/-10.
What if I don't want my fighter to target different target in one turn?
Then fire all all your shots at one target. You just take it as 0/-5 instead of -2/-2. Although I just edited my above post, when a fighter picks up triple shot they can fire them at a single target.
Limiting a player's basic combat options like this for the apparent sake of placing the classes in limited roles is deeply unsatisfying.
Both classes can do either, they just have an edge when it's one or the other. How would you make it so they were less limited?
If a feat gives you a +2 bonus against half of situations, and another feat gives you a +2 bonus against the other half then it's more interesting if a single character can only gain access to one of those feats. Otherwise you just took two feats for a permanent +2 bonus against everything and that's pretty boring (and would be called a feat tax).
All feats are meant to be at least somewhat situational, power attack for instance went from being a must have to a situational power to help against targets with DR. The thing people need to adjust to is just using your Strike action without any feats altering it is a perfectly good option at least twice on your turn.
I've not played a Ranger in 2E, but I've GM'd a Ranger in 1.1 and a Divine Sorcerer with the Ranger Multi-class in 1.3. I mentioned the need to crit for that +1 bonus, it's even in what you quoted. But I did leave out the fact you need to take a feat to pick that ability up. In the first case the Ranger kept it's distance for volly for the longbow, while in the second the Sorcerer was able to shoot well over 80 feet (second floor at Sommerhall to the entrance downstairs). So long distance fights can be part of this adventure at least. I'm not a fan of volly though, I want them to find another niche for the shortbow.
To me, any part of the system that revolves around Hunt Target changes Hunt Target. The more you can do against your target the most valuable Hunt Target becomes. If they remove the need to Hunt your target first then a lot of these abilities would need to be re-balanced.
As it stands, using Hunt Target is not a wasted action unless you are using it incorrectly. If you want to fire at target twice in one turn you can use Hunt Target and Hunted Target and get off two shots just like if you had used neither (except added together for DR purposes) but if you can keep that target hunted it's a boost for future turns and you can benefit from all the other bonuses. If you only wanted to fire the single shot then you don't apply Hunt Target that turn.
Hunt Target/Hunted Target together is two actions to fire twice plus benefits.
I compared it with the fighter because they have double shot which is as close a feat to Rapid Shot I could find in 2E. I maybe missing something but no one has Rapid Shot. I can't compare it with something that doesn't exist.
I’m not saying the Ranger is release ready but I’m happy with how Hunt Target works with Hunted Target and it’s melee equivalent. I think there should be other feats that allow you to save a action. Like one that could allow you to fire a shot and command your animal as a single action against your hunted target but it couldn’t be used in the same round as Hunted Target. Or a feat so when applying Hunt Target you can command animal or something. These seem too OP to me but I’m sure there’s a balance. Likewise 2-hand weapons should have their own feat for a viable option. That said, those options can be added at anytime. Because you don’t actually have to change Hunt Target, you can just add feats that customise how you use Hunt Target. Why require Hunt Target at all? Because of balance. Hunted Target is balanced by needing you to spend an action on Hunt Target. Without the Hunt Target requirement it’s a straight 4 attacks per turn every turn which is too powerful.
I’m not saying the benefits to Hunt Target itself couldn’t be adjusted, but I am saying I didn’t like it before 1.3 but because of the changes they made to the skills around it I really like it now and hope they make further changes like it to make it work for other play styles.
and a Divine Sorcerer with the Ranger Multi-class in 1.3
What multiclass feats did you take?