Advice for a returning pen and paper...er!

[killem2]

Currently I am dming a module with 7 character among 5 bodies and will have another person joining. He has not played in a long time but I gave him a book to read over and his sons who play alot of other pen and paper rpgs are leaning him towards ranger. Which I don't care its fine with me, but as a DM I always lead my players in the direction I know that will fit their goal.

He wants to be a great ranged combat dude. He's not played since 1st edition so at this point we're not really digging into optimization and just keeping it basic, but I am trying to show him that a straight fighter will be a better choice for ranged vs a straight ranger. (core basically)

I'm just not seeing anything in particular that he wants beyond the aspect of being great at ranged fighting.

Am I missing something about the ranger? I don't think I am, but I could be! :smallredface:

[laeZ1]

Honestly, I thought that this thread was going to be about lending things to people and how to get it back.

The ranger's got some spells, and that free meat shield to stand behind while you fire arrows, but ultimately, they're advertised as ranged characters.

Mechanically, if somebody told me that a fighter is better suited for ranged combat, I wouldn't be a bit surprised, but generally, that's not how people think of fighters, and it is how people think of rangers.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Honestly, I thought that this thread was going to be about lending things to people and how to get it back.

The ranger's got some spells, and that free meat shield to stand behind while you fire arrows, but ultimately, they're advertised as ranged characters.

Mechanically, if somebody told me that a fighter is better suited for ranged combat, I wouldn't be a bit surprised, but generally, that's not how people think of fighters, and it is how people think of rangers.

It think the best core, non-caster archer is actually the rogue built as a sniper. Bonus damage is the name of the game for archers since there's no PA analogue for archery. If you're working with SpC though, ranger is definitely the way to go if you're avoiding full-casters (which I would recomend for a newb).

[Answerer]

The best ranged combatant will probably be a Cleric or Wizard... but that's probably not what he meant.

Ultimately, the best core archer that isn't using Sneak Attack is probably going to be a Fighter/Ranger of some sort. Barbarian 1 might be worth it just for the durability.

And if by "Core" you mean "SRD," I'd definitely want to tack on a Barbarian dip for the Whirling Frenzy UA variant. And then I'd probably want levels in Psychic Warrior instead of Fighter and get myself into Slayer...

Probably something like Ranger 2/Barbarian 1/Psychic Warrior 2/Slayer 10, and then whatever you like for the rest. You could substitute War Mind for Psychic Warrior/Slayer, maintaining full BAB and gaining more Power Points, in exchange for vastly fewer Powers Known, loss of the (arguably better) Slayer class features, and inability to continue progressing his manifesting.

Horizon Walker is another fairly-good PrC to consider here. Full BAB, sorta-OK skills, and Desert Mastery gives the rather-nice immunity to fatigue (goes great with that Barbarian dip!). If you stick with it, Shifting Planar Mastery is also excellent. Can go with the Psionic version or not.


If you do go with the Sneak Attack version, Assassin's an obviously-nice choice: give up skills for combat ability and some useful spells. Shadowdancer 1 is also nice for the rather-good version of Hide in Plain Sight, though I probably wouldn't bother with more than that just because of Sneak Attack loss.

[killem2]

The best ranged combatant will probably be a Cleric or Wizard... but that's probably not what he meant.

Ultimately, the best core archer that isn't using Sneak Attack is probably going to be a Fighter/Ranger of some sort. Barbarian 1 might be worth it just for the durability.

And if by "Core" you mean "SRD," I'd definitely want to tack on a Barbarian dip for the Whirling Frenzy UA variant. And then I'd probably want levels in Psychic Warrior instead of Fighter and get myself into Slayer...

Probably something like Ranger 2/Barbarian 1/Psychic Warrior 2/Slayer 10, and then whatever you like for the rest. You could substitute War Mind for Psychic Warrior/Slayer, maintaining full BAB and gaining more Power Points, in exchange for vastly fewer Powers Known, loss of the (arguably better) Slayer class features, and inability to continue progressing his manifesting.

Horizon Walker is another fairly-good PrC to consider here. Full BAB, sorta-OK skills, and Desert Mastery gives the rather-nice immunity to fatigue (goes great with that Barbarian dip!). If you stick with it, Shifting Planar Mastery is also excellent. Can go with the Psionic version or not.


If you do go with the Sneak Attack version, Assassin's an obviously-nice choice: give up skills for combat ability and some useful spells. Shadowdancer 1 is also nice for the rather-good version of Hide in Plain Sight, though I probably wouldn't bother with more than that just because of Sneak Attack loss.

I agree, he was talking about a rogue, maybe I should bring that up to him.


Also I built combat around my players, so I try to not leave them open ended with things they can't overcome in someway.

[Hiro Protagonest]

You want my honest opinion?

Give him the Spell Compendium. Ranger spells are great... once you step outside of core.

Other option: Give him a "sniper rogue" variant. Loses proficiency with any martial melee weapons, gains proficiency with all martial ranged weapons, melee sneak attack damage only adds half dice (minimum 1d6), removes sneak attack range limit for bows and crossbows (but not thrown weapons), gains full base attack bonus when wielding a bow or crossbow.

[Firechanter]

In a core-heavy game, we've had good results with a Ranger/Rogue multiclass, however that one comes more into its own in melee by dishing out Crippling Strikes in Dual-Wield mode. It does perform neatly in ranged combat as well, but you know, in D&D ranged combat always gets the short end of the stick so it's probably as good as it gets.

First Favoured Enemy was Undead, because they were rather common in the campaign (but then, where aren't they?) and it helps offsetting their sneak-immunity a tiny bit.

Come to think of it, I also once had an Elf Fighter/Ranger multiclass, that one also performed decently, thanks to the combination of FE bonuses plus Weapon Specialization.

IIRC back in the day I crunched the numbers up, down and sideways to see which would be the most effective archer I could get out of the permitted sources, and I think my solution was that Fighter/Ranger build. However, that campaign was very heavy on a handful of creature types, so those FE bonuses actually worked most of the time. I don't remember exactly how far I played that character, maybe Rgr10/Ftr4, but not significantly further.

You as DM, keep in mind that Archers in D&D need all the love that they can get. On the appropriate levels, consider handing out Hank's Energy Bow as a boon. It's a composite bow that always has the ideal Str modifier and shoots Force arrows and gives the unique ability to convert Attack to Damage bonus, like Ranged Power Attack.

A _serious_ archer in a more high-powered game will want the Splitting ability on the weapon, effectively doubling the raw damage output for a +3 bonus, if memory serves. However, that property is in one of the more obscure books, Heroes of Ruin or something.

By and large, an archer in D&D is dependent on gear more than anything, and more than any other class, so anything that increases his wealth comes in really handy.

[Flickerdart]

"Rogue sniper" doesn't work very well (since SA only works within 30 feet in core). Such a character would probably want something like Rogue 10/Assassin 9/Shadowdancer 1, using Hide in Plain Sight, Crippling Strike, Death Attack and poisons to make sure that he can close in, make a shot that matters, and get away without the enemy immediately killing him dead.

[Lord_Gareth]

"Rogue sniper" doesn't work very well (since SA only works within 30 feet in core). Such a character would probably want something like Rogue 10/Assassin 9/Shadowdancer 1, using Hide in Plain Sight, Crippling Strike, Death Attack and poisons to make sure that he can close in, make a shot that matters, and get away without the enemy immediately killing him dead.

IIRC there's a spell or two that can extend your SA range as well.

[Firechanter]

Ah, this should be useful:
The Archery Handbook (BG) (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=642.0)

[Flickerdart]

IIRC there's a spell or two that can extend your SA range as well.
Out of core, yes, there are myriad ways of extending your sneak attack range.

[Randomguy]

I wouldn't say that fighters are better than rangers at archery in core.

Fighters get more feats, but there are only about 7 archery feats in core, and only 6 of them (at most) are worth taking. And then 2 more if you want to do mounted archery. A ranger gets 3 archery bonus feats, so a ranger character can still take all the archery feats and then some, while a fighter has a bunch of feats left over.
This gives fighters a small advantage, but really a 2 level dip in fighter on a ranger build will offset this.

The ranger gets more skill points, so he can actually do stuff out of combat. Rangers also get a cool animal companion to use as a mount or to defend them from melee guys, spells, favoured enemy, better saves, and some class features.

The only other things the fighter get are heavy armour proficiency, but you need a high dex to qualify for the archery feats, so it would be better to just wear armour that has a higher maximum dex bonus, and you can get this from a 2 level dip as well.

And fighters also get on average 1 more hp per level, but as an archer you should hopefully be not getting hit by the melee guys too often, so this also doesn't really matter.

So a fighter archer and a ranger archer would be more or less the same at archery, but the ranger would be better at just about everything else.

Rangers don't really get something that makes them good at archery, but they get more than the fighter.

Rogues would probably be better though, as others in the thread have mentioned.

[Answerer]

Favored Enemy is not worth remembering you have. The Animal Companion is too low-level to matter much. In Core, the spells are mostly garbage. Camouflage and Hide in Plain Sight come into play way, way too late.

Sure, the Ranger gets class features. Almost none of them are worth a damn.

[Snowbluff]

A Master Thrower from Complete Warrior makes a pretty awesome ranged fighter as well. Be a monk for FoB, a Ranger for either ranged feats or TWF (Assuming you would allow TWF to work with Shuriken/etc), or a rogue for SA for a nice ranged damage dealer.

[Flickerdart]

The Ranger's only meaningful advantage is that it can get into Horizon Walker more easily.

[Randomguy]

Sure, the Ranger gets class features. Almost none of them are worth a damn.

Skill points are really the big thing. Animal companion, too: It's not that far behind the druid's, and while it's not great in combat it's still a better mount than a regular horse.

[Snowbluff]

The Ranger's only meaningful advantage is that it can get into Horizon Walker more easily.

That, Mystic Ranger and Sword of the Arcane Order. Makes a pretty mean gish for 10 levels. Not everyone allowed Mystic Ranger, though.

[Answerer]

Skill points are really the big thing.
Skill points aren't really a big thing, uhm... pretty much ever. They're kind of nice. They're rarely-if-ever critical, and most skills suck anyway. If the Ranger's got enough points to max Hide and Move Silently, everything else is gravy anyway.


Animal companion, too: It's not that far behind the druid's, and while it's not great in combat it's still a better mount than a regular horse.
Yes, it is very much far behind the Druid.

[Anxe]

I would just let him be a ranger. You can suggest fighter, but let him choose. If its his first time playing since 1st edition, all this optimization is probably going to drive him away. Keep it simple (one class until he decides to broaden out on his own) and he'll enjoy himself.

[killem2]

You want my honest opinion?

Give him the Spell Compendium. Ranger spells are great... once you step outside of core.

Other option: Give him a "sniper rogue" variant. Loses proficiency with any martial melee weapons, gains proficiency with all martial ranged weapons, melee sneak attack damage only adds half dice (minimum 1d6), removes sneak attack range limit for bows and crossbows (but not thrown weapons), gains full base attack bonus when wielding a bow or crossbow.

where is info on this variant?

[Hiro Protagonest]

where is info on this variant?

I made it up.

[nedz]

Skill points aren't really a big thing, uhm... pretty much ever. They're kind of nice. They're rarely-if-ever critical, and most skills suck anyway. If the Ranger's got enough points to max Hide and Move Silently, everything else is gravy anyway.

*cough*SPOT*cough*, oh and the Ranger has enough skill points.
Listen has its uses also.
Animal Handling, ..., maybe.

Whether skill points are useful or not depends upon the game, so YMMV.
As a DM I try very hard to make them relevant, but not all DMs bother.

[Rejakor]

In core?

Druids make the best archers.



That said, none of this matters because we don't know how optimized your group is. Is your group super optimized? If he plays a straight ranger with 16 dex is he going to feel **** next to the incantatrix superdupermachine and the frenzied mineral warrior barbarian? Also, what level is this game?

[killem2]

That said, none of this matters because we don't know how optimized your group is. Is your group super optimized? If he plays a straight ranger with 16 dex is he going to feel **** next to the incantatrix superdupermachine and the frenzied mineral warrior barbarian? Also, what level is this game?

While I disagree that it does matter, if you need to know, no, we're not exactly the most optimized group ever. If I had to sum it up into a simple statistic, 35% optimization and 65% RP Flavor.

We are all level 6. Base Races from core, classes can be from any 3.5, 3.0 material (as long as it hasn't been updated). Upon character creation everyone rolls 5d6 drop lowest 2, 5 times, the sixth stat is an automatic 18 of your classes primary stat. (fighter str, wizard int)

Cleric/Fighter
Rogue/Fighter
Ranger
Fighter/Stone Lord
Barbarian/Fighter/Beastmaster
Barbarian (working towards war hulk)
Wizard

and currently an NPC wizard necromancer who is level 7.

We are doing Age of Worms Module.

[Answerer]

*cough*SPOT*cough*,
Someone in the party needs a lot of Spot and/or Listen. It might be nice to have more than one, but again, gravy. Sure, Spot would probably be 3rd after Hide/Move Silently... but it's not hard to get that on plenty of builds. A Human anything with at least 10 Int gets 3 skill points per level. You could take Nymph's Kiss for another, if you wanted. It's ultimately not much of a bonus.


oh and the Ranger has enough skill points.
Certainly he does. But that is all he has. If your chassis is the best thing about you (as is arguably the case for Core-only Ranger and Monk), you are bordering on being an NPC class.

[HunterColt22]

While I disagree that it does matter, if you need to know, no, we're not exactly the most optimized group ever. If I had to sum it up into a simple statistic, 35% optimization and 65% RP Flavor.

We are all level 6. Base Races from core, classes can be from any 3.5, 3.0 material (as long as it hasn't been updated). Upon character creation everyone rolls 5d6 drop lowest 2, 5 times, the sixth stat is an automatic 18 of your classes primary stat. (fighter str, wizard int)

Cleric/Fighter
Rogue/Fighter
Ranger
Fighter/Stone Lord
Barbarian/Fighter/Beastmaster
Barbarian (working towards war hulk)
Wizard

and currently an NPC wizard necromancer who is level 7.

We are doing Age of Worms Module.

Emphasis mine for reasons to be made clear. He want's to be an archer, why not go Scout? Same idea as a rogue, but based around movement, which as a sniper, you are going to want to do as not to get locked down by melee beat sticks half the game. Plus as long as he moves ten feet he gets bonus damage, along with bonus AC, ability to be the skillmonkey some what, and also gets access to some interesting bonus feats, as well as a class ability boon to his fort, something all things rogue like love. Relatively easy class and is geared towards ranged attack.

[killem2]

Emphasis mine for reasons to be made clear. He want's to be an archer, why not go Scout? Same idea as a rogue, but based around movement, which as a sniper, you are going to want to do as not to get locked down by melee beat sticks half the game. Plus as long as he moves ten feet he gets bonus damage, along with bonus AC, ability to be the skillmonkey some what, and also gets access to some interesting bonus feats, as well as a class ability boon to his fort, something all things rogue like love. Relatively easy class and is geared towards ranged attack.

Scout Huh? I can show him that one see what he thinks. I'll be sitting down with him friday to go over all of it.

[HunterColt22]

Complete Adventurer if memory serves me correctly.

[Answerer]

Ah, I misread that, thank you for exposing that.

If you can go from anywhere, Swift Hunter's probably the best build (Complete Scoundrel feat that stacks Ranger and Rogue levels for several things, including Sneak Attack) for a straight-up archer.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Ah, I misread that, thank you for exposing that.

If you can go from anywhere, Swift Hunter's probably the best build (Complete Scoundrel feat that stacks Ranger and Rogue levels for several things, including Sneak Attack) for a straight-up archer.

Scout levels, not rogue levels.

[Answerer]

Ah sure that.

Though that is somewhat disappointing since Skirmish damage is so low.

[Firechanter]

Did I hear skirmish?

How about a crossbow skirmisher.
Scout levels + Crossbow Sniper feat + Rapid Reload etc.
Now you can pretty much dump Strength. Put everything in Dex.

With Crossbow Sniper, your Skirmish range is increased to 60ft, and you get 1/2 Dex as damage bonus.

[Rejakor]

If the guy expressed interest in playing a rogue, you could check out this thing Jaronk built. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11805.0) It's a dex based crossbow short range blaster.

Other than that, swift hunters are kind of fun but getting skirmish damage in without greater manyshot is really really hard and fiddly.

[HunterColt22]

If the guy expressed interest in playing a rogue, you could check out this thing Jaronk built. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11805.0) It's a dex based crossbow short range blaster.

Other than that, swift hunters are kind of fun but getting skirmish damage in without greater manyshot is really really hard and fiddly.

Hard to get Skirmish damage? :smallannoyed: It's about as hard as doing sneak attack damage with a ranged rogue. If not a bit easier actually because you consistently need to move ten feet to do it. Which is a better boon than a rogue who would much rather sit in one spot and pray no one comes after him after his first round of twf bucket load of dice pain comes crashing down. :/

[Rejakor]

At level 9 most 'archers' shoot 3-4 arrows on a full attack. Without a way to move 10' and still full attack, you often do less damage (and have less chance of hitting) with a single arrow than with a barrage, even with skirmish damage on the single arrow (remember, a d6 is still only 3.5 average damage).

There are actually more things that trigger sneak attack (flat-footedness) than trigger skirmish (teleport anklet, high level spells and powers (augmented dimension slide, Dimension Jumper etc), travel domain, and greater manyshot), and they're usually easier to get.

That's why it's hard to get skirmish. It also does less damage than a sneak attack, which is another point against it.

Also, it's boring. Not something you want a new player using, because every single combat round can be summarized as <I do whatever gets me skirmish damage - I shoot arrows>. Typically you want them making actual choices, and the choice between 'use barrage' or 'get to safe place' is actually a choice.

[killem2]

If the guy expressed interest in playing a rogue, you could check out this thing Jaronk built. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11805.0) It's a dex based crossbow short range blaster.

Other than that, swift hunters are kind of fun but getting skirmish damage in without greater manyshot is really really hard and fiddly.

Looks pretty cool, I will save that link, and we'll look into it!


Hard to get Skirmish damage? :smallannoyed: It's about as hard as doing sneak attack damage with a ranged rogue. If not a bit easier actually because you consistently need to move ten feet to do it. Which is a better boon than a rogue who would much rather sit in one spot and pray no one comes after him after his first round of twf bucket load of dice pain comes crashing down. :/


At level 9 most 'archers' shoot 3-4 arrows on a full attack. Without a way to move 10' and still full attack, you often do less damage (and have less chance of hitting) with a single arrow than with a barrage, even with skirmish damage on the single arrow (remember, a d6 is still only 3.5 average damage).

There are actually more things that trigger sneak attack (flat-footedness) than trigger skirmish (teleport anklet, high level spells and powers (augmented dimension slide, Dimension Jumper etc), travel domain, and greater manyshot), and they're usually easier to get.

That's why it's hard to get skirmish. It also does less damage than a sneak attack, which is another point against it.

Also, it's boring. Not something you want a new player using, because every single combat round can be summarized as <I do whatever gets me skirmish damage - I shoot arrows>. Typically you want them making actual choices, and the choice between 'use barrage' or 'get to safe place' is actually a choice.


Both of these are excellent points, one of the biggest things he brought to my attention when I asked him about playing was, that his old d&d days were a lot more hack n slash rather than strategy and require some thought process.

[HunterColt22]

At level 9 most 'archers' shoot 3-4 arrows on a full attack. Without a way to move 10' and still full attack, you often do less damage (and have less chance of hitting) with a single arrow than with a barrage, even with skirmish damage on the single arrow (remember, a d6 is still only 3.5 average damage).

There are actually more things that trigger sneak attack (flat-footedness) than trigger skirmish (teleport anklet, high level spells and powers (augmented dimension slide, Dimension Jumper etc), travel domain, and greater manyshot), and they're usually easier to get.

That's why it's hard to get skirmish. It also does less damage than a sneak attack, which is another point against it.

Also, it's boring. Not something you want a new player using, because every single combat round can be summarized as <I do whatever gets me skirmish damage - I shoot arrows>. Typically you want them making actual choices, and the choice between 'use barrage' or 'get to safe place' is actually a choice.

To further this though there are two simple feats to solve those problems. One, Improved skirmish nets you another 1d6 on top of what you do for moving only another ten feet. At the end of the day you are only behind the rogue by about 4d6 which as you pointed out damage wise at those levels isn't much. Second is Greater Many Shot which allows you to apply precision damage on all shots fired.

To counter your argument on it being easier to trigger sneak attack, yes it looks easier but in reality, all a scout does is this, "I move ten feet." That's all it takes is movement to get precision damage, minus the normal circumstance for enemy types that rouges often face as well. As for decision based combat. A lot goes into how to get the skirmish damage and when best to use that advantage depending on your build and weapon specialization.

Scout in my opinion makes you think on your feet in combat, much like a wizard, cleric sorcerer or magic user, but different. Yes, it is still just plain attack move, much like a fighter, but you have to plan that movement out much more carefully as not to get trapped, and thus screwed out of your damage, versus a fighter, who just charges in and then sits there screaming "POWER ATTACK!" think of it like this, fighter is equal to a checkers piece while a scout is more akin to the queen in a chess match. Both do the same thing, over take pieces by moving and attacking them, but with much different styles and thought behind it, checkers just makes a bee line for the piece, while the queen puts thought behind its movements not to get caught and also to always have an escape route.

[Kerilstrasz]

heh... my opinion..

he wants a straight range dmg dealer...
i ll go with fighter and i ll Xplain..
1st of all forget all Ranger's specials for archering... fighter will eventually get more
feats so he compensates...
2nd a fighter can get all those improved feats like focus and specialization.
3rd as a fighter he don't need high int , wis & cha so he gets HHiigh dex and high
Str that with a nice Mighty Comp Longbow will do the job...

ofc thats only my opinion for a build with the parameters you posted...

[killem2]

Scout levels, not rogue levels.

I checked this out, I found daring outlaw which is swashbuckler and rogue. That was in complete scoundrel.

[Rejakor]

They are referring to this (http://dndtools.eu/feats/complete-scoundrel--60/swift-hunter--2868/), from Complete Scoundrel.




To further this though there are two simple feats to solve those problems. One, Improved skirmish [...] Second is Greater Many Shot[...]

[...]yes it looks easier but in reality, all a scout does is this, "I move ten feet."

Scout in my opinion makes you think on your feet in combat, much like a wizard, cleric sorcerer or magic user, but different. Yes, it is still just plain attack move, [...] while the queen puts thought behind its movements not to get caught and also to always have an escape route.

First, you appear to be misunderstanding me. I was not saying that it is hard to get skirmish damage - I was saying that it was hard to get skirmish damage on a full attack. I.e. the only kind of attack an archer should ever, ever, be doing. Greater Manyshot gets you there, but it requires manyshot and it's kind of annoying in that it doesn't allow Rapid Shot, it doesn't allow Speed weapons, or Haste, or anything beyond the basic attacks granted you by BAB. Arguably, it doesn't even allow Splitting. So, in summary, it costs 2 feats, it removes several of your potential attacks/rnd, and it is by far the easiest way to get skirmish 'full attacks'. So, full attacking skirmish is hard.


Also, speaking as someone who plays rogues, has DMed for a Swift Hunter, and has played a Swift Hunter, very few to no encounters ever actually force a swift hunter to ever make a decision. Nearly never will you be unable to move (especially with tumble) your 20', or be slowed such that you can't. And if you are, there's not much you can do about it. There's no real tactical 'i'll go here so I can go there' thought about it - usually either some wizard has slapped down Solid Fog so you're screwed, or you're always fine. Sure maybe you'll be better off in that corner than behind that pillar, but generally it doesn't matter because you are fast and most enemies are not or are tied up behind meatshields or BFC. Your biggest choice is where to put your arrows, where a normal archer has to pick very carefully where he stands, because every time he moves he doesn't get to full attack (unless he's invested in greater or regular manyshot, which is a big step down from a proper full attack for most archers).

I'm not really comparing this to a charger barbarian or whatever because I don't play those, at least not straight boring chargers, and I don't recommend other people play them, but even a charger has to make that pivotal choice of whether, when, and where to charge. Swift Hunters move... away from danger. And then they... shoot arrows at things. There's never really decisionmaking involved.


EDIT: Also I hope hloxlpths is a troll, as that terrible spelling and grammar combined with absolutely atrocious advice is too horrible to be real.

[nedz]

Improved skirmish adds 2d6 and 1 AC, also from CSco

[Kelb_Panthera]

I know there are at least three different ways to get 10ft of movement out of 5ft steps.

DC 40 tumble check turns 5ft step into 10ft step (OA), the sparring dummy of the master does the same (though I'm not sure where it's printed), and there's a white raven stance that lets you take at least one extra 5ft step on a turn (ToB).

I'm sure there are others that just aren't springing readily to mind ATM, though combining either of those first two with the third can get you 20ft of movement without bothering your full attack at all.

[Rejakor]

Swift Hunters typically don't have the 9 levels in warblade or crusader required for that stance, and otherwise it comes online at level 18 through feats.

Sparring Dummy of the Master and that use of the tumble skill are very obscure in sources not usually allowed/known about by DMs, and annoying to get (sparring dummy costs 25,000 or something, and has stupid requirements to craft, tumble DC 40 is non-trivial).

Also keep in mind that most Swift Hunters want to be moving 20' to get Improved Skirmish.

I never said it was impossible, I said it was hard and/or annoying. Which it is. Especially for someone new to 3.5.

[HunterColt22]

They are referring to this (http://dndtools.eu/feats/complete-scoundrel--60/swift-hunter--2868/), from Complete Scoundrel.





First, you appear to be misunderstanding me. I was not saying that it is hard to get skirmish damage - I was saying that it was hard to get skirmish damage on a full attack. I.e. the only kind of attack an archer should ever, ever, be doing. ....


Also, speaking as someone who plays rogues, has DMed for a Swift Hunter, and has played a Swift Hunter, very few to no encounters ever actually force a swift hunter to ever make a decision. Nearly never will you be unable to move (especially with tumble) your 20', or be slowed such that you can't. And if you are, there's not much you can do about it. ....

I'm not really comparing this to a charger barbarian or whatever because I don't play those, at least not straight boring chargers, and I don't recommend other people play them, but even a charger has to make that pivotal choice of whether, when, and where to charge. Swift Hunters move... away from danger. And then they... shoot arrows at things. There's never really decisionmaking involved. ... Compressed for reading sake.

I agree I probably misunderstood you with that, but again it wasn't made specifically clear that you were referring to full attacks in that first post. I am seeing this more as two different thoughts and play styles really. You are looking more at the scout as a typical archer, which I agree with, is very much in tone and partial intent with the character I think, particularly in some instances. I see it more as a guerrilla warfare type character that hit and runs.

Also again it seems our campaigns play extremely differently. From what I have experienced as a rogue, and characters along those lines, they do make big decisions about when and where to hit. Because of, medium BaB, two, their horrible will saves, which as a DM you should be targeting for these types of PCs, dominate has been a very bad thing in my book, but generally these type of actions require line of sight or effect on a target, thus moving around has a lot more consequences, and reactions than your normal kobold stomping done at level 3.

Generally speaking as you have said, you have DM'd a PC like this and played one as well, and thus, you know the tactics a PC can use to move around as you just demonstrated. You also easily the constraints that can be put on that PC to make those things hard, or difficult for him to pull off, thus making choice matter.

Again in the final part you are making the assumption that the DM has not read up on a Scout in some manner. A smart DM will have his bases covered where in some battles where he knows a scout can move, he will make it more dangerous, such as a magical darkness where you can't tell that you are moving right into an enemy. Again this is negated somewhat by the scout in later levels but you get the idea I think.

Personally, it seems we are just thinking in different terms of how battles pan out based on our experiences.

[killem2]

Thanks for the replies on this, hell even if he doesn't do scout, I might some day lol.

Wouldn't it be most effective to trigger skirmish by just getting a race that can fly? or being able to fly?

[HunterColt22]

Yes it normally is, of course the problem then is getting a race with flight WITHOUT class dipping or an absurd LA up your pie hole. As of note there are only really three options that I can think of that can help with this. One being Raptron. They get flight as they level up, eventually getting to good flight speed, and I think over 60ft? I don't remember, haven't cracked open RotW in a long while so someone can direct you better to the spot in the book where it is located. Second is races of Dragon with the dragon born who I think get a glide of some type. and or fly much later at higher levels. Again not sure.

LA+1 races with flight are far and few between, and only two come to mind that are worthwhile. Hengokyia from OA, sparrow or crane, but then you need to figure out how to fire a weapon or use one in that form. Second, and my personal vote is an Air Mephling. Their fly speed sucks (10ft :smalleek:), but it is perfect maneuverability, thus, you have an option here, take it and swallow the bad pills and be done with it thus opening up build potential more, or take a feat and be more feat strapped thus limiting builds significantly. Personally, Air Heritage sounds like an excellent alternative to being gimped in flight speed for no reason. Why an extra +30 to my speed, where almost nothing can touch me for the next 4 - 6 levels, and I am small and thus have all those lovely munchkin boons as well on top of that, and only for a single feat? In the immortal words of the seagulls from Finding Nemo "... Mine? ... MINE? MINE. MINE! MINE!!!"

[nedz]

Also, speaking as someone who plays rogues, has DMed for a Swift Hunter, and has played a Swift Hunter, very few to no encounters ever actually force a swift hunter to ever make a decision. Nearly never will you be unable to move (especially with tumble) your 20', or be slowed such that you can't. And if you are, there's not much you can do about it. There's no real tactical 'i'll go here so I can go there' thought about it - usually either some wizard has slapped down Solid Fog so you're screwed, or you're always fine. Sure maybe you'll be better off in that corner than behind that pillar, but generally it doesn't matter because you are fast and most enemies are not or are tied up behind meatshields or BFC. Your biggest choice is where to put your arrows, where a normal archer has to pick very carefully where he stands, because every time he moves he doesn't get to full attack (unless he's invested in greater or regular manyshot, which is a big step down from a proper full attack for most archers).

Which is why the Spring Attack melle scout is better, not in terms of damage necessarily, but in terms of fun. There is Bounding Assault which allows an extra attack, and Rapid Blitz also, though these require high BAB. Also Skirmish Boots, which are 3/day IIRC; Just have several pairs.

[killem2]

I just realized, even flying means movement and takes away from your full attack.

I suppose the goal is being able to skirmish + full attack each turn right? :smallfrown:

[Rejakor]

Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz are terrible feats and you should feel terrible for suggesting Spring Attack at all. It's the classic example of great idea, failed execution. It's a worthless waste of a feat slot and no-one should ever take it for any reason ever. It's worthless AND boring.


Flight doesn't automatically trigger skirmish. It still requires movement, which necessitates a move action, which means no full attack. It means you don't get shut down by rough terrain, but it's trivially easy to negate rough terrain with any number of feats, class abilities, and magic items anyway.

Air Mephits, as well as roleplaying-shoehorning you, are a terrible race for their LA and RHD - i'd always pick pixie over them. Aarokocras, Raptorans, Dragonborn, Hengeyokai (Sparrow), Unseelie Fey/Half Fey, and pixies are generally your easiest/best bet for flight, or just be the proud owner of a desmodu hunting bat, the easiest flying mount in the game to own or use.


The amount of times in a campaign where you can move somewhere out of line of sight of someone and still shoot something else, where it's something you want to shoot, I could count on one hand. Usually the enemy caster or sniper or whatever can move to where he can see you regardless, or simply targets someone else (with rangers not wanting to dump wis, swift hunters actually don't have terrible will saves). Otherwise, the choice of <being in cover> versus <not being in cover> is usually a no-brainer - and thus, not really a choice. There is the situation of 'stand in the open, shoot at the wizard' vs 'don't be in the open, and shoot at the wizard's meatshield' I guess, but again, I doubt that comes up super often.


If a DM is having to have special magical darkness with surprise melee enemies in order to actually make the swift hunter have to make choices, then that's the stormwind fallacy - it ain't broke, cause the DM can specifically step in and design specific encounters to fix it. Not really a supportable argument in favour of your point.

[HunterColt22]

I just realized, even flying means movement and takes away from your full attack.

I suppose the goal is being able to skirmish + full attack each turn right? :smallfrown:


Again yes generally, but that is looking at it as a pure DPR/DPS situation. Sometimes you need a lot more tact than that. Other times, you don't and you just need to spam fire your arrows/attacks and blot out the sun. All depends on whether you are in Thermopylae at a given instance or not.

[killem2]

In a previous session I remember seeing this undead that I can't remember now, but I recall it having a special ability that basically allowed it a free movement with no effect on its attack or normal movement. I think it was called quickness? quick? god I need to find that monster entry again :smallfurious:

[Answerer]

Sounds like the Choker (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/choker.htm), an Aberration and one of the more broken things you can shapechange into (or alter self or polymorph into with Assume Supernatural Ability).

[killem2]

That's the ability, but I did finally find it, it was a tomb mote from libirs mortis.

I suppose there is not way to get that ability stacked on to a playable race lol.

[nedz]

Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz are terrible feats and you should feel terrible for suggesting Spring Attack at all. It's the classic example of great idea, failed execution. It's a worthless waste of a feat slot and no-one should ever take it for any reason ever. It's worthless AND boring.

The feat tax is excessive, but how is it less boring than Archery ?

[Answerer]

That's the ability, but I did finally find it, it was a tomb mote from libirs mortis.

I suppose there is not way to get that ability stacked on to a playable race lol.
Well... Manipulate Form can do anything, so... there is that.

[Qwertystop]

Just a tip:

Flight may not allow you to fly somewhere and full attack in one round, but it does every alternate round (or even more often).

Round 1: Fly up as high as you can go while still getting a standard-action attack and staying in shooting range.

Round 2: Fall. You will get skirmish damage for moving, but since it doesn't take your action, you can get a full attack.

Round 3: If you can still fall without hitting the ground, repeat round 2. If not, go to round 1.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Actually, spring attack does have a niche. It's in AoO builds. In more than a few encounters there'll be one big enemy with several smaller, supporting enemies. You spring attack the big one, while deliberately moving through threatened spaces with robilard's gambit or karmic strike (or both) active. The little guys swing and either miss or do trivial damage, while you counter strike them and the big guy just has to stand there and take it. High speed is highly recommended though.

And before you say it, I'm aware that focused fire is more optimal than the above and that it's a rather feat-intessive setup, but you can't deny the cool factor of zipping through a pile of enemies leaving them all bleeding and/or prone, while being relatively unharmed yourself.

[Rejakor]

The feat tax is excessive, but how is it less boring than Archery ?

Being in the front line is dangerous and fun.

Being able to shoot down enemies with your arrows is fun.


Spring Attack combines the safety of not being in melee combat with not actually being able to harm anyone (only doing one attack).


And if you want to robilars, you've already spent heaps of feats and resources on that, and then on having damage on an aoo that kills stuff. You don't need spring attack to trigger AoOs - simply moving through foes will do that for you. Or charging. It's just wasted resources at that point. Not quite as much of a waste as building a character to spring attack for very little damage each round and do nothing else, but still a waste compared to pounce or just walking.

[nedz]

Being in the front line is dangerous and fun.
Agreed


Being able to shoot down enemies with your arrows is fun.
Having played an archer I have to say I found them to be quite boring. You need a large number of feats to do this well also.

Spring Attack combines the safety of not being in melee combat with not actually being able to harm anyone (only doing one attack).
You need to have a viable attack to deliver, which Spring Attack itself doesn't give you. I have a player who uses it in the game I run, and I don't think he would describe this as either boring or safe. The group is medium OP and he can be competitive.

[killem2]

Ok guys here is how it went down. I asked him straight up what he wanted to be and he said ranger and I asked why? He said reconfirmed that he wants to be a ranged combatant and he loves bows and arrows. So what we did was:

4 scout / 2 ranger and we'll go up scout from there, with swift hunter feat, travel devotion, and of course typical archery tree.

I went over a fight with him so he could get the basics and really likes this skirmish stuff. For only coming from 1st edition he caught up very very fast, so that was cool.

Thanks for the help. I think he is just going to focus on going up scout at this point. He didn't care about anything else the ranger gave him, except the favored enemy and the weapon selection they got.