Ranger vs. Ranged Fighter

[hobbitkniver]

Is there anything special about rangers that makes them worth playing as opposed to a fighter specializing in ranged weapons? I've been playing a ranger who took ranged weapons as opposed to 2 weapon fighting (we're only level 2), but the others told me that it'd be better to play a fighter and choose archery feats for my bonus feats. Even though I don't have magic yet, the spells don't look all to useful and the other abilities like tracking and animal empathy never seem to come up (in my game at least). An animal companion could be useful I guess, but would it be better than simply having a ton of feats?

[Lateral]

There are some supplements with great Ranger-only spells that make being a Ranger worth it. Also, if you can go Scout/Ranger and take Swift Hunter, you can make a kick-ass ranged build with Manyshot and Greater Manyshot (or full attacks and ten-foot steps, if you can get ten-foot steps.) What sources do you have?

[Hiro Protagonest]

Combine Lateral's suggestion with a horse animal companion and mounted archery. Now you can skirmish and full attack.

[NineThePuma]

Play a fighter. get this feat (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a). Wham, you're a Ranger.

[Cog]

Combine Lateral's suggestion with a horse animal companion and mounted archery. Now you can skirmish and full attack.
Until you read the Scout's errata, anyway.

[hobbitkniver]

There are some supplements with great Ranger-only spells that make being a Ranger worth it. Also, if you can go Scout/Ranger and take Swift Hunter, you can make a kick-ass ranged build with Manyshot and Greater Manyshot (or full attacks and ten-foot steps, if you can get ten-foot steps.) What sources do you have?

Where might I find such a supplement? There's so many books that it could be in.

Combine Lateral's suggestion with a horse animal companion and mounted archery. Now you can skirmish and full attack.

I'm afraid that a horse without some kind of magical excuse to transport it easily in difficult situations, could be too restricting.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Until you read the Scout's errata, anyway.

Aw. :smallfrown:

[Lateral]

Play a fighter. get this feat (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a). Wham, you're a Ranger.

Only if you don't have access to the Ranger goodies- the good Ranger spells, Sword of the Arcane Order, or Swift Hunter. Honestly, though, there are only so many archery feats; you'll have all the good ones pretty quickly, and now you're taking sucky feats instead of getting class features. And spells.

Edit:

Where might I find such a supplement? There's so many books that it could be in.
Spell Compendium had some nice ones, IIRC. Scout (and probably Swift Hunter) are in CAdv.

[myancey]

The Ranger is basically a fighter who traded in his cool feat progression for dumb spells. And favored enemy is mostly a joke created by the game designers to entice noobs with false promises of glory. And since you get so many martial feats..use your level 6 character feat to get leadership...and then you've got something better than an animal companion..even with lowish charisma.

[Seerow]

The Ranger is basically a fighter who traded in his cool feat progression for dumb spells. And favored enemy is mostly a joke created by the game designers to entice noobs with false promises of glory. And since you get so many martial feats..use your level 6 character feat to get leadership...and then you've got something better than an animal companion..even with lowish charisma.


Dumb spells? Have you looked at the spell compendium? Those spells are what sets the ranger apart, and one of the best easy fixes for rangers I know of is to simply greatly increase their spells per day.

[Incanur]

The Ranger is basically a fighter who traded in his cool feat progression for dumb spells.

Well, that and a whole pile of skills. Fighters - especially with the right ACFs - can dish out more damage with a bow than rangers, but the latter have far more versatility.

[Dusk Eclipse]

For the record, swift hunter is in Complete Scoundrel, not in Complete Adventurer.

[myancey]

Dumb spells? Have you looked at the spell compendium? Those spells are what sets the ranger apart, and one of the best easy fixes for rangers I know of is to simply greatly increase their spells per day.

Still doesn't compare to a full casting class. Plus don't they use wisdom for their casting stat? I don't have the books with me..but I believe they do. You won't optimize a ranger with a high wisdom..or a ranged fighter for that matter.

I don't think spells are really the way to go when designing a ranged attacker. I mean, yes, by level 20 there are probably some nice buffs that'll greatly help in melee..but worth giving up the feat progression offered by the fighter when the main goal is archery..I'm not so sure. And again..favored enemy? Really?

I can understand the argument that by level 20 the ranger is going to have some cool spells. So does the Paladin..but you never go straight Paladin because there are only so many diseases you need to cure per week. Same philosophy exists with the ranger. The ranger is the Paladin, only more of a joke because it forces you into one of two weapon choices. Martial classes should, with few exceptions, avoid being the casters.

[Zonugal]

I'd almost always take the Ranger over Fighter for ranged combat as I vastly prefer the skills (Hide, Move Silently, Listen and Spot are pretty handy for any sniper) as well as the general nature of the class. Plus with spells you're given an additional level of versatility (wands of CLW for example).

[myancey]

I'd almost always take the Ranger over Fighter for ranged combat as I vastly prefer the skills (Hide, Move Silently, Listen and Spot are pretty handy for any sniper) as well as the general nature of the class. Plus with spells you're given an additional level of versatility (wands of CLW for example).

And that makes a lot of sense if you're going versatility over optimization. But these added abilities certainly detract from combat prowess potential.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Still doesn't compare to a full casting class. Plus don't they use wisdom for their casting stat? I don't have the books with me..but I believe they do. You won't optimize a ranger with a high wisdom..or a ranged fighter for that matter.

It's called Zen Archery.

[tyckspoon]

And that makes a lot of sense if you're going versatility over optimization. But these added abilities certainly detract from combat prowess potential.

:smallconfused: You run out of useful archery feats by around level 6 either way. I mean, if you're in Core material only, ok.. Rapid Shot, Point Blank Shot, move on to Weapon Focus/Weapon Spec. But if you have the expanded Ranger stuff available to you.. just in level 1 spells in the Spell Compendium, Rangers get Arrowmind and Hunter's Mercy. Arrowmind lets them threaten with their bow as if it was a melee weapon and not provoke for firing in melee. Hunter's Mercy makes their next hit an automatic crit. Combine that with some of the stuff in the Magic Item Compendium that lets you cheaply Quicken low-level spells and you can crit on demand. That is detracting from combat potential how, exactly?

And you only need Wis 14 to cast all your Ranger spells. More would be nice for more bonus slots, naturally, but that's not really a huge investment, especially considering how cheap +2/+4 Wis items are by the time you actually get higher level Ranger spells.

[Psyren]

Still doesn't compare to a full casting class.

Weren't you comparing them to Fighter? They're not a casting class either, you know.


Plus don't they use wisdom for their casting stat? I don't have the books with me..but I believe they do. You won't optimize a ranger with a high wisdom..or a ranged fighter for that matter.

You only need 14 after buffs,that's not hard to get at all. More is nice but it's not like you're sinking your entire point buy into it.


I don't think spells are really the way to go when designing a ranged attacker.

Arrow Mind, Guided Shot, Hunter's Eye etc. disagree completely.


I mean, yes, by level 20 there are probably some nice buffs that'll greatly help in melee..but worth giving up the feat progression offered by the fighter when the main goal is archery..I'm not so sure. And again..favored enemy? Really?

Favored Enemy: Arcanist. Yes, really. Chances are you will be up against an ememy spellcaster at some point in the campaign.

[Seerow]

Still doesn't compare to a full casting class. Plus don't they use wisdom for their casting stat? I don't have the books with me..but I believe they do. You won't optimize a ranger with a high wisdom..or a ranged fighter for that matter.

I don't think spells are really the way to go when designing a ranged attacker. I mean, yes, by level 20 there are probably some nice buffs that'll greatly help in melee..but worth giving up the feat progression offered by the fighter when the main goal is archery..I'm not so sure. And again..favored enemy? Really?

I can understand the argument that by level 20 the ranger is going to have some cool spells. So does the Paladin..but you never go straight Paladin because there are only so many diseases you need to cure per week. Same philosophy exists with the ranger. Martial classes should, with few exceptions, avoid being the casters.

The ranger is the Paladin, only more of a joke because it forces you into one of two weapon choices.

No, seriously, go look at some of the Ranger spell choices. Some of them are less spells/buffs, and more combat maneuvers.

For example:
Arrow Storm-Make a ranged attack against every enemy within one range increment.
Hunter's Mercy-Your next bow attack is an automatic crit
Arrow Mind-Threaten nearby area with your bow
Guided Shot-Ignore cover/distance/concealment penalties


Just to showcase a few. These are things that directly boost your Archery directly. Two of those 4 are Ranger exclusive (the other two are accessible by Wizards/Sorcerers, so a archer Gish could have access to them), making them unique toys for a ranger that nobody else could replicate. That is a big deal.



As for high wisdom being bad, I agree that MAD is bad, but there is a feat that lets you use wisdom for attack rolls with ranged weapons (Zen Archery), so the Archery focused ranger could have that with a decent casting stat. The spells per day still feels kind of low, which is why I said a common fix is to just give rangers more spells per day. Even without that though, the Ranger still outclasses the Fighter handily (and the Fighter could use fixes of his own).

[NineThePuma]

Hey, give ranger full caster level, increase their spells per day a bit, and animal companion at Ranger level -3 rather than 1/2 ranger level. Bam.

[myancey]

It's called Zen Archery.

Great..but you still need dex for AC...and a lot of ranger class skills...meaning that you've still got 2 stats needing ability points...so...same issue as before.


You run out of useful archery feats by around level 6 either way. I mean, if you're in Core material only, ok.. Rapid Shot, Point Blank Shot, move on to Weapon Focus/Weapon Spec.

But there is far more out there than core rules only for feats...

[ericgrau]

Skills, plus spells and so on from splatbook basically. Otherwise ya a fighter is better. It sounds like skills aren't all that critical in your group or your friend might be saying "be a ranger we need someone with survival no one else has it" (or conversely "be a fighter the druid already has that stuff covered").

[tyckspoon]

But there is far more out there than core rules only for feats...

Curiously enough, most of them that I know of aren't relevant to Archery. There's.. what, Weapon Mastery from PHB II if you've already gone the Weapon Focus/Spec Router, Greater Manyshot in the XPH (which works better with a Ranger build anyway..) what else is there you can invest in archery that will make your non-Core bonus feats better than the Ranger's non-Core spells?

[Big Fau]

I always prefer Prestige Ranger for any kind of Ranger character. Scout 4/Cleric 2/Prestige Range 14 with Travel Devotion, Swift Hunter, and possibly using Two Weapon Fighting (via Yuan-Ti Serpent Bow) is always fun, and you get Cleric 10 spellcasting for buffs or DMM.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Great..but you still need dex for AC...and a lot of ranger class skills...meaning that you've still got 2 stats needing ability points...so...same issue as before.

So? Paladin relies on four, charisma for lay on hands, wisdom for spells, strength for melee, and constitution for tankiness. Monks also rely on four, and can't dump intelligence, though you don't need wisdom if you take Kung Fu Genius, though you still rely on four stats.

[Seerow]

Great..but you still need dex for AC...

A monk's belt is dirt cheap. Now you have wis to AC, Attack Rolls, and your spells.


and a lot of ranger class skills...

Which you aren't forced to take. Or even if you do, a high dex makes some difference in dex based skills, but skill ranks and magic items make a far larger difference.

And even being mediocre at those skills is better than what the fighter can do. Which is suck at them.




But there is far more out there than core rules only for feats...

What feats out there do you know of that compete with attack everything within 100 feet of you, or auto crit your next attack?

I know there's a nice feat in PHB2 that lets you attack a line with your arrow, which is kind of cool, and I guess you nab ranged weapon mastery as well...I'm struggling to think of much else that's really making a huge difference. Especially compared to what the ranger spells offer.

[Optimator]

Champions of Ruin also has some great Ranger spells.

[Psyren]

Cast Hunter's Eye and SNA I. You are now a full BAB rogue, and you haven't even spent your feats yet.

Fighter doesn't stand a chance. It's just silly.

[Coidzor]

Champions of Ruin has some nifty arrow-based spells for Rangers, though IIRC, only one of them which isn't as nifty can be cast and kept for any real length of time, but the fact that this one variety of them could be stockpiled is pretty nifty.

Might have been errata'd though...

[T.G. Oskar]

I dunno, but comparing a ranged weapon-specialized Fighter to a Ranger seems like a losing battle. Saying that the comparison between Ranger and Fighter is like the comparison between Paladin and Fighter but worse (more of a joke, to be precise) seems a bit odd, considering the Paladin could use some more love regarding feats, and the only feat-based love they get forces them to remove their spellcasting, something that it's definitely an unfair trade. In fact, the same effect on the Ranger is even MORE unfair.

Speaking of Champion of the Wild...how about a Ranger using that ACF against a Fighter with the same levels? IMO, it'll still beat the Fighter on ranged weapon specialization, because while a Fighter will get an increase in attack bonus between +1 and +3, and an increase between 2-6 points regarding damage, they still lack much more of the benefits a Ranger gets. Even if that exchange beats one of the nicest things the Ranger has (spellcasting) for something that really doesn't compare (four extra feats, all which are limited to what the list indicates). That the ACF is still better than the range-spec'ed Fighter means quite a lot.

Also, a range-specialized Fighter has a bit of MAD, if only depending on three stats (Strength for added damage with Composite bows, Dexterity for attack bonus, Constitution for damage). A ranger only has a moderate dependance on a fourth (Wisdom, and only to 14 unless you wish to get something higher via a Periapt of Wisdom), and the fact you can get Zen Archery to make it worthwhile (and a Monk's Belt or a Monk dip to make that Wis even more worthwhile) means the Ranger makes more use of a fourth stat than the Fighter could with a similar dependance on a fourth stat. I mean, the Ranger could even qualify for the Combat Form feats that the Fighter has better use for, if only because it'll probably have the right Wisdom score for them.

Finally, consider that some feats can be obviated. They get Rapid Shot, Multishot and Improved Precise Shot. Unless they're attacking from up close, they might not need PBS unless it's a prerequisite for something else, and Precise Shot can be replaced through their own spellcasting, so they can use their other feats for something else entirely. And still keep their own spells, skills, and more importantly class features, something the Fighter lacks unless they use ACFs.

So yes, Ranger > range-spec'ed Fighter. By quite a lot. Also, personal opinion mostly, but someone who claims that they can use Leadership for something better isn't showing a proper argument, since Leadership is broken no matter who chooses it (by the same regard, a Wizard can choose Leadership for a Wizard 2 levels lower and have pretty much doubled spellcasting, doubled actions and doubled spell access because their own cohort will have access to different spells). Leadership doesn't fix classes that have problems; it only adds a new character that doesn't steal your XP.

[Greenish]

Until you read the Scout's errata, anyway.To read Scout's errata is to get angry and ignore it.


I'm afraid that a horse without some kind of magical excuse to transport it easily in difficult situations, could be too restricting.Then play small race, have a medium mount. Might even take a flying one, though there aren't that many flying medium animals.


Hey, give ranger full caster level, increase their spells per day a bit, and animal companion at Ranger level -3 rather than 1/2 ranger level. Bam.Eh, ranger and druid animal companions should be swapped, rangers get the full power one and druid's get the half-powered version.


Great..but you still need dex for AC...and a lot of ranger class skills...meaning that you've still got 2 stats needing ability points...so...same issue as before.If you wanted to make an argument, you could have mentioned the stat requirements on ranged feats, because "dex for AC and skills" is just inane.


Cast Hunter's Eye and SNA I. You are now a full BAB rogue, and you haven't even spent your feats yet.Hunter's Eye is 1d6/3 CL, isn't it?

[Psyren]

Then play small race, have a medium mount. Might even take a flying one, though there aren't that many flying medium animals.

Or take Exalted Companion (BoED), which gets you a Blink Dog, Asperi, or Unicorn (among other choices.) How's that for useful?


Hunter's Eye is 1d6/3 CL, isn't it?

Yeah, forgot that rogues get 1d6/2, but CL is pathetically easy to boost anyway so it evens out.

[Greenish]

Yeah, forgot that rogues get 1d6/2, but CL is pathetically easy to boost anyway so it evens out.Rogues get 1d6/2 levels, Hunter's Eye is 1d6/3 caster levels, rangers get 1 caster level/2 ranger levels, you'll have some catching up to do. :smallamused:

[MeeposFire]

Skill points are the biggest reason to play a ranger. Fighters can get a lot for archery but none of that is as good as getting a healthy number of skill points from a good list.

[TroubleBrewing]

Skill points are the biggest reason to play a ranger.

I dunno about biggest necessarily, but it's certainly enough to always pick the Ranger in these kinds of situations. (And it IS a good list. One of the best, actually.)

I'm with everybody else: Spells, Skills, and class features make the Ranger far superior to the Fighter.

[MeeposFire]

I dunno about biggest necessarily, but it's certainly enough to always pick the Ranger in these kinds of situations. (And it IS a good list. One of the best, actually.)

I'm with everybody else: Spells, Skills, and class features make the Ranger far superior to the Fighter.

I forgot to say that skill points were the biggest reason for me. Excuse my lack of clarity:smallcool:.

[Gwendol]

Even without the ranger spells in the spell compendium the ranger will make a better archer than a fighter. Archers need skills to excel, and the ranger provides that while the fighter is likely to be reduced to close range archery (due to exceedingly poor perception and stealth skills). The other is damage output where a clever application of preferred enemy will provide some extra damage (undead, human, arcanist, etc are all solid choices).

With good ranger spells, it's not even up for discussion.

[TroubleBrewing]

On top of those examples, a Ranger's Animal Companion can easily become a mount with the proper selection of companion/race/feats/skills/etc.

Given this, the Ranger has access to a scaling mount that grows in power as he does, as opposed to a Fighter using Mounted Combat. (Admittedly, horses are cheap. George Washington ran into that kind of thing more often than not.) Mounted Combat is one of the easier ways of improving damage output.

[Feytalist]

To be fair, the ranger's animal companion scales up incredibly slowly. As in, once per 6 levels. If that's what you are after though, a dip into Beastmaster will help. Or something like Wild Plains Outrider.

Also, to improve damage output, you really need some sort of melee weapon (which is not really the thread's point, but still...), ideally a lance.

[TroubleBrewing]

To be fair, the ranger's animal companion scales up incredibly slowly. As in, once per 6 levels.

The first time it gains any power is only 2 levels after you get it, at level 6. :smallconfused:

I agree with the Wild Plains Outrider dip, though. Unlike a lot of mounted PrC's, it's good for any mounted character, even archers.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Ranger is so much more superior than Fighter that it really is rather pathetic.

Let's take some actual gameplay and see how they stack up:

* There's a whole swarm of mooks around, too many to take on directly

Ranger: No problem. Hide and Move Silently are class skills, and I'm usually in Light armor anyways. Let's sneak on by and keep going.

Fighter: Clank, clank, clank (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0024.html)

* Okay, so, being a full BAB class with good HD, you're going to take point. How are you at detecting ambushes?

Ranger: I've got Spot, Listen, and Search on my class skill list. So I'm perfectly able to detect ambushes, and thanks to Hide and Move Silently, I am pretty good at setting them too.

Fighter: Uhhhh... I hit things.

* Great. So, the BBEG ran off behind the curtain with the McGuffin o' Doom, into a labyrinthine cave system to make his getaway. What now?

Ranger: No sweat. I got Survival AND Track as a bonus feat. We'll be right on his tail.

Fighter: Ummm... better luck next time, Gadget?

* Okay, let's stop showboating here and making the Fighter feel helpless, and actually get down to combat. What are your options?

Fighter: I shoot things! I get lots of feats, and full BAB, so I can shoot things good.

Ranger: I can shoot things, sure. I'm about as good at it as the Fighter is, since I get some of the archery feats for free. However, I've got a lot more damage output, thanks to things like Hunter's Eye, and options like Swift Hunter. I've even got things like Woodland Stride to keep combat mobility even in bad terrain.

* Right. So, let's look at the real reason everyone wants a Fighter: Being a meatshield and hit point soak. Let's go there.

Fighter: I've got heavy armor proficiency, which means Full Plate, and a d10 HD. And, since I don't have to blow points on any mental stats, I've probably got a better Con score, too.

Ranger: Well, funny thing about armor... with a good Dex, a Chain Shirt is just as good as Full Plate is, and a damn sight cheaper. So my AC is going to be comparable. Even more, mine works against touch attacks, which means everything from Shadows and Wights to casters and their pesky Enervation. That whole 'blowing points on mental stats' means I've also got a better Will save, to prevent lockdown, isn't that right Mr 'Hold Person'? Plus, at level 9, I've got Evasion, which pairs nicely with an actually viable Reflex save. So that fireball? Mr. Tank over there's probably going to be taking full damage. Me? Ignoring it, just like the Rogue does. Oh, if that isn't all, I can also heal a little, so I can pick the Cleric back up if he gets tagged. I'd like to see the Fighter do that. Sure, I've 'only' got a d8 HD, and probably he's right about a lower average Con score. But I'm eating a LOT less damage in the meantime, which more than balances out.

* Gotcha. Now then, what sort of party utility do you bring to the table?

Ranger: I can be your scout, moving up on point, far enough ahead to spot any ambushes. I've got a few Knowledge skills, so I know what we're going up against, and what their weaknesses are. Furthermore, I've got Pass Without Trace, which lets me sneak the whole party behind enemy lines. I've also got eyes in the sky with the right Animal Companion, which not only cuts down the amount of divination the casters need to use, but also spots ambushes from miles away, and can be used as a messenger as well. Then let's go to battlefield control, shall we? I get Entangle, one of the best in the business.

Fighter: I shoot things. And I hit things. And I've got enough feats that I can do both.

* Mmmkay, and how about character options?

Fighter: I've got DUNGEONCRASHAARRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!

Ranger. I've got the ability to get arcane spells and be every bit as nasty with magic as a Bard is, if not more, due to a better spell list.

* Anything else you'd like to share with us before we conclude the interview?

Fighter: I like swords bows.

Ranger: Let's see. I've got the ability to shoot things of the Fighter, the scouting ability of a Rogue, better survivability than both combined, and significantly better ranged damage output than both combined. I've also got some Druid casting, which can be traded out for some Wizard casting if I want, plus unique spells which are significantly more powerful than most people realize, and an animal companion which is either a Fleshraker for even *more* damage output, or an eyes-in-the-sky scout.

* Thanks, guys. We appreciate it.

[TroubleBrewing]

Lest we heap on the misery, the Ranger also gets Wild Shape Variant options.

No real contest here.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Lest we heap on the misery, the Ranger also gets Wild Shape Variant options.

No real contest here.

Yes, but we're talking about ranged combat options, rather than melee options and how the Ranger beats the fighter there as well even when the Fighter *IS* using Dungeoncrasher and PA/LA/ST.

[Feytalist]

I'd still like to see that other poster's fighter build that's just as good as a ranger.

[TroubleBrewing]

I'd still like to see that other poster's fighter build that's just as good as a ranger.

I thought it was a Barbarian, and it was in another castle a different thread.

Oh well. I'd like to see this one, too.

[Feytalist]

Meh, comes from thread-hopping so much. Well, I'd like to see that as well.

[Gwendol]

Clank, clank, clank.... ROTFL!

[Hirax]

Both are great dips, but if I had to play a game as one or the other with no multi classing, it would be ranger, no question.

[Psyren]

Rogues get 1d6/2 levels, Hunter's Eye is 1d6/3 caster levels, rangers get 1 caster level/2 ranger levels, you'll have some catching up to do. :smallamused:

Level 10 rogue has 5d6.
Level 10 ranger with Practiced Spellcaster has 3d6.

So then I add a bead of karma and ioun stone and oh hey look.

[Incanur]

A fighter with the targeteer and/or hit-and-run ACF would be difficult to beat for sheer damage output. A best, the ranger could nova better. That doesn't make the fighter superior overall, though. Far from it.

[mucco]

Small contribution: there's a feat in Races of the Wild which gives you a cumulative +4 to hit whenever you miss, for that round only. Which means in any given round, if your first three arrows miss you'll have +12 to hit for the rest of the round. It gets very insane once you factor in Haste, Rapid Shot, a Splitting bow and possibly Power Attack (what optimizer doesn't want the Energy Bow?).

That feat, being a feat, is slightly easier to get for fighters. Don't have the books, maybe there's even a weapon spec. requirement, don't remember.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

A fighter with the targeteer and/or hit-and-run ACF would be difficult to beat for sheer damage output. A best, the ranger could nova better. That doesn't make the fighter superior overall, though. Far from it.

Swift Hunter would slaughter the damage output, particularly when combined with Hunter's Sight.

[Incanur]

Swift Hunter would slaughter the damage output, particularly when combined with Hunter's Sight.

That's not a pure ranger anymore, though. Scout/ranger with Swift Hunter is probably tier 3 rather than the ranger's tier 4.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Ranger has awesome ACF and most of them send Ranger into high Tier 4 borderline Tier 3 and some of them right into high tier 3.

Wildshape Ranger, while not pertinent to this discussion it's one of them.

And the Mystic Ranger, which gives spellcasting similar to the bard (up to 5 level spells), makes the good ranger spells in the low level range. (add SotAO for a lighting warrior lite... no I am not joking). And in E6 it is capable to become a one man party by him/her self.

While vanilla ranger is (IMO) right in the middle of tier 4, with enough ACF stacking it becomes a powerhouse who will fit perfectly in tier 3 with warblades and psychic warriors, and will keep up to a degree with the big boys in tier 2 and 1.

A Mystic Swift Hunter is definitely one of the best tier 3 builds ever IMHO.

[Gametime]

I've read that fighter is better for a pure volley archery build, when you're really concerned with getting maximum damage at silly-long ranges. I wouldn't be surprised if fighters did have a very slight edge in that one area, although I haven't verified it myself. The fact that rangers are actually useful in non-combat situations, and less-than-ideal combat situations, and actually have the skills to make ideal combat situations happen, makes them clearly superior in any actual game.

For an army of archers firing in a row, though? I'd probably use fighters.


Level 10 rogue has 5d6.
Level 10 ranger with Practiced Spellcaster has 3d6.

So then I add a bead of karma and ioun stone and oh hey look.

Right, but that costs ~70,000 gold. Well, 50,000 if your DM is nice enough to let you get the bead of karma without the rest of the strand. Assuming you don't want to cripple your equipment for the sake of boosting caster level, let's say you spend half your WBL on these. That puts you at about 14th level (or 13th, if you get the karma bead separately). The rogue has 7d6 sneak attack; you have 5d6. Also, Hunter's Eye only lasts for one round, so you need a way to persist it.

Don't get me wrong, it's a neat spell, but I don't think it's worth the investment until fairly high levels.

[T.G. Oskar]

* Mmmkay, and how about character options?

Fighter: I've got DUNGEONCRASHAARRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!

Ranger. I've got the ability to get arcane spells and be every bit as nasty with magic as a Bard is, if not more, due to a better spell list.

I'm so gonna take this out of context on my sig. I only need a Fighter doing a silly pose while screaming "I got DONJONCRASHAAAAAAA!!!" in proper Engrish.

I think Eldariel's analysis of archery did mention that Fighters are good for ranged volleys, but you still need a lot of stuff that's not exclusive to the Ranger. Example of that is a Splitting bow for extra arrows, to maximize your number of hits, and perhaps Greater Manyshot to pull that off as a standard action (though it benefits people with increased crit ranges or people with precision damage anyways, something that the Ranger has more access at). What the Fighter MIGHT have as an advantage is that it can get to be a decent archer faster; afterwards, the Ranger not only picks up, but excels. That, and the Fighter might get to use armor spikes and gauntlets in case they need to consistently strike from up close, or use the weapons for Defending/Eager/Warning properties (that doesn't mean the Ranger can't use a gauntlet, tho).

[Greenish]

That, and the Fighter might get to use armor spikes and gauntlets in case they need to consistently strike from up close, or use the weapons for Defending/Eager/Warning properties (that doesn't mean the Ranger can't use a gauntlet, tho).Ranger can use armour spikes and spiked gauntlets just as well (though thanks to Arrow Mind they don't need those to fight in melee).

[dextercorvia]

A fighter with the targeteer and/or hit-and-run ACF would be difficult to beat for sheer damage output. A best, the ranger could nova better. That doesn't make the fighter superior overall, though. Far from it.

The Ranger has the Skillpoints to take advantage of Education and Knowledge Devotion.

[Dusk Eclipse]

The Ranger has the Skillpoints to take advantage of Education and Knowledge Devotion.

...hmmm sounds interesting, never thought about that.

[Gametime]

Adding dex to damage can outstrip Knowledge Devotion fairly easily. Also, since the fighter probably has more than enough feats, Weapon Spec and Greater Weapon Spec in addition to Ranged Weapon Mastery are pretty likely, for an additional +6 damage.

The ranger is better in a lot of ways, and is hugely better for an actual game, but I'm pretty sure fighters still win in the stand-still-and-fire-at-a-visible-target contest.

[TroubleBrewing]

Nope. Here's why.


Adding dex to damage can outstrip Knowledge Devotion fairly easily.

Think so? Why settle for one when you can have both? Also, as far as I can see, there are only two ways for a Fighter to add Dex to his ranged damage, and one is Dragon Magazine material, while the other is Dragon Compendium, and only applies within 30 ft.

Not to mention that Knowledge Devotion also adds to-hit bonuses, and that you just succeeded at a Knowledge check about the monster in question, giving you access to all of its weaknesses and special powers...




Also, since the fighter probably has more than enough feats, Weapon Spec and Greater Weapon Spec in addition to Ranged Weapon Mastery are pretty likely, for an additional +6 damage.

Those feats are terrible. There are far better uses for your feats than that, even as a feat-overloaded Fighter.




The ranger is better in a lot of ways, and is hugely better for an actual game,

This is true, at least, but...




but I'm pretty sure fighters still win in the stand-still-and-fire-at-a-visible-target contest.

... this is not. Plus, what kind of narrow contest is this? Is this REALLY the type of character you want to be playing?

Ranger: I'm good at lots of things, and all of them make me a valuable asset to our team!

Fighter: I can stand perfectly still and hit a highly-visible target that is not too far away!

Ranger: I can do that too. So can the Wizard. Hell, Bob the Commoner can do that. And he can produce chickens virtually at will, too! I forgot why we invited you along, Fighter. Go back to being a town guard mook.

[Zonugal]

I could maybe see the Fighter pulling ahead in ranged battlefield control if you put together a build utilizing dungeoncrasher and ranged attacks initiating bull-rushes.

Few ranger builds can equal chucking javelins that fling people fifteen backwards.

[Optimator]

Those feats are terrible. There are far better uses for your feats than that, even as a feat-overloaded Fighter.
Uh, not for an archer Fighter.

[Seerow]

Uh, not for an archer Fighter.

18 feats? Here's a list I have from a while ago when I was going through the books I had available to sort the feats. Feats that aren't universal to archers are striked through.


Crossbow Sniper
Deadeye Shot
Far Shot
Greater Manyshot
Improved Precise Shot
Improved Rapid Shot
Manyshot
Penetrating Shot
Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Ranged Disarm
Ranged Pin
Ranged Sunder
Rapid Reload
Rapid Shot
Sharp-Shooting
Shot on the Run
Zen Archery



That's 15 archery feats. Though I'll gladly admit most are worth less than the paper they're printed on.

[myancey]

Dead Eye makes a decent archery feat since errata put it as a level 1. Especially if you're prone to using rapid shot and the other 30' feats.

[Gametime]

Think so? Why settle for one when you can have both? Also, as far as I can see, there are only two ways for a Fighter to add Dex to his ranged damage, and one is Dragon Magazine material, while the other is Dragon Compendium, and only applies within 30 ft.

Not to mention that Knowledge Devotion also adds to-hit bonuses, and that you just succeeded at a Knowledge check about the monster in question, giving you access to all of its weaknesses and special powers...

Drow of the Underdark has a Fighter ACF that adds dex to damage against flat-footed targets, though only within 30 feet. Also, a minor point, but succeeding on a Knowledge check doesn't give you access to all of its weaknesses and special powers; it gives you access to one such weakness or special power, plus one more for every 5 by which you beat the DC. Also also, an even more minor point, getting +5 from Knowledge Devotion is beating a separate DC than the DC to know stuff; if facing a monster with tons of hit dice, you could get +5 from Knowledge Devotion while still knowing nothing at all about the monster. :smalltongue:


Those feats are terrible. There are far better uses for your feats than that, even as a feat-overloaded Fighter.

For a fighter intent on getting as many shots off per round as possible? Not really. Rapid Shot + some approximation of haste + splitting enchantment makes those tiny bonuses add up fairly quickly. Ranged Weapon Mastery is actually quite good, so Weapon Specialization is a given. Greater Weapon Spec is optional, admittedly, but really, there aren't that many great feats. It's not like fighters have the skill points to invest in real non-combat options.

But if you'd like to lay out the 18 feats you'd take instead as an archery fighter, I'll be glad to cede the point.



... this is not. Plus, what kind of narrow contest is this? Is this REALLY the type of character you want to be playing?

...So, wait, when I said the ranger was basically superior in every way except for pure, no-poor-conditions damage and a generally better class to play in an actual campaign, you took that to mean that I think fighters are better characters to play? :smallconfused:

[Coidzor]

Drow of the Underdark has a Fighter ACF that adds dex to damage against flat-footed targets, though only within 30 feet. Also, a minor point, but succeeding on a Knowledge check doesn't give you access to all of its weaknesses and special powers; it gives you access to one such weakness or special power, plus one more for every 5 by which you beat the DC. Also also, an even more minor point, getting +5 from Knowledge Devotion is beating a separate DC than the DC to know stuff; if facing a monster with tons of hit dice, you could get +5 from Knowledge Devotion while still knowing nothing at all about the monster. :smalltongue:

So what's your reason for making the points then?

[Greenish]

Also, as far as I can see, there are only two ways for a Fighter to add Dex to his ranged damageDead Eye, Vital Aim, Hit and Run Tactics, Crossbow Sniper. Granted, the last one is 1/2 dex, two are mutually exclusive and all have limitations, but still.

Also, targeteer's Arrow Swarm isn't that bad either. Of course, you can get Vital Aim, Arrow Swarm and two ranged EWP's with a two-level dip, so as usual, multiclassing is the way to go for non-full casters.


Those feats are terrible. There are far better uses for your feats than that, even as a feat-overloaded Fighter.They're better for a volley archer than most other options, if you have to go full fighter.


Crossbow Sniper
Deadeye Shot
Far Shot
Greater Manyshot
Improved Precise Shot
Improved Rapid Shot
Manyshot
Penetrating Shot
Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Ranged Disarm
Ranged Pin
Ranged Sunder
Rapid Reload
Rapid Shot
Sharp-Shooting
Shot on the Run
Zen Archery


That's 15 archery feats. Though I'll gladly admit most are worth less than the paper they're printed on.You left out Woodland Archer and Dead Eye (Deadeye Shot is a different feat, and worthless without SA).

And on that list there are only six feats worth taking (unless you go for crossbows or wis-based) as a volley fighter, and half of those are only prerequisites.

[Gametime]

So what's your reason for making the points then?

Short answer: Someone was wrong on the internet. (http://xkcd.com/386/)

Long answer: I think it can be worthwhile to correct people when they're wrong, even if it's about a minor thing. That may mean I come off as pedantic sometimes, but little mistakes repeated over and over can become reinforced in our minds. And the way Knowledge checks work is often misunderstood, on these boards; it's easy to remember "The DC is based on HD" and less easy to remember that beating that DC only unlocks a small amount of information. Then those misinterpretations get repeated in threads (say, about how rigorous a druid needs to be about observing potential wild shape forms) and those threads go off on a big tangent of correcting people.

So I guess I'm trying to lessen the occurrence of that sort of thing? Alternately, I was bored. Take your pick.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Is it funny that Totemist blows them both out of the water? Without half trying.

[Feytalist]

Is it funny that Totemist blows them both out of the water? Without half trying.

Perhaps. We are talking about the fighter and the ranger here, so it's not as if it's the best of the bunch by any measure. Otherwise we might as well discuss the cleric archer.

Although how would you build a ranged totemist? I'm not intimately familiar with incarnum.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Perhaps. We are talking about the fighter and the ranger here, so it's not as if it's the best of the bunch by any measure. Otherwise we might as well discuss the cleric archer.

Although how would you build a ranged totemist? I'm not intimately familiar with incarnum.

It all starts with Manticore belt, then you damage-bonus-stack.

Manticore Belt lets you spam ranged natural attacks, but each one has an individual attack roll so volley rules do not apply. You get bonus attacks equal to essentia invested. Things get crazy ridiculous from there.

[Feytalist]

It all starts with Manticore belt, then you damage-bonus-stack.

Manticore Belt lets you spam ranged natural attacks, but each one has an individual attack roll so volley rules do not apply. You get bonus attacks equal to essentia invested. Things get crazy ridiculous from there.

Huh, interesting. Definitely checking it out when I get home.

[T.G. Oskar]

Manticore Belt lets you spam ranged natural attacks, but each one has an individual attack roll so volley rules do not apply. You get bonus attacks equal to essentia invested. Things get crazy ridiculous from there.

Yeah, I remember that. Manticore Belt + Necklace of Natural Attacks with the Splitting Property amongst other things, an insane amount of Essentia pumped, and a Bard with Inspire Courage and a lot of stacked boons plus Dragonfire Inspiration with a Battle Dragon (or was it another kind of dragon?) I distinctively recall that was what made me a sheet-checker on the Test of Spite, actually. Came from the same individual whom elevated Aptitude and Lightning Maces to an artistic form of unintended suicide...

[Cog]

Manticore Belt lets you spam ranged natural attacks, but each one has an individual attack roll so volley rules do not apply. You get bonus attacks equal to essentia invested. Things get crazy ridiculous from there.
According to the Rules Compendium (page 42), what matters is the initiating action, not the number of attack rolls. Since Manticore Belt is a standard action, it's a volley.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Yeah, I remember that. Manticore Belt + Necklace of Natural Attacks with the Splitting Property amongst other things, an insane amount of Essentia pumped, and a Bard with Inspire Courage and a lot of stacked boons plus Dragonfire Inspiration with a Battle Dragon (or was it another kind of dragon?) I distinctively recall that was what made me a sheet-checker on the Test of Spite, actually. Came from the same individual whom elevated Aptitude and Lightning Maces to an artistic form of unintended suicide...

Don't forget Dread Carapace bound to Arms chakra to increase damage from natural attacks, which the spines count as.

[Coidzor]

Came from the same individual whom elevated Aptitude and Lightning Maces to an artistic form of unintended suicide...

...He killed himself with his lightning maces routine? :smalleek:

And yes, Battle Dragon is what is usually cited as a way to get sonic DFI.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

...He killed himself with his lightning maces routine? :smalleek:

And yes, Battle Dragon is what is usually cited as a way to get sonic DFI.

Failed the Will save on Death Urge, which forces you to CDG yourself, or attack yourself, with auto-crit. Which means unlimited bonus attacks from lightning mace. Cue NI damage. However, he was fortunate, in that he was using ranged weapons with ammo for his aptitude weapons, so he ran out of ammo before the calculator ran out of digits.

[NineThePuma]

On that note: the guy kept referencing his weapons as "pistols" ; were they actually pistols or what?

[Hiro Protagonest]

Failed the Will save on Death Urge, which forces you to CDG yourself, or attack yourself, with auto-crit. Which means unlimited bonus attacks from lightning mace. Cue NI damage. However, he was fortunate, in that he was using ranged weapons with ammo for his aptitude weapons, so he ran out of ammo before the calculator ran out of digits.

I saw that match. Wasn't he using a pistol loaded with ~583 bullets?

[TroubleBrewing]

Something along those lines. That was a HILARIOUS match.

[Lateral]

Failed the Will save on Death Urge, which forces you to CDG yourself, or attack yourself, with auto-crit. Which means unlimited bonus attacks from lightning mace. Cue NI damage. However, he was fortunate, in that he was using ranged weapons with ammo for his aptitude weapons, so he ran out of ammo before the calculator ran out of digits.

Do you have a link? Sounds fun.

[tyckspoon]

According to the Rules Compendium (page 42), what matters is the initiating action, not the number of attack rolls. Since Manticore Belt is a standard action, it's a volley.

Which is only relevant if you're using Sneak Attack or other precision sources. Inspire Courage/Dragonfire Inspiration/soulmelds that give bonus damage/bonus-damage weapon properties don't give a smeg; you can have a Collision Acidic Necklace of Natural Weapons and it'll work fine.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Which is only relevant if you're using Sneak Attack or other precision sources. Inspire Courage/Dragonfire Inspiration/soulmelds that give bonus damage/bonus-damage weapon properties don't give a smeg; you can have a Collision Acidic Necklace of Natural Weapons and it'll work fine.

Splitting. Don't forget Splitting.

[Dr.Epic]

If you just want to be a character that's good at archery, go with fighter. Rangers do get a ton of bonus feats for free, but fighter's shear number of them makes it better. If you truly want to play an Aragorn expy, then go ranger. If you just want to kill stuff and be good with a bow, go fighter.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

If you just want to be a character that's good at archery, go with fighter. Rangers do get a ton of bonus feats for free, but fighter's shear number of them makes it better. If you truly want to play an Aragorn expy, then go ranger. If you just want to kill stuff and be good with a bow, go fighter.

This was clearly disproved in the three pages since the OP. Please read the thread, or at least provide supporting facts for your statements that seem to have been disproved over the past three pages of discussion and debate of the various resources and means of the two classes in a way that is not merely parroting or repeating points that have already been either refuted or proven to be less viable than it would seem.

tl;dr version: [citation needed]

[TroubleBrewing]

tl;dr version: [citation needed]

FTFY. :smalltongue:

[JaronK]

The real answer here is that a combination is best. Archery is feat heavy, so dipping Fighter for 2-4 levels is usually a decent idea. But at the same time, you want stuff like Spot, Listen, Move Silently, and Hide, as well as the utility spells, so a lot of Ranger is a very good plan.

JaronK

[opticalshadow]

The real answer here is that a combination is best. Archery is feat heavy, so dipping Fighter for 2-4 levels is usually a decent idea. But at the same time, you want stuff like Spot, Listen, Move Silently, and Hide, as well as the utility spells, so a lot of Ranger is a very good plan.

JaronK

i think if you were to level dip, it would be far more useful to dip into something other then fighter, there just seems to be other classes that could offer better 2-4 level dip bonuses, i could be wrong of course, but when i read the archery handbook, fighter was the one class i dont remember reading about, and once you start multi classes (defeating this threads purpose) you might as well just go about doing it to a much better potential/

[Optimator]

The reason for fighter is that archery in 3.5 is virtually feat-based.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The reason for fighter is that archery in 3.5 is virtually feat-based.

However, there are so few feats needed that Fighter has no advantage over a Ranger...

Ranger gets Improved Precise Shot, Manyshot, and Rapid Shot as bonus feats. He can pick up Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot by level 3 (1 if human). There really aren't any other feats you'd need.

[opticalshadow]

The reason for fighter is that archery in 3.5 is virtually feat-based.

the thread has already proven that to not be the case, in the end the fighters larger feat pool wont make it any better then the rangers class abilities.

[JaronK]

Actually, there's quite a few solid feats. Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, Improved Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Woodland Archery, Ranged Weapon Mastery (with prerequisites), and Far Shot all come to mind... and you want those early enough to use them a lot (that last can be replicated with gear, btw). So it's generally quite beneficial to get some Fighter levels early to get them taken care of. After that, Fighter's done... move on to other classes (Ranger, Scout, Warblade).

JaronK

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Actually, there's quite a few solid feats. Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, Improved Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Ranger gets these just as easily as a fighter
Woodland Archery,Ranger qualifies for easier than fighter
Ranged Weapon Mastery (with prerequisites), and Far ShotAren't worth the paper they are printed on.
So it's generally quite beneficial to get some Fighter levels early to get them taken care of. After that, Fighter's done... move on to other classes (Ranger, Scout, Warblade).

Nope, sorry. Still not worth it.

[JaronK]

Ranger gets these just as easily as a fighter

Not NEARLY as fast. The point is you want to speed up how fast you get your feats, so that you're playing with them and not just playing a character that will totally be awesome when he gets more levels.


Aren't worth the paper they are printed on.

Considering Archery tends to involve a lot of lower damage attacks, the weapon mastery feats actually work much better for them than other styles. I'd say for any pure Ranger archery build of 4th to 12th level (which are very common levels to play at), I could make a better build by swapping out a few of the Ranger levels for Fighter levels. Not all mind you, but a few.

This is especially true when I throw in the Targetteer Variant Fighter, who trades out martial melee weapons and I think some armor in favor of two free exotic ranged weapon proficiencies and access to Vital Aim, which gives Dex to damage with ranged weapons. Two levels of that is amazing in any non casting heavy archery build.

JaronK

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Not NEARLY as fast. The point is you want to speed up how fast you get your feats, so that you're playing with them and not just playing a character that will totally be awesome when he gets more levels. Mmm... how so? Buy Point Blank shot at 1st. You get Rapid Shot for free at 2nd. Precise Shot at 3rd. You get Manyshot for free at 6. Improved Precise Shot requires a BAB of +11 anyways, so a ranger actually gets it BEFORE a Fighter can spend a feat at 12th level for it.

So no, a Fighter does *not* get there sooner.


Considering Archery tends to involve a lot of lower damage attacks, the weapon mastery feats actually work much better for them than other styles. I'd say for any pure Ranger archery build of 4th to 12th level (which are very common levels to play at), I could make a better build by swapping out a few of the Ranger levels for Fighter levels. Not all mind you, but a few.

This is especially true when I throw in the Targetteer Variant Fighter, who trades out martial melee weapons and I think some armor in favor of two free exotic ranged weapon proficiencies and access to Vital Aim, which gives Dex to damage with ranged weapons. Two levels of that is amazing in any non casting heavy archery build.

JaronK

The question is not if you can use both ranger and fighter, but which one makes a better archer. You seem to be missing the point.

Besides, I'd much rather have access to Hunter's Sight than Targeteer, since it's much more damage output.

[Gametime]

I've never actually played a fighter archer before, so I'm just going by what Eldariel said in the archery handbook. Ranged Weapon Mastery gets a good review from him, so I'm inclined to defer to his judgement. Some levels of fighter in general are supposed to be a good idea for archers (again, according to him).

Also, by Hunter's Sight, do you mean Hunter's Eye? Because even if you overcome the half-caster-level problem, it still only lasts for one round. Targeteer is on all the time.

[JaronK]

Mmm... how so? Buy Point Blank shot at 1st. You get Rapid Shot for free at 2nd. Precise Shot at 3rd. You get Manyshot for free at 6. Improved Precise Shot requires a BAB of +11 anyways, so a ranger actually gets it BEFORE a Fighter can spend a feat at 12th level for it.

So no, a Fighter does *not* get there sooner.

What I said was that a Ranger with a Fighter dip gets there faster than a pure Ranger. For example, a Ranger 6 only gets PBS, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Manyshot, and let's say Woodland Archery as well. By comparison, a similar Targeteer Fighter would have all of the above, plus let's say Vital Aim (Dex to damage) and Improved Rapid Shot, in addition to two exotic weapon proficiencies (may I suggest the Great Crossbow and Compound Greatbow?). Our Fighter has +2 to hit and +Dex to damage with all shots. Not bad. So yes, he does in fact get there sooner. It's not like Improved Precise Shot is all that impressive.

Better than both here would be Ranger 2/Targetteer Fighter 4, which gets all the same things as the Fighter version here but with a reasonable Spot score (which I find important) as well as other skill improvements from his Ranger levels.

But if you really want to get into it, I do find that pure Targetteer Fighters (if for some reason you wanted to do that) can indeed outdamage pure Rangers if you're going for just straight up full attack damage (Rangers win out with better Spotting and Stealth abilities, as well as one shot spell boosts, both of which are certainly important as well). A Targetteer using Dead Eye (the Dragon Compendium Version) + Crossbow Sniper + Vital Aim gets +2.5 * Dex to damage, and using either a Hand Crossbow with Hand Crossbow Focus or an Aptitude Great Crossbow with the same feat means you can fire full round action shots without trouble. Throw in Improved Critical and you've got something. Abuse Aptitude via Lightning Mace and Roundabout Kick, along with the Splitting enchantment, and you can easily fire 50+ shots in a single round, each of which hits extremely hard.

The best weapon for it, by the way, would be an Aptitude Splitting Great Crossbow of Collision +1, with Greater Magic Weapon cast on it (Tooth of Leraje does this best, but perhaps a Pearl of Power to your local Wizard would help).


The question is not if you can use both ranger and fighter, but which one makes a better archer. You seem to be missing the point.

Considering the post you responded to was indeed me saying that Ranger mixed with Fighter was better, it seems that you were missing the point there.

In the end, I find that when I want serious ranged damage output, my builds tend to be something like Ranger 2/Targeteer Fighter 4/Warblade 14, or similar (unless I'm going for a more spell heavy build, in which case it's some combination of Cleric and PrC Ranger). Or see here for one concept build: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11805.0


Besides, I'd much rather have access to Hunter's Sight than Targeteer, since it's much more damage output.

I'm not familiar with Hunter's Sight. Do you mean Hunter's Eye or Hunter's Mercy? Both of those are just one round buffs and neither is a huge damage output increase, so without PrC Ranger/Cleric to persist them they're rather unimpressive compared to Dex to Damage all day long.

JaronK

[Greenish]

i think if you were to level dip, it would be far more useful to dip into something other then fighter, there just seems to be other classes that could offer better 2-4 level dip bonusesReally? Where would you rather dip, then?


This is especially true when I throw in the Targetteer Variant Fighter, who trades out martial melee weapons and I think some armor in favor of two free exotic ranged weapon proficiencies and access to Vital Aim, which gives Dex to damage with ranged weapons. Two levels of that is amazing in any non casting heavy archery build.Loses shields, aside from buckler, so no biggie. Arrow Swarm is also pretty neat.

[Zonugal]

JaronK, it sounds like perhaps the imagery we're to use is:

For tearing apart beasts, firing a ton and in general being any 80s action hero you want to go with the targeteer fighter.

For precise, one shot snipes of doom akin to rifle-based assassins who make one bullet really count you want to go with the ranger.

Is that not too far off?

[Hiro Protagonest]

JaronK, it sounds like perhaps the imagery we're to use is:

For tearing apart beasts, firing a ton and in general being any 80s action hero you want to go with the targeteer fighter.

For precise, one shot snipes of doom akin to rifle-based assassins who make one bullet really count you want to go with the ranger.

Is that not too far off?

Swap those two around. The fighter doesn't have the skills to be an action hero, and the ranger can take improved rapid shot.

[JaronK]

Not quite. What the Ranger has over the Fighter is the ability to actually see targets. For kick in the door "you're in a room and this thing is against you" style play, the Fighter is better, as he can generally fire more shots with higher damage on a full attack. If you're sneaking about finding targets to intercept and generally dealing with more realistic play, the Ranger is better due to having the necessary skills and spells. Better than both is a combination of the two. Single shot sniping damage is more a Cleric archer thing.

JaronK

[opticalshadow]

Not quite. What the Ranger has over the Fighter is the ability to actually see targets. For kick in the door "you're in a room and this thing is against you" style play, the Fighter is better, as he can generally fire more shots with higher damage on a full attack. If you're sneaking about finding targets to intercept and generally dealing with more realistic play, the Ranger is better due to having the necessary skills and spells. Better than both is a combination of the two. Single shot sniping damage is more a Cleric archer thing.

JaronK

nothing like one shotting the castle guards from 4 miles away...

[Zonugal]

I really think this is more the fighter's style...

http://somewhatmanlynerd.com/gifs/commandoshedscene.gif

[Seerow]

I'd say that variant fighter is worth dipping into, just for the dex to damage. But it sounds like Dragon material, which means it's out for 90% of games.

The difference between a normal fighter and a normal ranger is the normal fighter gets the important feats a bit earlier, while the ranger gets those same feats, just a bit later, while getting spells to supplement him as well.

So if you're playing a low level game? Sure, dip fighter. If you're starting at mid-high levels? Don't bother.

[ericgrau]

Between improved rapid shot, ranged weapon mastery, similar attack bonus/damage feats and general fighter feats and so on I "broke" the game by hitting things on a 2 that my party had difficulty hitting and greatly out-pacing the group on damage. My secondary attacks could easily hit too. I still ran out of feats in spite of 8 fighter levels on top of many PrC levels. Yes, ranged weapon mastery is good. In a casual setting it's even overpowered.

Agreed that ranger is better for stealth, sniping and so on rather than dungeon crawling. But most parties pop in and kill things.

[TroubleBrewing]

Zonugal: Looks more like a Warblade, to me. :smalltongue:

EDIT:
Between improved rapid shot, ranged weapon mastery, similar feats and general fighter feats I "broke" the game by hitting things on a 2 that my party had difficulty hitting and greatly out-pacing the group on damage. My secondary attacks could easily hit too. I still ran out of feats in spite of 8 fighter levels on top of PrCs. Yes, ranged weapon mastery is good. In a casual setting it's even overpowered.

The argument from personal experience is not valid.

[ericgrau]

I also did the math and looked at the high attack bonus on my character sheet vs. monster AC? Figured out the best sources of damage and AB while making the character and that was it. I don't know what else you want. Not accepting an argument does not invalidate the conclusion. You actually have to provide a better argument.

[Seerow]

Well given you said it was low op, I assume you weren't going with dual/quad wielding splitting bows nonsense.

So Im going to make the assumption you had no more than 6 attacks in a round (4 base, 1 haste, 1 improved rapidshot), 3 of those at full attack bonus, 3 at lower bonuses. Even assuming all 6 of those hit, Weapon Spec + Weapon Mastery makes the difference of 24 damage in a round. I can see where it makes a difference, I cannot see where it is overpowered. I mean weapon spec + weapon mastery is literally just slightly more damage than 1d6 sneak attack damage. Which by the way the ranger can get more than that from his spells.

[ericgrau]

Magic bow. Everyone has one. +5 to hit alone translates into double or triple digit extra damage figures; it's not merely the plus to damage times 6. In the spell compendium at least the ranger spells can't even come close to that. Not without 5 rounds of buffing, and then the fight's already over. Or besides standard action casting times others have other drawbacks. I was surprised the first time I was looking at a ranger thread and thought I'd take a look at them. This is the other extreme I suppose (though I in fact figured it out both in paper and in play in my build), as in the SC ranger spells only work well on paper and then only with a poor glance at the figures.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Zonugal: Looks more like a Warblade, to me. :smalltongue:.

Warblade/bloodstorm blade IMO.

[TroubleBrewing]

+5 to hit alone translates into double or triple digit extra damage figures; it's not merely the plus to damage times 6.

Emphasis mine. How do you figure adding at least +100 damage to a damage roll from a +5 weapon?

[Seerow]

Magic bow. Everyone has one. +5 to hit alone translates into double or triple digit extra damage figures; it's not merely the plus to damage times 6.

what? +5 to hit means nothing when I'm already granting you the assumption that you will hit on every attack.

Or are you referring to the +4 to hit from WF/GWF/RWM? Cause if so, first why bring up magic weapons? Second, yeah, +4 to hit does significantly boost your hit chance relative to the average person, so you're more likely to hit on later iteratives. It is a decent increase in average damage, but still nothing on the level that could be considered overpowered, even at low optimization.

[ericgrau]

On average +5-ish is roughly 30-35% more hits and damage output. That will outshine before even adding in the extra damage.

And +2 from improved rapid shot. Or else another critical feat. Remember the build was still feat starved even with full fighter levels. PrCs will do that.

[Greenish]

So Im going to make the assumption you had no more than 6 attacks in a round (4 base, 1 haste, 1 improved rapidshot)Plus two from Arrow Swarm. :smalltongue:


Even assuming all 6 of those hit, Weapon Spec + Weapon Mastery makes the difference of 24 damage in a round.Now, do the math again, this time without assuming that you're automatically hitting with all attacks, and remembering all the other per shot damage. I feel ericgrau's argument is more about the value of that +3 attack than just the +4 damage.

[Seerow]

On average it's about 30-35% more hits and damage output. That will outshine before even adding in the damage.

Outshine what specifically? The ability to make a attack against everyone within 100 ft of you at once? The ability to make your next attack a guaranteed crit?

It's a decent output increase, but you're overestimating it.


Let's go with something simple. 2 characters with Imp Rapid Shot, Haste, +20 BAB, 34 dex, 26 str, and +5 weapons. And let's say 5d6 worth of bonus damage from weapon properties to keep it simple. One has RWM/WF/WS feats, one doesn't. So one character has an extra +4 to hit and +6 damage.

First char:
+43 to hit 1d8+13+5d6 (av 35)
+43/+43/+43/+38/+33/+28

Second Char:
+47 to hit 1d8+17+5d6 (av 39)
+47/+47/+47/+42/+37/+32



Average AC at CR 20 seems to be around 35 (it's the AC of both a Tarrasque and a Balor, so I'm rolling with that)

So first char hits:
95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/70%

Second Char hits:
95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/90%


First char averages 5.45 hits per round, second averages 5.65 hits per round. First char averages 190.75 damage per round, second averages 220 damage per round.


But let's try a higher AC. A Pit Fiend has a AC 40, that should make some difference. That puts us at:

So first char hits:
95%/95%/95%/95%/70%/45%

Second Char hits:
95%/95%/95%/95%/90%/65%

First char averages 4.95 hits per round, second averages 5.35 hits per round. First char averages 173.25 damage per round, second averages 208.65 damage per round. So a difference of 5 AC higher only shifted the damage 5 further in favor of the RWM




The point of all this? Attack bonus for any fighting type class is really high. The majority of your attacks are going to hit every time at high level regardless. It does make a noticeable difference in output, but one that is not insurmountable via other benefits. The ranger could also opt to take the first feat in the chain for a +1 to hit to help narrow that gap.

[Seerow]

Plus two from Arrow Swarm. :smalltongue:

Yeah, I say no Targeteer but Arrow Swarm is legit. :smalltongue:

I mean really, I can respect the idea that all books should be available, but Dragon Magazine is full of all sorts of **** AND is less available to most people than the books are. As far as I'm concerned Dragon Magazine is 3rd party material, and shouldn't be considered anymore than a Quintessential Monk.


Now, do the math again, this time without assuming that you're automatically hitting with all attacks, and remembering all the other per shot damage. I feel ericgrau's argument is more about the value of that +3 attack than just the +4 damage.

Incidentally I was doing that before your post. While the accuracy may make more difference with more damage or less accuracy, I don't think that it will get to the point where it's hundreds of damage until you start breaking out stronger optimization techniques.

[Eldariel]

I've never actually played a fighter archer before, so I'm just going by what Eldariel said in the archery handbook. Ranged Weapon Mastery gets a good review from him, so I'm inclined to defer to his judgement. Some levels of fighter in general are supposed to be a good idea for archers (again, according to him).

Fighter provides you with:
- Weapon Spec
- Hit'n'Run
- Targeteer

Latter two depend, but Weapon Spec you can get pretty reliably and Ranged Weapon Mastery is easily a top tier archery feat because unlike with melee, you can't Power Attack with a bow. You do need some simple way of blending Weapon Focus in the build to truly make it worth it (War-domain is fairly efficient for this), but if you do, getting the +3/+4 and extra range is v. good.

Further, it's relatively easy to get extra attacks on a bow (you can get 8 attacks a turn non-magically relatively easily; that's more than TWF, and that's without the silly Dual Wield Crossbow fun) at attack penalties which both, makes To Hit bonuses valuable enough to take in spite of lacking Power Attack, and makes Damage bonuses abnormally valuable.

[Greenish]

you can get 8 attacks a turn non-magically relatively easilyIteratives + Rapid Shot + Whirling Frenzy + Arrow Swarm?


[Edit]:
Yeah, I say no Targeteer but Arrow Swarm is legit. :smalltongue:You didn't say "no targeteer", you made up statistics about how unlikely using dragon magazine material is, which doesn't really relate for anything. (And even that wasn't in the post I was replying to.)


I mean really, I can respect the idea that all books should be available, but Dragon Magazine is full of all sorts of **** AND is less available to most people than the books are. As far as I'm concerned Dragon Magazine is 3rd party material, and shouldn't be considered anymore than a Quintessential Monk.Dragon Magazines aren't any better or worse balance-wise than splats, and they're 100% official D&D material (it says so in the cover!). You may not like them, and you don't have to use them, but that doesn't mean no one is allowed to mention them.

[Eldariel]

Iteratives + Rapid Shot + Whirling Frenzy + Arrow Swarm?

Aye; all your attacks are at -9 meaning you have what amounts to a form of Power Attack in use already but once you compensate for that (Woodland Archer, Ranged Weapon Mastery, Knowledge Devotion, Improved Rapid Shot [feat I can't often even fit], etc.) you are free to go to town.

Of course, you can also add Warblade for Dancing/Raging Mongoose and eventual Time Stands Still (and Eternal Blade for extra turn each encounter for the lulz), and Crossbows for TWF for 3 more landing us at like 26 a turn (before magic abilities like Haste and Splitting kick in) but point is, arrows add all static bonuses a ton of times meaning stuff like Ranged Weapon Mastery, Knowledge Devotion, Holy Warrior, Collision, etc. is irregularly powerful on archery.

[Seerow]

More math, jacking attacks per round up to 8, damage per shot up to 80 (86), and dragging base accuracy down to +38. Remember the baseline change before was 30 damage, with ~22 of that coming from the flat damage, so accuracy accounted for +8 average damage.



Non RWM: +38/+38/+38/+38/+38/+33/+28/+23
W/ RWM: +42/+42/+42/+42/+42/+37/+32/+27

Against 35 AC:
95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/70%/45%

vs

95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/90%/65%


1) 6.85 average hits, 548 average damage per round. Expected 41.1 increase from RWM damage increase, any extra comes from accuracy.

2) 7.25 average hits, 623.5 average damage per round. Gain of 75.5 damage per round, so the extra accuracy accounted for only 34.4 damage.


Against 40 AC:
95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/70%/45%/20%
95%/95%/95%/95%/95%/90%/65%/40%

1) 6.1 average hits, 488 damage per round. Expected 36.6 increase from RWM damage increase.
2) 6.7 average hits, 576.2 damage per round, making for an increase of 51.6 damage from the accuracy boost


So with all that math, RWM does pull further ahead in a higher damage lower accuracy environment, making for a whopping 20% damage increase at the high end, but not the hundreds of extra damage suggested upthread.

[Gametime]

I mean weapon spec + weapon mastery is literally just slightly more damage than 1d6 sneak attack damage. Which by the way the ranger can get more than that from his spells.

I have yet to see a ranger spell that can provide more damage all die than Weapon Spec + Ranged Weapon Mastery. There's Hunter's Eye, but we've already pointed out the problems with that multiple times.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying rangers are worse than fighters. I just really don't think the fighter is getting credit for the extra damage he can bring to the table.

[T.G. Oskar]

I just really don't think the fighter is getting credit for the extra damage he can bring to the table.

I dunno...I think it's getting enough credit. It's just that YMMV on whether 2-6 extra points of damage per hit at 9th level is really a contribution when a melee character can pull that off 3 levels ago. Because, all other conditions equalized, the difference between the ranger and the ranged fighter is 3 feats for 6 points of extra static damage versus a spell that grants more than 2d6 points of extra sneak attack.

The damage output gets equalized with really big creatures, though (if not outright defeated).

[NineThePuma]

spell that grants more than 2d6 points of extra sneak attack.

At level 12, though.

[Greenish]

a spell that grants more than 2d6 points of extra sneak attack.Well, Sneak Attack is of limited applicability in ranged.

[Gametime]

Because, all other conditions equalized, the difference between the ranger and the ranged fighter is 3 feats for 6 points of extra static damage versus a spell that grants more than 2d6 points of extra sneak attack.



I know I keep harping on this, but people seem to keep ignoring it: Hunter's Eye lasts for one round. Unseer Seers easily get the eighth level spell slots to persist it, and if Divine Metamagic is allowed you can do that, too, but on its own, considering rangers qua rangers? It is not a reliable source of bonus damage.

[Bayar]

I know I keep harping on this, but people seem to keep ignoring it: Hunter's Eye lasts for one round. Unseer Seers easily get the eighth level spell slots to persist it, and if Divine Metamagic is allowed you can do that, too, but on its own, considering rangers qua rangers? It is not a reliable source of bonus damage.

Unseen Seers are not Fighters.

[Greenish]

Unseen Seers are not Fighters.What does that have to do with anything? He wasn't suggesting they are, he was pointing out that rangers aren't unseen seers either.

[JaronK]

Exactly, Ranger spells tend to provide one round damage bursts, but honestly they're rarely even big damage bursts. Weapon Spec + Ranged Weapon Mastery tends to provide more damage and to hit bonuses than most Ranger archery spells. What makes Rangers good is their ability to add onto their archery abilities with stealth, detection, and utility spells... a Ranger trying to out DPS a Fighter in a full attack environment is going to lose... and the higher level you get, the more obvious this is (until the Fighter runs out of feats to take, but since no one's going to stay in Fighter at that point, it's irrelevant to talk about people playing pure Fighter Archers past that).

JaronK

[Lans]

The Ranger has the Skillpoints to take advantage of Education and Knowledge Devotion.
Thug varient fighter should have the points also. With an Intelligence focus on par with the rangers Wisdom focus at least.

Edit- 1 round bursts might be more useful than at-will. Like say a party of 4 12th level characters vs an EL +4 like a marilith.

[MeeposFire]

I still prefer playing soulbow archers especially with all the ACFs for soulknives for more feats and actual psionic powers. Heck with fractional BAB and the enhancement bonus from soulbow will get you to +16 BAB and wisdom to damage. Kensai for more enhancements (like splitting) it is a nice package overall. Just wish there was a feature allowing archery feats to be based on wisdom.

One handed mental longbow for the win (well sort of).

[Gametime]

Edit- 1 round bursts might be more useful than at-will. Like say a party of 4 12th level characters vs an EL +4 like a marilith.

Potentially true, but without caster-level boosts Hunter's Eye is only going to give you 2d6 sneak attack damage at that level. Practiced Spellcaster would make it 3d6. You could invest in other boosts, but most of them are fairly expensive (and if you're not making Hunter's Eye last longer, they almost certainly aren't worth the investment).

You also need to actually get the target flat-footed. It's not a huge deal, but it can be a pain, especially since one of the most efficient ways for rangers to do it - hiding - doesn't work well with sneak attack because you need to be within 30 feet. Sniper's Shot would solve that, but only if you have a way to gain extra swift actions.

[Lans]

Potentially true, but without caster-level boosts Hunter's Eye is only going to give you 2d6 sneak attack damage at that level. Practiced Spellcaster would make it 3d6. You could invest in other boosts, but most of them are fairly expensive (and if you're not making Hunter's Eye last longer, they almost certainly aren't worth the investment).

You also need to actually get the target flat-footed. It's not a huge deal, but it can be a pain, especially since one of the most efficient ways for rangers to do it - hiding - doesn't work well with sneak attack because you need to be within 30 feet. Sniper's Shot would solve that, but only if you have a way to gain extra swift actions.
True, I'm not even sure if the Rangers burst damage exceeds the fighters at-will damage. But in theory they should be more usefull. EL+0 encounters are a bit of a joke for most parties, most of the time. The last time a Ranger vs Fighter thread happened they were being measured in B/R, then PF/R, then ABD/R