Ranger vs. Wizard

[Vknight]

So yeah I need too somehow explain too someone how a Wizard just wins against a Ranger.

Why
A person I'm playing with says the Ranger is the end all be all, that can best the Ranger easily before level 7 and after level 14.
And that a Wizard can be completely shut down with a dead/anti magic field. Or a dispell magic

So lets be fair and make it only a pure Wizard no X prestige too lower the metamagic to 0 or some such thing

Also I may need too explain that Permanency is a spell and not metamagic...
So yeah that

So yeah may be hard I came too the playground because well Tippy and Tippy and do I really need more of an explanation

[Asrrin]

I don't even know where to begin with this.

First off, if the ranger is an archer, Windwall. wham, bam, done. Second, if the ranger is a TWF, just treat him like a fighter.
Any number of save or die spells, battlefield control, celerity, summons, teleports will absolutely end the encounter.

As for dispel Magic and Anti-magic field, he does realize that both of those are wizard spells, not avialable to the ranger except as items? an optimized wizard will be able to easily make the caster level check for dispel magic vs. a ranger, and as far as the anti-magic field, a tinfoil cone hat solves that problem quite nicely. Also Orb of X line of spells for dealing direct damage if it's emanating directly on the ranger.

[Inevitability]

The average battle between a high-level wizard and a high-level ranger will go like this:

*Wizard rests in his sanctum, when suddenly twenty of the magical traps and scrying sensors securing the hallways go off*
*Wizard teleports/plane shifts away, and casts some spell to protect against scrying*
*24 hours later, the ranger is attacked by three ice assassins.*
*Wizard teleports to 1 mile within the location of the assassins, and starts buffing himself.*
*Ranger dies*

[sleepyphoenixx]

At all but low levels a ranger is almost as screwed as a wizard by AMF. Monster difficulty assumes that you have a level appropiate amount of magic items. No class survives a mid- to high level encounter without magic.
That aside, AMF and dead magic zones don't come up all that often in the course of normal play (or if they do your DM should have told you beforehand not to make a caster).
In every other situation the wizard is pretty much guaranteed to go first and has a pretty good chance to either kill or disable the ranger with his first spell.

[AutumnLotus]

Simplest Answer: Use any half useful Conjuration spell on them, and buff yourself ahead of time. Unless he is doing Sword of the Arcane Order/Mystic Ranger cheese then it should be as simple as that. If he IS doing the above then obviously you must plan based off what sort of tactic he will use.

If he chooses to use a bow then cast Wind Wall immediately, then fling debuffs at him until he is incapacitated. My personal favorites are Grease, Web, and Bestow (Greater) Curse. If he isnt knocked out then summon some Fiendish Whatevers (Gorillas for fun) and watch as he becomes a smear on the floor.

If he intends on spamming Dispel magic then all you need to do is increase your caster level with feats or items so that the check always goes in your favor. If it is high enough level to cast antimagic field? Contingency Dimension Door out of the area of the spell, then plane shift away to the plane of your preference and watch him through a divination of your choice. wait until the field is gone, then cast spells at him till he dies.

These are siiimple ways to deal with him, and obviously there are people here with more imaginative choices. All I have stated (besides greater bestow curse) is from the SRD so screams of cheese should be met with a cheeky grin, preferably with finger pointing

[Fouredged Sword]

Well, lets focus on the basics.

After about level 5, you can simply look at the summoning lists for wizards and compare them to a ranger.

Can a level 5 ranger solo 2-3 black bears supported by 3-4 wolves? That is something like a CR 7 encounter, and they are immune to handle animal.

Can a level 7 ranger solo 2-3 dire wolves supported by 4-5d3 wolves? Again, it is an encounter +2 CR higher than his level.

And it gets worse as the levels go forward, and is about an inefficient use of spells as possible for a wizard. Mix in a few feats focused on summoning, and all those animals get MUCH stronger.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I'm not sure how one can come to think that the Ranger stands a chance against the wizard... Barring extreme optimization for the ranger and extreme deoptimization for the wizard.

With both mild optimized I wonder at what level does the wizard and ranger need to be for the Ranger to overtake the Wizard. Then what is the maximum level of the wizard in which a level 20 ranger can take out.

I have the feeling the wizard won't hit a double digit level before a level 20 ranger can't keep up with the wizard.

[Big Fau]

So yeah I need too somehow explain too someone how a Wizard just wins against a Ranger.

Why
A person I'm playing with says the Ranger is the end all be all, that can best the Ranger easily before level 7 and after level 14.
And that a Wizard can be completely shut down with a dead/anti magic field. Or a dispell magic

So lets be fair and make it only a pure Wizard no X prestige too lower the metamagic to 0 or some such thing

Also I may need too explain that Permanency is a spell and not metamagic...
So yeah that

So yeah may be hard I came too the playground because well Tippy and Tippy and do I really need more of an explanation

AMFs are countered by the spell Invoke Magic (LoM, 9th level spell that allows you to cast any 3rd level spell you know), or by simply walking out of the area. It is a pathetically easy AoE to avoid when used offensively, and outright suicidal if the Ranger is using it as a defense. Dead Magic Zones are purely DM Fiat, and are not a valid argument in this circumstance. If the Ranger has to rely on one of those to win, it means the DM is the actual winner and the Ranger was little more than a tool.

As for Dispel Magic, boosting your CL above 30 means the regular Dispel doesn't work. Rangers don't get access to that spell though, and any magic item that includes a Dispel Magic effect is going to be easy to counter-act (ironically, by the Wizard using Dispel Magic himself).

The Ranger's damage output is at least halved by Displacement, negated completely by Wind Wall, or ignored via Dispel Magic+Greater Ironflesh (or whatever that spell from the SC is called). At level 14 the Wizard has access to Celerity (he's had it since 4th level, but whatever), meaning all you have to do is win initiative and you can throw out a Web or Glitterdust to screw the Ranger out of his ability to fight a simple Summon Monster.

[Inevitability]

Well, the only way I could see the ranger standing a chance would be when they're level 1-3, and even then, the wizard would win if the ranger fails one tiny saving throw.

[Talya]

Unless he is doing Sword of the Arcane Order/Mystic Ranger cheese


I'd just like to point out that this "cheese" allows the ranger to almost - but not quite - keep up to a wizard for the first 10 levels of his career. So what constitutes ranger "cheese" is less immediately cheesy than the base wizard class in the SRD.

[Coidzor]

Considering a level 1 Wizard can kill a level 3 party of four "standard" characters with a reasonable success rate, we can probably extrapolate that down to a level 1 Ranger.

[Curmudgeon]

I'd just like to point out that this "cheese" allows the ranger to almost - but not quite - keep up to a wizard for the first 10 levels of his career. So what constitutes ranger "cheese" is less immediately cheesy than the base wizard class in the SRD.
I'd note that a specialist Wizard — a base option of the class — adds about the same additional power as the Mystic Ranger variant does compared to the base Ranger.

If these Ranger options are cheesy, the Wizard starts as fondue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fondue).

[The Prince of Cats]

The one note I'd make is that most 'X vs. Y' threads like this assume that the wizard has just prepared their spells and probably knows what to expect. They also assume that a wizard will have no issues with using all of their highest-level spells in one encounter.

A wizard who has had to prepare for a all eventualities, has fought a couple of level-appropriate encounters and is expecting trouble before he next rests might want to be wary of a ranger.

You might as well compare an un-buffed wizard to a ranger with favoured-enemy (wizard's race / sub-race) and a surprise round from sneaking up on them in their favoured terrain. Add in a suitable combat pet to give flanking, a decent TWF build using leaden blades and power attack, then assume the ranger's high dex wins them initiative even in the first round. The ranger at level 7 will be attacking 8 times before the wizard even stops being flat-footed, for a good chance of at least one critical and maybe a 75% hit rate. So... 3d6 + 21 (assuming +3 for 16 strength, + 4 for power attack each time) and 4d8 + 28 (same bonuses, also assuming the crit was on the longsword) gives an average of 31 + 46 for 77 damage and a dead wizard...

The truth is that Batman always wins; whoever ambushes their foe after preparing their strategy is the winner. It's not about wizard vs. ranger here, just fanboy vs. fanboy.

Wizards can do a lot of damage in a hurry, but then they are spent. A ranger is not quite a 'dance all day' attacker like a fighter or rogue, but a ranger at the end of a hard day of adventuring will murder a wizard in the same situation and barely break a sweat. A ranger without spells is a sub-par fighter, but a wizard reduced to their cantrips is a joke.

[Curmudgeon]

You might as well compare an un-buffed wizard to a ranger with favoured-enemy (wizard's race / sub-race) and a surprise round from sneaking up on them in their favoured terrain.
I thought all Rangers had Favored Enemy (arcanists) (Complete Mage, page 32), so they'd get the bonus against all Wizards. Trying to guess the right race is a fool's errand.

[KorbeltheReader]

Another way to go is looking at individual spells or common spell combinations. For the pre-7th level group, for instance, hold person can be cast from 160 ft. away and instantly wins the battle. A huge fiendish monstrous centipede summoned with summon monster III grapples at +15 and can be given the feat Snatch since the fiendish template grants it an Intelligence score high enough to gain feats. Sudden maximized shivering touch deals 18 points of Dexterity damage, no save, and can be delivered via familiar while invisible.

One wizard at level 6 can have all three of these memorized simultaneously while flying and invisible. How does a ranger survive that? And this is the wizard at the low end of his power.

[Fouredged Sword]

After a point the wizard is unkillable because the ranger lacks the ability to hurt something that is an astral projection. Also, the wizard can simply teleport away, so if the wizard doesn't WANT to fight right then, you are not getting more than 1 round of combat to kill him. Mix with a nice contingency (teleport when I get ambushed!) and you are a very hard to target character.

[Big Fau]

The one note I'd make is that most 'X vs. Y' threads like this assume that the wizard has just prepared their spells and probably knows what to expect. They also assume that a wizard will have no issues with using all of their highest-level spells in one encounter.

A wizard who has had to prepare for a all eventualities, has fought a couple of level-appropriate encounters and is expecting trouble before he next rests might want to be wary of a ranger.

You might as well compare an un-buffed wizard to a ranger with favoured-enemy (wizard's race / sub-race) and a surprise round from sneaking up on them in their favoured terrain. Add in a suitable combat pet to give flanking, a decent TWF build using leaden blades and power attack, then assume the ranger's high dex wins them initiative even in the first round. The ranger at level 7 will be attacking 8 times before the wizard even stops being flat-footed, for a good chance of at least one critical and maybe a 75% hit rate. So... 3d6 + 21 (assuming +3 for 16 strength, + 4 for power attack each time) and 4d8 + 28 (same bonuses, also assuming the crit was on the longsword) gives an average of 31 + 46 for 77 damage and a dead wizard...

The truth is that Batman always wins; whoever ambushes their foe after preparing their strategy is the winner. It's not about wizard vs. ranger here, just fanboy vs. fanboy.

Wizards can do a lot of damage in a hurry, but then they are spent. A ranger is not quite a 'dance all day' attacker like a fighter or rogue, but a ranger at the end of a hard day of adventuring will murder a wizard in the same situation and barely break a sweat. A ranger without spells is a sub-par fighter, but a wizard reduced to their cantrips is a joke.

What? A Wizard, played properly, doesn't prepare spells for specific circumstances; he prepares spells that are useful in a majority of encounters. Spells like Grease, Glitterdust, Black Tentacles, and a number of other options are just encounter-ending powerhouses that a Ranger can't hope to defend against. And the OP specified levels 7 and 14, by which time the Wizard has enough spells/day that he can cast around 2/encounter and solo the rest of it without wasting another slot. A 7th level Wizard that's reduced to his cantrips only is a Wizard that was put through a veritable gauntlet of encounters, well above the normal 4/day. A basic 7th level Wizard can handle 5/day with the right loadout (before bonus spells are even accounted for), while Specialists and Focused Specialists can handle more. At 14th, he's capable of casting upwards of 4-5 spells per encounter just for the fun of it. I'm speaking from experience here: A properly built Wizard cannot be bested by a Tier 3 or lower at most levels of the game without massive DM Fiat. The guy who prepared for a fight isn't Batman, that guy's just ready for a hunt and that's it. The Wizard is Batman, no two ways about it. Moreover, the OP's scenario doesn't mention any additional encounters beyond the Ranger. Your assumption that the Wizard is out of spells is inaccurate.

You don't need to "know" what to expect. A Wizard's spells are flexible enough that only other full casters can actually counteract a Wizard, and even then it's a close fight.

Now let's take a look at the rest of your post:


You might as well compare an un-buffed wizard to a ranger with favoured-enemy (wizard's race / sub-race) and a surprise round from sneaking up on them in their favoured terrain.

Favoritism towards the Ranger.


Add in a suitable combat pet to give flanking, a decent TWF build using leaden blades and power attack

"Leaden blades" are not codified in the rules.


then assume the ranger's high dex wins them initiative even in the first round.

Nerveskitter+Hummingbird Familiar gives the Wizard a +9 before ability scores or Improved Init. A Dex of 14 and Improved Init (a feat most Wizards will take because they can trade out Scribe Scroll for it) means the Ranger is facing down a +15 Init modifier, and has to roll hellishly high against a Wizard's Nat 1 just to stand a chance.


The ranger at level 7 will be attacking 8 times before the wizard even stops being flat-footed

How are you getting 8 attacks off of TWFing at 7th level? Barring certain shenanigans (all of which involve multiclassing and liberal interpretations of certain rules), that's impossible. Even worse, you can't full attack during the Surprise round so even if the Ranger gets the drop on the Wizard the most you're getting is 4 attacks, maybe 5.


for a good chance of at least one critical and maybe a 75% hit rate. So... 3d6 + 21 (assuming +3 for 16 strength, + 4 for power attack each time) and 4d8 + 28 (same bonuses, also assuming the crit was on the longsword) gives an average of 31 + 46 for 77 damage and a dead wizard...

A Necropolitan Wizard is immune to Crits, and there are additional means of negating them (like a Mithral Fortification Buckler or being a Warforged with some way of negating ASF). Final, fatal flaw with your assumption: A Wizard's spells, at 7th level, have a range of Touch/40ft/170ft/680ft. At any distance beyond Close range the Wizard doesn't care about Initiative since you can't physically get close enough to Full Attack.

Prince of Cats, you don't have much experience with high-op Wizards do you?

Edit:


Wizards can do a lot of damage in a hurry, but then they are spent. A ranger is not quite a 'dance all day' attacker like a fighter or rogue, but a ranger at the end of a hard day of adventuring will murder a wizard in the same situation and barely break a sweat. A ranger without spells is a sub-par fighter, but a wizard reduced to their cantrips is a joke.

A Wizard doing damage is doing 600 points per spell slot as they are likely a Mailman build. The idea that they "are spent" afterwards is laudable, if not outright ludicrous. Like I said above, a Wizard reduced to Cantrips isn't playing his character right or has been put through hell and back.

[PersonMan]

The one note I'd make is that most 'X vs. Y' threads like this assume that the wizard has just prepared their spells and probably knows what to expect. They also assume that a wizard will have no issues with using all of their highest-level spells in one encounter.

Actually, one of the big benefits of Wizards are that they can prepare spells no matter what they do or do not expect.

Grease, Glitterdust, Invisibility, Fly, Wind Wall, Summon Monster I-IX, they're all useful in a variety of situations.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

If he's talking about the two classes fighting each other, then it's completely irrelevant. Classes weren't designed to fight each other, they were designed to go on adventures and overcome challenges. In that regard:

Non-Wizard: "Using my investigation and information gathering expertise I've determined who the villain is and where he currently resides!"
Wizard: "I scried him out a week ago, I knew all of that instantly and I've spent all this time keeping tabs on him, learning what he has planned, and finding out all the weak points in his defenses."
Non-Wizard: "Excellent! His lair is three weeks' journey away, with but my knowledge of the local geography and my diplomatic ability with the local tribes we can cut that trip down by four days!"
Wizard: "Shut up and step onto my teleportation circle."

[The Prince of Cats]

Moreover, the OP's scenario doesn't mention any additional encounters beyond the Ranger. Your assumption that the Wizard is out of spells is inaccurate.
Precisely; it's not a fair comparison. At the very least, a comparison of ranger vs. wizard should be after 3 level-appropriate encounters each.


Favoritism towards the Ranger.
Yes, I openly admit to that. It was in response to the favouritism shown toward the wizard...


"Leaden blades" are not codified in the rules.
Sorry, slight misspelling: Try http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/spells/leadBlades.html (I was thinking Pathfinder here)


Nerveskitter+Hummingbird Familiar gives the Wizard a +9 before ability scores or Improved Init. A Dex of 14 and Improved Init (a feat most Wizards will take because they can trade out Scribe Scroll for it) means the Ranger is facing down a +15 Init modifier, and has to roll hellishly high against a Wizard's Nat 1 just to stand a chance.
So... My example of a vaguely-optimised ranger is countered by... a stupidly-optimised wizard? Yes, it is possible to get a wizard's init up to +15, but unlikely.


How are you getting 8 attacks off of TWFing at 7th level? Barring certain shenanigans (all of which involve multiclassing and liberal interpretations of certain rules), that's impossible. Even worse, you can't full attack during the Surprise round so even if the Ranger gets the drop on the Wizard the most you're getting is 4 attacks, maybe 5.
Forgot about the reduced actions in a surprise round. So yes, that almost halves the damage output.


A Necropolitan Wizard is immune to Crits, and there are additional means of negating them (like a Mithral Fortification Buckler or being a Warforged with some way of negating ASF). Final, fatal flaw with your assumption: A Wizard's spells, at 7th level, have a range of Touch/40ft/170ft/680ft. At any distance beyond Close range the Wizard doesn't care about Initiative since you can't physically get close enough to Full Attack.
So... Your argument is that a Necropolitan Wizard with Nerveskitter and a Hummingbird Familiar who has all his spells for the day can kill an unoptimised ranger?


Prince of Cats, you don't have much experience with high-op Wizards do you?
Nope... Never been keen on playing with or as a min-maxer... (as a DM, they never had long life-expectancies due to their tendency to stir up trouble)

How is that even fun? It sounds more like accountancy than a game, trying to eke out every possible bonus from every decision.

[Agincourt]

If he's talking about the two classes fighting each other, then it's completely irrelevant. Classes weren't designed to fight each other, they were designed to go on adventures and overcome challenges. In that regard:

Non-Wizard: "Using my investigation and information gathering expertise I've determined who the villain is and where he currently resides!"
Wizard: "I scried him out a week ago, I knew all of that instantly and I've spent all this time keeping tabs on him, learning what he has planned, and finding out all the weak points in his defenses."
Non-Wizard: "Excellent! His lair is three weeks' journey away, with but my knowledge of the local geography and my diplomatic ability with the local tribes we can cut that trip down by four days!"
Wizard: "Shut up and step onto my teleportation circle."

That's not how scrying works. You need to describe the person you intend to scry on. Casting a spell on "the villain" gets you no information.

[Coidzor]

I'd note that a specialist Wizard — a base option of the class — adds about the same additional power as the Mystic Ranger variant does compared to the base Ranger.

If these Ranger options are cheesy, the Wizard starts as fondue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fondue).

It's amazing how people who won't bat an eye at a Wizard will blanch at Mystic Rangers with the Sword of the Arcane Order feat. Especially if you throw in Wildshaping on top of that.

[Big Fau]

Precisely; it's not a fair comparison. At the very least, a comparison of ranger vs. wizard should be after 3 level-appropriate encounters each.

As long as the Wizard has 3 spells left in his repertoire he can end the Ranger. Even if they were all 2nd level spells. The Ranger's HP would be 75% of his max, and well within a Fiendish Monstrous Centipede's capabilities. Hell, Alter Self+Blur+False Life puts the Wizard on even grounds with the Ranger in terms of combat.


Yes, I openly admit to that. It was in response to the favouritism shown toward the wizard...

What favoritism, the "fully rested" part? The Wizard can start the encounter bound to a cement pillar and still come out on top (there's spells and a metamagic feat for it).


Sorry, slight misspelling: Try http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/spells/leadBlades.html (I was thinking Pathfinder here)

Wasn't aware we were using PF, as the OP didn't clarify sources allowed.


So... My example of a vaguely-optimised ranger is countered by... a stupidly-optimised wizard? Yes, it is possible to get a wizard's init up to +15, but unlikely.

"Stupidly optimized" is subjective here. I could easily cut out that familiar and have several other options for getting that +15, and I don't actually need it to be that high. A +11 is more than sufficient at 7th level. As for this level of optimization being unlikely, far from it. This is close to standard tactics for a Wizard.


So... Your argument is that a Necropolitan Wizard with Nerveskitter and a Hummingbird Familiar who has all his spells for the day can kill an unoptimised ranger?

No, my argument is that a Wizard can beat a Ranger if the optimization level of both characters is equal. Of course an optimized Wizard can be an unoptimized Ranger.


Nope... Never been keen on playing with or as a min-maxer... (as a DM, they never had long life-expectancies due to their tendency to stir up trouble)

How is that even fun? It sounds more like accountancy than a game, trying to eke out every possible bonus from every decision.

Then you don't know the full extent of their capabilities. It doesn't take nearly that much effort to make a Wizard capable of being better than anything in the game.

The fatal flaw in your argument is you are assuming it's a level playing field. It isn't; the Wizard's spells/day are more than sufficient to get through 5+ encounters/day at 7th level, and we approach the 8+ encounters/day at around 14th level.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

That's not how scrying works. You need to describe the person you intend to scry on. Casting a spell on "the villain" gets you no information.

There are plenty of divination spells that can determine who the villain is and obtain a description of him, the point of that was to illustrate that spells can do everything a mundane character's skills can do and more in a fraction of the time.

[Agincourt]

There are plenty of divination spells that can determine who the villain is and obtain a description of him, the point of that was to illustrate that spells can do everything a mundane character's skills can do and more in a fraction of the time.

That is not going to help the OP at all in his discussion if you don't identify which divinations will help and how. In general, the divination spells on the wizard spell list are worse that those found on the Cleric list. Hand waving away details about which spells to cast, when they are available, and which resources they will consume is not going to help the OP one iota.

[eggynack]

So... My example of a vaguely-optimised ranger is countered by... a stupidly-optimised wizard? Yes, it is possible to get a wizard's init up to +15, but unlikely.
That's not really what's happening here. The majority of those things are just basic features of the class that can be picked up trivially. Nerveskitter is a single 1st level slot, a hummingbird familiar only sacrifices other familiar bonuses, which are usually worse, and possibly some UMD cheese, which you would find equally problematic for your ranger in other ways, and 14 dexterity is standard. I'd say that the scribe scroll trade is going a bit out of the way, because scribe scroll is pretty strong, but it's not going out of the way by much. You're looking at a ridiculously high initiative modifier, and that's true no matter how you slice it. This is not a place where the ranger has an advantage.



Forgot about the reduced actions in a surprise round. So yes, that almost halves the damage output.
Aren't you pretty much just getting a single attack? And if this is the surprise round, doesn't that single attack require you to be standing right next to the opponent as you surprise them? Wizards gain massive benefit from a surprise round. I don't think rangers really do.


So... Your argument is that a Necropolitan Wizard with Nerveskitter and a Hummingbird Familiar who has all his spells for the day can kill an unoptimised ranger?
No, I think his argument was that an optimized wizard with a reasonable quantity of spells/day can kill a ranger that's optimized, as long as that optimization doesn't include mystic ranger/SotAO stuff. Granting high level casting to the ranger makes it more about player skill than class, because the two will be reasonably equal, with a decent edge for the wizard.


Nope... Never been keen on playing with or as a min-maxer... (as a DM, they never had long life-expectancies due to their tendency to stir up trouble)

How is that even fun? It sounds more like accountancy than a game, trying to eke out every possible bonus from every decision.
Think less accountancy, and more Ultra-complicated hyper-chess. Wizards aren't awesome because they eke out bonuses from everything. They're awesome because they can do things with massive strategic and tactical ramifications. Sure, they can also get pretty big numbers, especially to initiative (wizards like initiative), but it's mostly about the big tactical ramifications. The reason you're seeing such a massive deficit between what this wizard and this ranger is capable of, is because wizards are amazingly powerful, while rangers are not. You start talking about how your ranger is going to out-initiative the wizard, and then the wizard casts a single spell, and there goes any advantage you once had. It's tragic, really.

[Big Fau]

Prince of Cats, look at it this way: The best option for the Ranger is to copy the Wizard via Mystic Ranger+SotAO.

So the argument isn't Ranger VS Wizard, it's Wizard VS Wizard when one Wizard is pretending to be a Ranger and the other isn't.

[Ivanhoe]

Considering a level 1 Wizard can kill a level 3 party of four "standard" characters with a reasonable success rate, we can probably extrapolate that down to a level 1 Ranger.

I think this needs a bit more detail. How does a level 1 wizard do this and what does "reasonable success rate" mean?

[Big Fau]

I think this needs a bit more detail. How does a level 1 wizard do this and what does "reasonable success rate" mean?

If they are within the AoE, Color Spray stuns them for a minimum of 2 rounds (Sudden Maximize+Sudden Empower to make it 7), then the Wizard just beats them to death with a Greatsword (proficiency be damned).

[Snowbluff]

I like the part where you cast Friendly Fire, and the archery ranger fails his spellcraft roll.

[Ivanhoe]

If they are within the AoE, Color Spray stuns them for a minimum of 2 rounds (Sudden Maximize+Sudden Empower to make it 7), then the Wizard just beats them to death with a Greatsword (proficiency be damned).

That could work. Given that at leat one of the group will save, though, and the 15ft range only making it highly situational, the level 1 wizard is not really winning this. I guess.

Added on a edit afterthought: how will a wizard survive a ranger's bow attack a level 1?

[Big Fau]

That could work. Given that at leat one of the group will save, though, and the 15ft range only making it highly situational, the level 1 wizard is not really winning this. I guess.

It heavily depends on the party in question. If the party contains casters, the Wizard is screwed by the RNG. If not, Wizard's odds improve dramatically as long as he can get all 4 in range. Spell Focus+Greater make his job more successful, but misses out on Sudden Max/Emp. Mixing the two may be more worth-while.

Of course, we can also get into the cheese territory of cross-class Handle Animal trickery wherein the Wizard sells his own spellbook to buy a bunch of Riding Dogs and train them for battle.

[TrueJordan]

I like the part where you cast Friendly Fire, and the archery ranger fails his spellcraft roll.

How would spellcraft help?

[toapat]

Prince of Cats, look at it this way: The best option for the Ranger is to copy the Wizard via Mystic Ranger+SotAO.

So the argument isn't Ranger VS Wizard, it's Wizard VS Wizard when one Wizard is pretending to be a Ranger and the other isn't.

not only that but the ranger has to make a spellcraft check to simply cast any of those spells, has to have a high Wisdom and Int dedication, and has 6 fewer feats then the wizard while being barred from 70-90% of the excessively broken things that wizard gets.

the only non-full casters who have any hope of fighting the T1+2s are Paladin, and only so long as XPH+CPsy are banned (due to a stupidly worded ability that does not work the way optimisers want it to), and only at or over 11th level. And this is only because they have access to one method of travel which is extremely difficult to actually perceive. Oh, and you still dont have a way to compete with Planar travel, and the Psychic Warrior.

[Vhaidara]

How would spellcraft help?

To realize what spell was cast.

[Snowbluff]

How would spellcraft help?

And to get really suspicious about why the wizard is sitting so close. "I full attack!"
"You hit yourself with each attack."

[Coidzor]

Prince of Cats, look at it this way: The best option for the Ranger is to copy the Wizard via Mystic Ranger+SotAO.

So the argument isn't Ranger VS Wizard, it's Wizard VS Wizard when one Wizard is pretending to be a Ranger and the other isn't.

And at level 7, a Mystic Ranger with SoTAO is a spell level behind the wizard and at 14th level they're two spell levels behind.

And one of the things most likely to beat a Wizard is a higher level Wizard with more and more powerful spells.


I think this needs a bit more detail. How does a level 1 wizard do this and what does "reasonable success rate" mean?

It came up as a result of this thread, I'm not sure exactly where, but about halfway down this page they start talking about the results of their running the scenarios (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?228852-Class-Power-by-Level/page10). There was also a discussion of the Barbarian's ability to solo a party of 4.

The Forum update means some of the links are broken though.


the only non-full casters who have any hope of fighting the T1+2s are Paladin, and only so long as XPH+CPsy are banned (due to a stupidly worded ability that does not work the way optimisers want it to), and only at or over 11th level.

Wait. What on earth about the Psionics subsystem gimps Paladins? :smallconfused:

[nedz]

A lot of this depends upon the optimisation levels of the characters.

The one advantage which the Ranger possesses is mundane stealth. He gets several spells which can boost this as well as several useful class features (which come online quite late — I know).

Now if your Wizard is strolling through the woods and the Ranger gets the drop on him and can incapacitate the Wizard in the surprise round without triggering his defences then he has a chance. Now this is not going to happen to a suitably paranoid high-OP Wizard, and there are a lot of ifs here, but people do get careless sometimes.

So in low to mid OP play it could happen, but it does require the right situation as well as luck.

[ryu]

A lot of this depends upon the optimisation levels of the characters.

The one advantage which the Ranger possesses is mundane stealth. He gets several spells which can boost this as well as several useful class features (which come online quite late — I know).

Now if your Wizard is strolling through the woods and the Ranger gets the drop on him and can incapacitate the Wizard in the surprise round without triggering his defences then he has a chance. Now this is not going to happen to a suitably paranoid high-OP Wizard, and there are a lot of ifs here, but people do get careless sometimes.

So in low to mid OP play it could happen, but it does require the right situation as well as luck.

What wizard that lived to at least level seven purely working alone wasn't paranoid enough to prepare basic cautions when walking through a forest alone?

[toapat]

Wait. What on earth about the Psionics subsystem gimps Paladins? :smallconfused:

not Psionics itself, but one of the perceptions within those books is argued due to its pre-requisite feat, to bypass line of Effect entirely (despite the feat granting said perception not mentioning at all as being line of effect ignoring.), something which earthglide entirely denies otherwise. Move earth and disintegrate end up being the only way to directly hit said paladin, as well as summoning earth elementals.

[CombatOwl]

I'm not sure how one can come to think that the Ranger stands a chance against the wizard... Barring extreme optimization for the ranger and extreme deoptimization for the wizard.

With both mild optimized I wonder at what level does the wizard and ranger need to be for the Ranger to overtake the Wizard. Then what is the maximum level of the wizard in which a level 20 ranger can take out.

I have the feeling the wizard won't hit a double digit level before a level 20 ranger can't keep up with the wizard.

In Pathfinder... it is highly likely that a level 20 archery ranger could rocket tag the wizard in the first round if the ranger wins initiative and has him in range. Either because of the ranger capstone, or because archery is so much better in Pathfinder. Conservatively, archery ranger is going to have, per arrow, +8 to damage from his strength bonus, +10 from deadly aim, and at *least* +2 enhancement on his bow (assuming that he was level 20 and only had a +5 bow, and chose to add speed). +20 static bonus per arrow just from that, 7 times in a round (4 iteratives, +2 from rapid shot and manyshot, +1 from speed). That's 140 damage just from the static bonuses--which is above or about where the average wizard's HP will be, even after buffs under a 15 or 20 point buy. It's only really reasonable to assume there was a chance of the last arrow missing that wizard, so 120 static damage +6d8 from the variable damage. If the ranger had a surprise round to put up gravity bow because of his stealth skills, that goes up. That's rocket tag territory for a wizard, even setting aside all the other options on the table. If that wizard is on the ranger's favored enemy list, it's pretty hard to imagine that wizard surviving.

You could theorize that wizard contingencies might be able to do something about that, but getting nested contingencies like that are much harder or impossible in Pathfinder.

[Snowbluff]

In Pathfinder, a Wizard has the option to always act in the surprise rounds with a huge initiative bonus. :smalltongue:

At level 20 the Wizard has had Simulacrum for a while now. That's a really simple example of a spell that would give a Ranger trouble in a "solo fight" with little to no effort.

I would consider Archery worse in PF. Less stuff to work with. Deadly Aim isn't really impressive to people with Teeth of Leraje and Splitting Hank's Energy Bows.

[Vhaidara]

In Pathfinder... it is highly likely that a level 20 archery ranger could rocket tag the wizard in the first round if the ranger wins initiative and has him in range. Either because of the ranger capstone, or because archery is so much better in Pathfinder. Conservatively, archery ranger is going to have, per arrow, +8 to damage from his strength bonus, +10 from deadly aim, and at *least* +2 enhancement on his bow (assuming that he was level 20 and only had a +5 bow, and chose to add speed). +20 static bonus per arrow just from that, 7 times in a round (4 iteratives, +2 from rapid shot and manyshot, +1 from speed). That's 140 damage just from the static bonuses--which is above or about where the average wizard's HP will be, even after buffs under a 15 or 20 point buy. It's only really reasonable to assume there was a chance of the last arrow missing that wizard, so 120 static damage +6d8 from the variable damage. If the ranger had a surprise round to put up gravity bow because of his stealth skills, that goes up. That's rocket tag territory for a wizard, even setting aside all the other options on the table. If that wizard is on the ranger's favored enemy list, it's pretty hard to imagine that wizard surviving.

You could theorize that wizard contingencies might be able to do something about that, but getting nested contingencies like that are much harder or impossible in Pathfinder.

Actually, the contingency is easy: If I am attacked by a missile weapon, Wind Wall.

[Snowbluff]

Actually, the contingency is easy: If I am attacked by a missile weapon, Wind Wall.

Not to mention the slim chance of a wizard being on the favored enemy list. Assuming a humanoid wizard (not a Tiefling, for example), he actually has a rather slim chance of actually having the enemy. You can't use Instant Enemy and Master Hunter in a surprise round, so a Wizard would always have an option to retaliate or defend.

[Curmudgeon]

Actually, the contingency is easy: If I am attacked by a missile weapon, Wind Wall.
The Wizard is going to be triggering this Contingency in pretty much every battle, including when it will only provide a 30% miss chance: daggers, javelins, spears, and the like aren't automatically deflected the way Wind Wall affects arrows and bolts. Plus this Contingency won't even trigger until after the first missile weapon hits.

Unlike Craft Contingent Spell, you can only have one Contingency. Are you still sure it's easy?


Not to mention the slim chance of a wizard being on the favored enemy list.
What "slim chance"? It's 100% guaranteed, as I already pointed out:

I thought all Rangers had Favored Enemy (arcanists) (Complete Mage, page 32), so they'd get the bonus against all Wizards. Trying to guess the right race is a fool's errand.

[Vhaidara]

I was just responding to what sounded to me like a claim that this would require nested contingencies to prevent. I personally have no experience making high op characters, much less primary casters.

[Telonius]

At very low levels ... maybe. Let's say (just for the sake of argument) that the Wizard gets grappled by an animal companion with an AMF, or wanders into a null magic zone (don't ask how, rocks just fell and Mystra died), or had his component pouch stolen by an Ethereal Filcher, or some other such foolishness. In that case, yes, the Wizard is going to have kind of a hard time of it, since he's effectively a smart commoner with a floppy hat and a pet raven.

Getting the Wizard into that situation is going to be really hard. A higher-level Wizard just won't ever have to deal with it. But, at lower levels, it's just barely possible. Contingency (and Craft Contingent) don't turn on until 11th level. Divinations aren't going to be as accurate at lower levels, either, so the Wizard won't be able to anticipate the attack as easily.

[eggynack]

The Wizard is going to be triggering this Contingency in pretty much every battle, including when it will only provide a 30% miss chance: daggers, javelins, spears, and the like aren't automatically deflected the way Wind Wall affects arrows and bolts. Plus this Contingency won't even trigger until after the first missile weapon hits.
This part honestly doesn't seem all that difficult to solve. It shouldn't be too hard to select for only the class of weapons that is completely stopped by wind wall, if only to some acceptable degree of accuracy that allows the odd exception to pass through only somewhat impeded.

[Big Fau]

At very low levels ... maybe. Let's say (just for the sake of argument) that the Wizard gets grappled by an animal companion with an AMF, or wanders into a null magic zone (don't ask how, rocks just fell and Mystra died), or had his component pouch stolen by an Ethereal Filcher, or some other such foolishness. In that case, yes, the Wizard is going to have kind of a hard time of it, since he's effectively a smart commoner with a floppy hat and a pet raven.

Getting the Wizard into that situation is going to be really hard. A higher-level Wizard just won't ever have to deal with it. But, at lower levels, it's just barely possible. Contingency (and Craft Contingent) don't turn on until 11th level. Divinations aren't going to be as accurate at lower levels, either, so the Wizard won't be able to anticipate the attack as easily.

AMF doesn't become common until 15th. A scroll of AMF requires a DC 35 UMD check, which is a hefty investment for a 7th level character (since CC'ed ranks won't cut it). 3K for the scroll, +Xgp for however much you sank into your UMD modifier.

[Captnq]

Ranger Goes out and buys a sword. Any sword. Lets make it a +2, How about +1 and Assassination. Get puts poison on it. He gets to hit one target for poison.

But he's a ranger. So, He has to get a second sword to be effective, because he fights two handed.

Now the wizard, he gets the same sword. The other sword, he sells. He instead gets metamagic rod sculpting lesser. He las picks up some nasty poison, an oil chamber, and a few flasks of blister oil.

My wizard can use the same poison, does the same base damage as the ranger, and now he does an extra +1d6 from the blister oil and +1d6 fire damage from the oil.

Then he uses the metamagic rod in one hand and the sword in the other. If he has time, he casts true strike one round, then whirling blade sculpted into a 40 foot cone.

WHIRLING BLADE

- COMPLETE ARCANE (3.5)
- SPELL COMPENDIUM (3.5)
Transmutation
Level: Bard 2, Hexblade 2, Sorcerer/Wizard 2, Warmage 2
Components: V, S, F
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 60 ft.
Effect: 60-ft. line
Duration: Instantaneous

That's right, 2nd level spell. Everyone in a 40 foot cone gets hit because even if I roll a 2, I'm hitting AC 24 at 3rd level. They all get hit with the same poison. Yes, the feat version of whirling blade doesn't allow that, but the 2nd level spell version does, by RAW.

Or maybe I skip the true strike. Maybe I skip the poison. Lets say I take two not-wizard feats, cleave and great cleave.

The I enlarge person, cast invisibility, and then sneak up on a crowd. I cast whirling blade and ADD MY INT BONUS TO DAMAGE.

I get everyone flatfooted, I'm doing a fairly nasty amount of damage to a group in a 40' cone and every one of them that drops gives me a cleave attack. Oh, wait, you can't do that with whirling blade feat? Sorry. But Wizard Spells do what Fighters are supposed to do, but better and far more awesomely.

And it's 2nd level. It never gets old. Even if the DM nerfs it and uses RAI instead of RAW, even if you DON'T optimize to use it effectively, it's still a nasty spell for 2nd level

Wizard spell lists are full of awesome spells that allow you to basically do what the melee classes are supposed to do, but better. It's sad. Just sad.

And don't get me started on the familiar. Two words Mirror Mephit. Nuff said.

- - - Updated - - -


In that case, yes, the Wizard is going to have kind of a hard time of it, since he's effectively a smart commoner with a floppy hat and a pet raven.


Okay, first of all, outfitting a raven with armor that grants him a +4 to armor class is cheap as hell. 26 gp to be exact.

A Mister shoots poison and is light enough for a raven to carry. Or Dust Eggshell Grenade. Or claw mounted fingerblades give your raven 1d6 sneak attack for the first round.

That's not even going into a flying opposable Light Balista, if you wanted your familiar to fly around with a 400 lbs crossbow as your backup. That's going to run you about 20,000 gp, however.

People don't outfit their familiars right.

[Telonius]

AMF doesn't become common until 15th. A scroll of AMF requires a DC 35 UMD check, which is a hefty investment for a 7th level character (since CC'ed ranks won't cut it). 3K for the scroll, +Xgp for however much you sank into your UMD modifier.

Let's say a 1/day widget of AMF. (I'm trying for a reductio ad adsurdum, just to show how many hoops you'd have to jump through to accomplish this). It would be expensive, but doable. Command Word or use-activated means no UMD check needed.

But have a look what this means - you'd have a bigger Wizard (or Cleric as the case may be) being the one that beats the Wizard, not the Ranger.

[Snowbluff]

What "slim chance"? It's 100% guaranteed, as I already pointed out:

Significantly lower than the chance that I did read your comment and disregarded as it was being irrelevant because we are talking about Pathfinder. :smalltongue:

[AnonymousPepper]

It's not going to make a HUGE difference in the fight, but I'm going to point out that you guys are completely, completely forgetting two of the most basic tools in a high-level archer build - the Force and Seeking WSAs. It's not quite as easy as "lul I cast Wind Wall and Blur," because no competent archer is going to be susceptible to either of them. I have never built, and have never seen built, an archer that didn't at least have Force on his weapon, with Seeking being a rather common addition to boot; Force is literally never skipped, though, because it completely negates both DR and Wind Wall. A particularly smart archer will take Hank's Energy Bow so he can ignore the scaling from the +2 WSA while still having its effect.

You're going to have to find some other way of shutting down the archer besides "Anyway, here's Wind Wall."

[Vknight]

It's not going to make a HUGE difference in the fight, but I'm going to point out that you guys are completely, completely forgetting two of the most basic tools in a high-level archer build - the Force and Seeking WSAs. It's not quite as easy as "lul I cast Wind Wall and Blur," because no competent archer is going to be susceptible to either of them. I have never built, and have never seen built, an archer that didn't at least have Force on his weapon, with Seeking being a rather common addition to boot; Force is literally never skipped, though, because it completely negates both DR and Wind Wall. A particularly smart archer will take Hank's Energy Bow so he can ignore the scaling from the +2 WSA while still having its effect.

You're going to have to find some other way of shutting down the archer besides "Anyway, here's Wind Wall."

So your solution is get a bow specifically designed too counter those things?

[ryu]

It's not going to make a HUGE difference in the fight, but I'm going to point out that you guys are completely, completely forgetting two of the most basic tools in a high-level archer build - the Force and Seeking WSAs. It's not quite as easy as "lul I cast Wind Wall and Blur," because no competent archer is going to be susceptible to either of them. I have never built, and have never seen built, an archer that didn't at least have Force on his weapon, with Seeking being a rather common addition to boot; Force is literally never skipped, though, because it completely negates both DR and Wind Wall. A particularly smart archer will take Hank's Energy Bow so he can ignore the scaling from the +2 WSA while still having its effect.

You're going to have to find some other way of shutting down the archer besides "Anyway, here's Wind Wall."

Thing is the low level archer doesn't get that easily and the high level wizard has far superior things to do than let the archer live long enough loose even a single arrow.

[AnonymousPepper]

So your solution is get a bow specifically designed too counter those things?

No, I'm saying to get the things that any archer worth his salt already gets anyway.

Not taking Force on a bow is like not learning Haste as a wizard. It's that essential.

If you were going up against a fifth-level wizard, would you neglect that he will probably use Haste and Alter Self against you? No! Likewise, you would not neglect that any decent archer will be packing a force bow.

[ryu]

No, I'm saying to get the things that any archer worth his salt already gets anyway.

Not taking Force on a bow is like not learning Haste as a wizard. It's that essential.

If you were going up against a fifth-level wizard, would you neglect that he will probably use Haste and Alter Self against you? No! Likewise, you would not neglect that any decent archer will be packing a force bow.

Eh haste is good but hardly essential. Hardly worth it at all unless your with a decently sized party. Now cheap, effective BFC on the other hand? That's where it's at in low level play. There are just so many buttons that say the enemy(s) never get a turn.

[ShurikVch]

Force is literally never skipped, though, because it completely negates both DR and Wind Wall Prove it.

A projectile weapon with the force property turns ammunition shot from it into a force attack. These force projectiles automatically overcome damage reduction and suffer no miss chance against incorporeal targets, but they don’t damage creatures immune to force effects. Ammunition shot from a force weapon deals the same amount
of damage as normal ammunition. Wind Wall is not a DR or incorporeality

[AnonymousPepper]

Exactly, the ammunition - not the attack, the ammunition - is turned into a force attack. It's no longer a corporeal bolt/arrow.

Would you say that Wind Wall blocks a force missile? No? Then why would it block a force bolt/arrow?

[ShurikVch]

Exactly, the ammunition - not the attack, the ammunition - is turned into a force attack. It's no longer a corporeal bolt/arrow.

Would you say that Wind Wall blocks a force missile? No? Then why would it block a force bolt/arrow?
By the same reason a Force Dragons, which are, as we know, completely made of force, able to fly via wings

EDIT: Also, force is corporeal.

[Platymus Pus]

I don't even know where to begin with this.

First off, if the ranger is an archer, Windwall. wham, bam, done.

Windwall has quite a bit of flaws to take advantage of, I don't think the wizard will like the possibly of ballista sized bolts going through it and into his face or ones made of force energy.

Of course people are assuming the wizard has prep, in a wizard vs ranger fight occurs it's likely between party members and it was probably because the wizard was being a jerk. Stupid wizards always full of themselves *mumbles*

[Gwendol]

Archery is deadly at low levels, and allows the ranger to engage at long enough range to be safe from most of what the wizard can throw at him. That will not hold true past the first few levels though, and in general the ranger is not a very powerful class. Versatile yes, but not very powerful.

[animewatcha]

Celerity + feeblemind at a save DC the ranger ain't gonna make especially with poor will save + ray of stupidity . All usable in 1 'round.' Ranger has?

[Somensjev]

ok, i'm not good at optimising, but i'll give this a try

level 7 ranger, let's give him the elite array, now, we'll assume he's a ranged attacker, since melee stands no chance, we'll also make him an elf, for that little bonus to dexterity
so, we'd get stats somewhat like this
dex 18
str 13
con 12
int 10
wis 12
cha 8
that seem fair?
now, we'll give him the bow with the larges range increment i could find, the composite greatbow 130ft (there's probably better ones) so, you can shoot 130ft without penalty
let's enchant it
the ranger has what 20-30 thousand gold?

now, since someone says force is required let's use that, i can't find it online, so i'll assume it's a +1 enchantment, apparently seeking is also required, i could find that, and it's a +1, so that's a total +2 for about and extra 8000gp for the bow, now a composite greatbow is 200gp, and you have to make it masterwork so there's a nother what, 300 gp?

so the ranger had about 30000gp and spent 8500gp on just his bow



now, for the wizard we'll also give him the elite array, i'll make him a gray elf, for the same +2 bonus that the ranger got

so the stats are
dex 15
con 12
str 6
int 18
wis 12
cha 10

so, he's level seven, giving him access to 3rd level spells

spells are


spell level
0
1
2
3



spells per day
6
6
6
4


bonus spells per day

1
1
1



so, let's write up a little spell list for this wizard, now, this is just stuff he should have prepared each day

0th: any
1st: alarm, shield, grease, mage armour, obscuring mist, truestrike
2nd: summon monster 2, web, darkness, invisibility, mirror image
3rd: wind wall, displacement, fly

now, the wizard has yet to spend any money, and is already a pretty good threat, especially if they go out and get a bow

[Snowbluff]

The Wizard should be a Diviner. He should also have 4th level spells.

[Killer Angel]

a ranger at the end of a hard day of adventuring will murder a wizard in the same situation and barely break a sweat. A ranger without spells is a sub-par fighter, but a wizard reduced to their cantrips is a joke.

I would like to know in what conditions is the ranger, at the end of an adventuring day that reduced the wizard to cantrips only.... probably at a point, in which also the wizard's familiar could kill him with a single hit.

without counting that, if the wizard got only cantrips, is because the last spell was Rope Trick.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Wait... I have to ask...

How does the Paladin threaten T1's outside of complete cheese (pun pun y'all). Heck I wouldn't say Paladins are non-casters, they have plenty of spells, spell-like, and supernatural abilities that disqualifies them as non-casters whereas Rangers have one source of non-casters (spells).

I would say the Ranger has a better chance at keeping up with the Wizard in an all around setting than the Paladin.

Ranger versus Paladin

Social: Paladin is (normally) LG, sure the Paladin has Diplomacy but all those restrictions based on his alignment hampers a lot. Rangers get more skill points and don't have restrictions on what they can do. That LG Ranger can deal with and work with CE, LE, and NE people quite easily (or take jobs from the NE king...etc).

Battle: They are both about the same in battle. Not quite great but good enough to fill a slot if they specialize. Both specialty (charging and archery) can be shut down quite easily.

Skills:Ranger wins hand down. Number of points and class list. To bad the Paladin can't see squat.

In an AMF the Paladin is a Fighter without Feats while the Ranger a Fighter with some feats + animal companion.

When you bring in optimization... (Outside of major cheese) Paladins hit tier 4 and Rangers hit tier 3.

So I doubt the Paladin will fair better than the ranger.

(Note: I'm not so sure about Pathfinder but things didn't change all that much for classes in pf relative to other classes)

[The Insanity]

If he's talking about the two classes fighting each other, then it's completely irrelevant. Classes weren't designed to fight each other, they were designed to go on adventures and overcome challenges.
Do you never fight NPCs?

[toapat]

*Mace'd*

Underdark Knight ACF for paladin gives Earthglide at lvl 11

Barring Mindsight (And **** no does that actually work through walls) and arguably tremorsense (earthglide is described as not making noise nor displacing the earth and stone), there is no way for the Wizard to see the paladin, giving the paladin the chance to kill them before the contingencies pop. there are only a small handful of not useful ways to hit the paladin, and at level the paladin should be able to defeat any earth elementals.

If the contingencies need to be negated, the paladin can scrollcast Greater Celerity, then Forcecage + Dimensional Anchor to keep the wizard pinned.

Also, i said barring fullcasters, not barring casters.

THe only way that a Ranger competes with Wizard is by becoming a half powered wizard. Paladins compete by finding tiny holes that wizard cant exploit.

Also, at full optimization, Paladin hits High T3, while ranger becomes T1.5 because full optimization turns Ranger into a Wizard/Druid with 6 feats.

[ryu]

Do you never fight NPCs?

And do none of his BBEGs have class levels? Really?

[Gwendol]

Wait... I have to ask...

Ranger versus Paladin

When you bring in optimization... (Outside of major cheese) Paladins hit tier 4 and Rangers hit tier 3.

So I doubt the Paladin will fair better than the ranger.

(Note: I'm not so sure about Pathfinder but things didn't change all that much for classes in pf relative to other classes)

Say what? Paladin is typically on par with a Bard when optimized, and thus high T3. A well-built paladin will outperform the ranger in melee combat, and thanks to Inspire Courage (and spells) may be competitive in the archery dept.
Rangers can also be optimized thanks to mystic ranger and SotAO, wildshape, etc, but my bet would still be on the paladin. Bringing up the Code in an optimization discussion is beside the point.

[animewatcha]

Is this paladin 20 or at same level point of level 7 and 14? Also IIRC, scrollcast is minimum standard unless longer, unlike wands that get the swift action clarification. Despite the action change, the paladin needs to negate the dazing that happens from using greater celerity ( wizards have spells for this or can turn into something for this ). The 3 scrolls ( I am assuming scrolls for those 3 since I do not see dimensional anchor as a paladin spell ) are 3 UMD checks that paladin is doing cross-classing AND has to devote resources to make all 3 checks if the wizard 'lets them happen'.

-sidenote before continuing- paladin is using wizard to defeat wizard and therefore it is not really 'paladin vs wizard.'

I also looked up earthglide. The ability by itself on SRD for earth elemental doesn't allow vision normally beyond own body ( assuming that tremorsense/earthsense/whatever earthy is doing this for said creature ). Despite this, what reason is the wizard traveling on the ground at this point? Also, contingencies happen exactly when the condition happens ( for better or worse, wizard likes or not ). There is no 'timing before they pop off' unless said timing bypasses the conditions in some way ( i.e. wizard didn't prepare for that way. good luck with that ).

Since you get to bring in scrolls of 9ths, wizard gets to bring in scrolls of 9ths. Like scroll of mage's disjunction ( bye-bye forcecage and dimension anchor and the paladin's stuff if he is close enough ). There is also scroll of alter self into a solar to cast as a 20th level cleric if not just beat you down. There is also the gate-solar loop. More shenanigans with scrolls with other spells ( Like say timestop ). Also, the paladin would need to be making consistent UMD checks while the wizard doesn't. Paying for scrolls at full price at minimum ( barring things like diplomacy ) while wizard can make them himself at fraction of cost.

Paly also has that nasty code to abide by. Wizard doesn't. Also, whose to say that you aren't just dealing with a clone, astral projection, etc.

[CombatOwl]

Actually, the contingency is easy: If I am attacked by a missile weapon, Wind Wall.

Read the rules for contingency. Wind wall does not effect a person, it is placed in an area and therefore not a legitimate spell for contingency. Fickle winds would work, but is that *really* the single contingency that wizard wants up all the time? You only get one, after all. Its not like 3.5e where you can craft contingent spells.

[ryu]

Read the rules for contingency. Wind wall does not effect a person, it is placed in an area and therefore not a legitimate spell for contingency. Fickle winds would work, but is that *really* the single contingency that wizard wants up all the time? You only get one, after all. Its not like 3.5e where you can craft contingent spells.

Is ice assassin still a thing in pathfinder? If so unlimited contingencies are still a thing.

[Vhaidara]

Read the rules for contingency. Wind wall does not effect a person, it is placed in an area and therefore not a legitimate spell for contingency. Fickle winds would work, but is that *really* the single contingency that wizard wants up all the time? You only get one, after all. Its not like 3.5e where you can craft contingent spells.

Actually, OP never stated 33.5 or PF, and I believe the default is 3.5. PF came up because someone mentioned that PF ranger is slightly better than 3.5 ranger (vanilla for both).

[CombatOwl]

In Pathfinder, a Wizard has the option to always act in the surprise rounds with a huge initiative bonus. :smalltongue:

If they play a diviner. Otherwise, no. That is the most OP choice, but the question was rangers vs. wizards not rangers vs. diviners. There are, after all, other schools.


At level 20 the Wizard has had Simulacrum for a while now. That's a really simple example of a spell that would give a Ranger trouble in a "solo fight" with little to no effort.

Again, rocket tagged in two first round. Even if the simulacrum was out to start with, that's only a perception or sense movie check to figure out, and any ranger worth their salt will have enough bonuses in other by level 20 to figure out which one to rocket tag. Clone is more of a problem.


I would consider Archery worse in PF. Less stuff to work with. Deadly Aim isn't really impressive to people with Teeth of Leraje and Splitting Hank's Energy Bows.

Archers in general have more options because they have more feats (one every other level, not one every third) and archetypes and better martial classes. Its not just Deadly Aim.

[The Prince of Cats]

Do you never fight NPCs?
Probably not alone. A ranger supported by a wizard and a cleric can take on NPCs...

[Snowbluff]

:smallredface:
If they play a diviner. Otherwise, no. That is the most OP choice, but the question was rangers vs. wizards not rangers vs. diviners. There are, after all, other schools.

Again, rocket tagged in two first round. Even if the simulacrum was out to start with, that's only a perception or sense movie check to figure out, and any ranger worth their salt will have enough bonuses in other by level 20 to figure out which one to rocket tag. Clone is more of a problem.
Simulacrum would all have their own special senses, initiative checks, and abilities. It's not "hey it's a party of that one wizard," but more of "this 'singular' enemy is a lot more diverse that I would have guessed." And that's just one good spell that a wizard can be using on his down time, even if it's banned.

I think the odds of having the wizard as a favored enemy are probably similiar to the odds of a wizard being a diviner.



Archers in general have more options because they have more feats (one every other level, not one every third) and archetypes and better martial classes. Its not just Deadly Aim.
When you count flaws, having more feats isn't really true until much later. It's literally an extra feat. Pathfinder feats are pretty much terrible on the same level as 3.5 PHB feats, save for a couple. Archetypes aren't that useful, and there are much better classes, feats, spells, and items for archery in 3.5, like factotum, devotion feats, Hunter's Mercy, and wand chambers.

[The Insanity]

Probably not alone. A ranger supported by a wizard and a cleric can take on NPCs...
Um... that's cool. I don't see the relevance to what I said, though. :smallconfused:

[CombatOwl]

:smallredface: Simulacrum would all have their own special senses, initiative checks, and abilities. It's not "hey it's a party of that one wizard," but more of "this 'singular' enemy is a lot more diverse that I would have guessed." And that's just one good spell that a wizard can be using on his down time, even if it's banned.

That's like saying "hey, we're forgetting that ranger's animal companion and his army of helpful woodland creatures!" Strictly true, but not relevant. So what if you have the simulacrum out? You're still getting rocket tagged in one round. Maybe you make two initiative checks; but unless you're a diviner you're still going to be slower on average. Even with two tests. Even if you were a diviner, your simulacrum wouldn't go before the ranger, in all probability.


I think the odds of having the wizard as a favored enemy are probably similiar to the odds of a wizard being a diviner.

There are *mildly optimized* characters, right? The odds of having a maximum favored enemy bonus against that wizard is damn near 100% because human is the obvious choice. Or maybe that ranger used their "not useful" archetype choice to pick up something like freebooter that replaces their racial favored enemy with a swift-action universal bonus.


When you count flaws, having more feats isn't really true until much later.

Flaws are an optional rule, not something that can be assumed.


Pathfinder feats are pretty much terrible on the same level as 3.5 PHB feats, save for a couple.

You don't play many archers in Pathfinder, do you? Even with that extra feat(s), you have to make hard choices because there are so many options.


Archetypes aren't that useful,

For an archer?! Who are you trying to kid? Admittedly, the ranger archetypes are at best a mixed bag for archery but there are a lot of good archer archetypes.


and there are much better classes, feats, spells, and items for archery in 3.5, like factotum, devotion feats, Hunter's Mercy, and wand chambers.

That is definitely a debatable claim.

[eggynack]

You don't play many archers in Pathfinder, do you? Even with that extra feat(s), you have to make hard choices because there are so many options.
Isn't that mostly because all of PF's combat feats are locked up in massive feat chains, where each individual feat is worse, and where the end of a given feat chain occasionally overwhelms the power level of a shorter 3.5 feat chain? I know that's how it is for some combat styles, but I'm less sure for archery. Either way, the point is that lotsa options doesn't necessarily mean not-terrible.

[Coidzor]

That's like saying "hey, we're forgetting that ranger's animal companion and his army of helpful woodland creatures!" Strictly true, but not relevant. So what if you have the simulacrum out? You're still getting rocket tagged in one round. Maybe you make two initiative checks; but unless you're a diviner you're still going to be slower on average. Even with two tests. Even if you were a diviner, your simulacrum wouldn't go before the ranger, in all probability.

How's the Ranger determining which creature to attack first? What's limiting the Wizard to a single Simulacrum?

[Snowbluff]

That's like saying "hey, we're forgetting that ranger's animal companion and his army of helpful woodland creatures!" Strictly true, but not relevant. So what if you have the simulacrum out? You're still getting rocket tagged in one round. Maybe you make two initiative checks; but unless you're a diviner you're still going to be slower on average. Even with two tests. Even if you were a diviner, your simulacrum wouldn't go before the ranger, in all probability.
If you're a diviner, you've won initiative. People who take it are putting work into their initiative scores. Wizard have additional options for an improved initiative with their familiars. If/when a wizard wins initiative, he Wind Walls, teleports, dominates the ranger, or Time Stops to consider his options.

Simulacrum can soften a surprise round by spotting or sensing a Ranger, then alerting their wizard.

Animals really can't compete. At all.



There are *mildly optimized* characters, right? The odds of having a maximum favored enemy bonus against that wizard is damn near 100% because human is the obvious choice. Or maybe that ranger used their "not useful" archetype choice to pick up something like freebooter that replaces their racial favored enemy with a swift-action universal bonus.
There are a lot more factors for race choices in PF. Human isn't always the right choice, depending on what you're doing.

Freebooters are not able to use Master Hunter. No rocket tag.


Flaws are an optional rule, not something that can be assumed.

You don't play many archers in Pathfinder, do you? Even with that extra feat(s), you have to make hard choices because there are so many options.
True, but the option is there.

"Argh, I can't have precise shot and rapid shot at level 1!" I really hate these options. Too often I can't get something interesting or something else to do with my actions. Even Obtain Familiar has a feat tax.



For an archer?! Who are you trying to kid? Admittedly, the ranger archetypes are at best a mixed bag for archery but there are a lot of good archer archetypes. Other than Zen archer, you have things like "finally, my fighter can makes a spot check!" I'm thoroughly not impressed, but that would be off topic.


That is definitely a debatable claim.It's fact, bro. Point Blank Shot is way worse than Knowledge Devotion. That's the sort of comparison you're looking at.

Isn't that mostly because all of PF's combat feats are locked up in massive feat chains, where each individual feat is worse, and where the end of a given feat chain occasionally overwhelms the power level of a shorter 3.5 feat chain? I know that's how it is for some combat styles, but I'm less sure for archery. Either way, the point is that lotsa options doesn't necessarily mean not-terrible.
And then there is this. Eggy, the archery feat chain is more or less the same, but with Deadly Aim (some damage at the cost of accuracy) or Clustered Shots (count DR once for a build that could easily ignore it at all times). So it's still pretty feat starved.

[Story]

Considering a level 1 Wizard can kill a level 3 party of four "standard" characters with a reasonable success rate, we can probably extrapolate that down to a level 1 Ranger.

To be fair, the level 1 Barbarian did almost as well.

[toapat]

To be fair, the level 1 Barbarian did almost as well.

thing is though, very few other mundanes compete with the number of options barbarian has. Paladin is the only other class that really got the good stuff, and they have no chance in hell of matching the barbarian's success at that challenge.

[Haldir]

Say what? Paladin is typically on par with a Bard when optimized, and thus high T3. A well-built paladin will outperform the ranger in melee combat, and thanks to Inspire Courage (and spells) may be competitive in the archery dept.
Rangers can also be optimized thanks to mystic ranger and SotAO, wildshape, etc, but my bet would still be on the paladin. Bringing up the Code in an optimization discussion is beside the point.


Melee combat is the least efficient way to do any killing. Saying a Paladin is stronger than a Ranger because it can do melee better than Ranger is like saying a hammer is better than a blender for finely crushed ice.

Paladin would be destroyed by a good Ranger.

[Platymus Pus]

Melee combat is the least efficient way to do any killing. Saying a Paladin is stronger than a Ranger because it can do melee better than Ranger is like saying a hammer is better than a blender for finely crushed ice.

Paladin would be destroyed by a good Ranger.

If dex and perception is high enough a Ranger could pick off a Paladin by a good 10 miles or so easily.

[Coidzor]

To be fair, the level 1 Barbarian did almost as well.

Now to see how a level 1 Ranger fares, I suppose, if we wanted to be thorough. I believe the Barb'd edge 'em out though.

[Snowbluff]

Can I point out to you guys something about tiers? They don't assume optimization. A paladin isn't "Tier 3" because of how you chose your feats.

[toapat]

Melee combat is the least efficient way to do any killing. Saying a Paladin is stronger than a Ranger because it can do melee better than Ranger is like saying a hammer is better than a blender for finely crushed ice.

Paladin would be destroyed by a good Ranger.

IIRC the full range increment of the bow is 2 miles when fully built for range.

Thing is, the shear penalty for indirect fire isnt overcome at that point. the entire reason people have done that, is because AoE spells that wizard gets and that ranger cant get and that will destroy enemies.

[Augmental]

Underdark Knight ACF for paladin gives Earthglide at lvl 11

At the same level, the wizard gets access to Extended Overland Flight which lasts for 22 hours. If the wizard never touches the ground, you can't hurt him without exposing yourself.

[toapat]

At the same level, the wizard gets access to Extended Overland Flight which lasts for 22 hours. If the wizard never touches the ground, you can't hurt him without exposing yourself.

its still an advantage which the wizard cant directly duplicate

[Snowbluff]

its still an advantage which the wizard cant directly duplicate

*Thumbs spellbook* "Define 'directly.'"

[Threadnaught]

its still an advantage which the wizard cant directly duplicate

Xorn Movement is a 5th level Sorcerer/Wizard Spell.

I'm not familiar with the Paladin ACF though, does it say "as Xorn"? If so, then yeah, the Paladin has a very small advantage in what materials they can move through, plus I suspect it's a longer duration than the Wizard's 1 Round per Level.

At least Wizard can fly and change the geography of an entire continent, that'll help control where the Paladin goes.

[Story]

plus I suspect it's a longer duration than the Wizard's 1 Round per Level.


That just means you need Occular + Persist spell. Though getting 2 free metamagics on the same spell is difficult. You'd probably need a custom rod of Occular Spell.

[Snowbluff]

That just means you need Occular + Persist spell. Though getting 2 free metamagics on the same spell is difficult. You'd probably need a custom rod of Occular Spell.

I would just suck up the Ocular cost. Getting persist would be worth the resources.

There's no formula for metamagic rod costs.

[Mithril Leaf]

Xorn Movement is a 5th level Sorcerer/Wizard Spell.

I'm not familiar with the Paladin ACF though, does it say "as Xorn"? If so, then yeah, the Paladin has a very small advantage in what materials they can move through, plus I suspect it's a longer duration than the Wizard's 1 Round per Level.

At least Wizard can fly and change the geography of an entire continent, that'll help control where the Paladin goes.


That just means you need Occular + Persist spell. Though getting 2 free metamagics on the same spell is difficult. You'd probably need a custom rod of Occular Spell.

Or to be a spelldancer.

[CombatOwl]

Isn't that mostly because all of PF's combat feats are locked up in massive feat chains, where each individual feat is worse, and where the end of a given feat chain occasionally overwhelms the power level of a shorter 3.5 feat chain?

Often, yet. There's also just a lot of stuff to pack into relatively few feat slots. Especially if you're not a fighter. I mean, fighters can usually get everything they want, but they're also getting a feat every level.


I know that's how it is for some combat styles, but I'm less sure for archery. Either way, the point is that lotsa options doesn't necessarily mean not-terrible.

However, the options are generally good options. Yes, there are very long feat chains, but they also produce very good results typically. At least for archery nonsense.

[CombatOwl]

If you're a diviner, you've won initiative.

Unless you happen to have picked one of the ranger archetypes that lets them take 20 initiative checks and automatically act in the surprise round too. Again, those archetypes you were dismissing.


People who take it are putting work into their initiative scores. Wizard have additional options for an improved initiative with their familiars. If/when a wizard wins initiative, he Wind Walls, teleports, dominates the ranger, or Time Stops to consider his options.

Rangers can also boost their initiative to pretty stratospheric levels.


Simulacrum can soften a surprise round by spotting or sensing a Ranger, then alerting their wizard.

If the 20th level wizard can't spot him, the 10th level simulacrum is even less likely.


Animals really can't compete. At all.

So? They can force the wizard to waste an action defending himself. An action that was oriented against melee animals, not an archer. Whatever. I mean, if you're going to assume that the simulacrum is some big game changer (it really, really isn't), the AC and friends are at least as significant.


There are a lot more factors for race choices in PF. Human isn't always the right choice, depending on what you're doing.

If you're playing an optimized wizard, it's either human or elf. And besides, the favored enemy bonus is just icing. The ranger doesn't even need it to rocket tag the wizard. Conservatively, one full round of attacks from a 20th level archery anything will kill a wizard who hasn't gotten their defenses up yet. Archer bard, ranger, archer fighter, zen archer, whatever. Any sort of dedicated archery build will have enough damage per round to drop a wizard in one full round attack by 20th level, else they don't deserve to be called an archer. A 20-point optimized wizard will have 16 con to start, dump all of their stat improvements into int, and will have a +6 con item. That's 22 con. +6 per level, over 20 levels, that's 120hp. If they take all of their favored class bonuses as HP, the wizard will have 140. Average HP rolls will yield them 70. That's 210 HP on a level 20 wizard that just goes hog wild on buffing their HP. The archer needs to average 30 damage per arrow (7 shots) to drop that wizard. That's quite doable. If that archer optimized, he has a 19 starting strength (because he's a human, half-elf, or half-orc, obviously) which he has boosted 5 times, giving him 24 base strength, +6 from his strength item, giving him 30. That's +10 damage per arrow just from strength. We'll cripple the archer and assume he's stuck with a +2 speed bow firing +4 [elemental] arrows. So he's looking at +14 damage per shot. Deadly Aim gives him another +10 per shot, bringing him to +24 static damage per shot. Gravity bow brings his bow damage up to 2d6 per arrow, or 7 damage on average. That's 31 damage on average per arrow +1d6 from some element that may or may not be resisted. Not even factoring in favored enemies, hammer the gap, critical hits, class dips to gain arcane strike, tomes of strength to boost his strength, etc that ranger is able to reliably drop that wizard in one round doing nothing but firing his bow. That's certainly rocket tag territory.

The fact that the ranger can load even more damage through about a dozen different ways *or* attempt to master hunter that wizard to death just provides more options. Even putting that calculation significantly in the wizard's favor he's not got enough HP to make that work unless he has defenses up.


Freebooters are not able to use Master Hunter. No rocket tag.

Yes they are, the archetype doesn't replace master hunter so they still get it. The only two ranger archetypes that don't are battle scout and shapeshifter. But even then, that wizard isn't surviving an undefended full round attack by that ranger. Even with conservative estimates on static damage (no hammer the gap, not focusing as hard as possible on strength, etc) that ranger is doing to deal more damage than the typical 20-point wizard will have in HP.


"Argh, I can't have precise shot and rapid shot at level 1!"

Unless you play a human fighter. Or just wait till level 2 as a ranger or zen archer...


It's fact, bro. Point Blank Shot is way worse than Knowledge Devotion. That's the sort of comparison you're looking at.

Knowledge devotion is good, but there are archetype abilities that more than make up the difference, and quite a lot of pathfinder feats that are great for archers. Hammer the gap is just plain broken.

[dextercorvia]

Considering a level 1 Wizard can kill a level 3 party of four "standard" characters with a reasonable success rate, we can probably extrapolate that down to a level 1 Ranger.

Wow, I can't believe people remember that. That was probably the most fun I ever had at 1st level optimization.

[Snowbluff]

Unless you happen to have picked one of the ranger archetypes that lets them take 20 initiative checks and automatically act in the surprise round too. Again, those archetypes you were dismissing.
Good point, but read the surprise round rules, please. You can't full attack in the surprise round. Without Master hunter, which requires having Favored Enemy (no freebooters), the ranger won't down the wizard in a singular hit.



If the 20th level wizard can't spot him, the 10th level simulacrum is even less likely.
Special senses. See below. Also, the similacrum text allows for a level 20 resulting creature (20 CL x2 max target HD, cut the result in half).



So? They can force the wizard to waste an action defending himself. An action that was oriented against melee animals, not an archer. Whatever. I mean, if you're going to assume that the simulacrum is some big game changer (it really, really isn't), the AC and friends are at least as significant.
Solar has regeneration, and can cast shield other. The wizard takes half damage. Hour/level. That's even if they lose half of their casting.
Pseudodragons have blindsense, and are cheap as dirt.
Faerie Dragons simulacrum casts as a third level sorcerer. They're really cheap, too.

That's just a few off the top of my head.


Unless you play a human fighter. Or just wait till level 2 as a ranger or zen archer...

Uh, duh and or hello! The point is the feat tax for running an archer can really hurt sometimes. You're suckered into the cookie cutter feats without gaining any real gems in return.


Knowledge devotion is good, but there are archetype abilities that more than make up the difference, and quite a lot of pathfinder feats that are great for archers. Hammer the gap is just plain broken.
Hammer the gap isn't particularly impressive. Assuming every hit in full attack hit with haste and rapid shot, you have +15 damage. With a decent knowledge devotion (+2 damage with a weepy 16), you could get 12 damage, not to mention the bonus to hit. It comes online much earlier without a hard BAB requirement. The skill points hurt unless you're int based, but you should have points in knowledge for the things you fight.

For the less intelligent, Law Devotion would aid greatly in for a fight. I'm more of a Trickery Devotion or Travel Devotion guy, myself. I like having other things to do other than "I attack."

[Mithril Leaf]

So? They can force the wizard to waste an action defending himself. An action that was oriented against melee animals, not an archer. Whatever. I mean, if you're going to assume that the simulacrum is some big game changer (it really, really isn't), the AC and friends are at least as significant.

If you're playing an optimized wizard, it's either human or elf. And besides, the favored enemy bonus is just icing. The ranger doesn't even need it to rocket tag the wizard. Conservatively, one full round of attacks from a 20th level archery anything will kill a wizard who hasn't gotten their defenses up yet. Archer bard, ranger, archer fighter, zen archer, whatever. Any sort of dedicated archery build will have enough damage per round to drop a wizard in one full round attack by 20th level, else they don't deserve to be called an archer. A 20-point optimized wizard will have 16 con to start, dump all of their stat improvements into int, and will have a +6 con item. That's 22 con. +6 per level, over 20 levels, that's 120hp. If they take all of their favored class bonuses as HP, the wizard will have 140. Average HP rolls will yield them 70. That's 210 HP on a level 20 wizard that just goes hog wild on buffing their HP. The archer needs to average 30 damage per arrow (7 shots) to drop that wizard. That's quite doable. If that archer optimized, he has a 19 starting strength (because he's a human, half-elf, or half-orc, obviously) which he has boosted 5 times, giving him 24 base strength, +6 from his strength item, giving him 30. That's +10 damage per arrow just from strength. We'll cripple the archer and assume he's stuck with a +2 speed bow firing +4 [elemental] arrows. So he's looking at +14 damage per shot. Deadly Aim gives him another +10 per shot, bringing him to +24 static damage per shot. Gravity bow brings his bow damage up to 2d6 per arrow, or 7 damage on average. That's 31 damage on average per arrow +1d6 from some element that may or may not be resisted. Not even factoring in favored enemies, hammer the gap, critical hits, class dips to gain arcane strike, tomes of strength to boost his strength, etc that ranger is able to reliably drop that wizard in one round doing nothing but firing his bow. That's certainly rocket tag territory.

The fact that the ranger can load even more damage through about a dozen different ways *or* attempt to master hunter that wizard to death just provides more options. Even putting that calculation significantly in the wizard's favor he's not got enough HP to make that work unless he has defenses up.

Yes they are, the archetype doesn't replace master hunter so they still get it. The only two ranger archetypes that don't are battle scout and shapeshifter. But even then, that wizard isn't surviving an undefended full round attack by that ranger. Even with conservative estimates on static damage (no hammer the gap, not focusing as hard as possible on strength, etc) that ranger is doing to deal more damage than the typical 20-point wizard will have in HP.


Congraluations, you just killed an Astral Projection and the Wizard now has your exact location to have his small army of simulacra teleport to. Or his army of planar bound balors. Then teleport there and gate in a solar. Or any of the many other things a Wizard can do to utterly wreck you several times a day.

[12owlbears]

Is it just me or does this thread seem completely pointless.

[eggynack]

I think I just need to ask, what are we arguing about right now? What's the level, what're the optimization parameters, and what system is this? It just feels like there's a lot of random stuff going around.

[Coidzor]

Wow, I can't believe people remember that. That was probably the most fun I ever had at 1st level optimization.

What can I say? It left an impression. XD

[toapat]

Xorn Movement is a 5th level Sorcerer/Wizard Spell.

I'm not familiar with the Paladin ACF though, does it say "as Xorn"? If so, then yeah, the Paladin has a very small advantage in what materials they can move through, plus I suspect it's a longer duration than the Wizard's 1 Round per Level.

At least Wizard can fly and change the geography of an entire continent, that'll help control where the Paladin goes.

Assuming the refference site im using is fully accurate to the 3.5 printing:

Paladin gets earthglide as an Earth elemental, Xorn Movement has a few more restrictions, notably that it cant pass though worked stone (such as that extruded by Wall of Stone) of any size (where as a paladin can phase through large blocks). it also holds no restriction against brick but no one fires bricks the size of a coffin. However, the paladin must fully exit into air to enter a separate piece of stone, where as the Wizard does not.

the real problem is, UDK's Earthglide doesnt specify that you dont need to breath like Xorn Movement does.

[Snowbluff]

I think I just need to ask, what are we arguing about right now? What's the level, what're the optimization parameters, and what system is this? It just feels like there's a lot of random stuff going around.

Um... let me think:

1) Paladin with Earth glide.
2) The value of simulacrum.
3) Surprise rounds.
4) Master Hunter.
5) Wizard dominance.
6) PF ranger versus PF Wizard.
7) 3.x ranger versus wizard in general
We already know how this works out.

[eggynack]

1) Paladin with Earth glide.
2) The value of simulacrum.
3) Surprise rounds.
4) Master Hunter.
5) Wizard dominance.
6) PF ranger versus PF Wizard.
7) 3.x ranger versus wizard in general
We already know how this works out.
So, we're just fully embracing the insanity then? I can dig it.

[ryu]

Assuming the refference site im using is fully accurate to the 3.5 printing:

Paladin gets earthglide as an Earth elemental, Xorn Movement has a few more restrictions, notably that it cant pass though worked stone (such as that extruded by Wall of Stone) of any size (where as a paladin can phase through large blocks). it also holds no restriction against brick but no one fires bricks the size of a coffin. However, the paladin must fully exit into air to enter a separate piece of stone, where as the Wizard does not.

the real problem is, UDK's Earthglide doesnt specify that you dont need to breath like Xorn Movement does.

Okay that's glorious. Everything is glorious right now.

[toapat]

Okay that's glorious. Everything is glorious right now.

ya, just a tiny oversight from saying "As earth elemental"

[ryu]

ya, just a tiny oversight from saying "As earth elemental"

Still glorious. You are currently imagining your paladins having little air hoses connected to little oxygen producing magic devices that can work in these conditions thanks to the earthglide.

[animewatcha]

Toapat, did you read my post earlier in the thread about paly and wizard?

[squiggit]

Yes they are, the archetype doesn't replace master hunter so they still get it.

They still get master hunter, yes... They don't, however, have a Favored Enemy and therefore the only part of the feature that works is "move at full speed while tracking without penalty".

[Gwendol]

Melee combat is the least efficient way to do any killing. Saying a Paladin is stronger than a Ranger because it can do melee better than Ranger is like saying a hammer is better than a blender for finely crushed ice.

Paladin would be destroyed by a good Ranger.

I seriously doubt this. A SotAO paladin, optimizing for inspire courage will be a lot different from your vanilla pally.

[Snowbluff]

So, we're just fully embracing the insanity then? I can dig it.
Mhm.

I seriously doubt this. A SotAO paladin, optimizing for inspire courage will be a lot different from your vanilla pally.

It plays like anyone with a good UMD score. :smalltongue:

[Gwendol]

Pretty much, yes.

The mystic fire knight paladin rocks though.

[toapat]

Toapat, did you read my post earlier in the thread about paly and wizard?

no, because you dont understand alot of what the conversation is about. SotAO is considered core on paladin for a reason, i being broad and assuming neither Anchor nor Forcecage were 4th level (which i was incorrect about),


Disjunction doesnt explicitly ignore Line of effect. Dimensional Anchor is a ray, and thus cant be used during earthglide, Forcecage does not require line of effect either. Tremorsense is a third level wizard spell, which if the wizard is flying, wont work. by RAW, Mindsight (which i just said is outright banned) does not ignore LoE but its clearly intended to do so, and is the only way for the wizard or paladin to spot eachother through non-tremorsense methods, and the retaliatory options that can effect the paladin that Wizard has are severely limited (Move Earth, Disintegrate, and summoning earth elementals.)

Although really, the paladin should be performing a single, standard action attack, then casting Celerity, then using the UDK's Dimension Door SLA to gtfo.

The entire point of it is that it presents a set of atypical challenges for the wizard to deal with.

Ranger can do something similar with Xorn Movement but there are more restrictions and Mystic Wildshape ranger (5 or 6 depending on if you include Natural Spell, vs a Wizard's 11) simply looses 9/10 because of smaller feat pool and significantly lower mystic endurance.



Pretty much, yes.

The mystic fire knight paladin rocks though.

And its substitution levels, so it can be taken with a few other things.

[Haldir]

I seriously doubt this. A SotAO paladin, optimizing for inspire courage will be a lot different from your vanilla pally.

There is a reason why even humans on Earth, who have very little magic, have stopped using melee combat against powerful ranged attacks. Given that the Ranger absolutely has a better standard spell list than the Paladin, and can be a better spellcaster than the Paladin with optimization, I am starting to feel like you're taking this "Paladin is stronger than Ranger" April fool's thing you did a little too far.

[toapat]

There is a reason why even humans on Earth, who have very little magic, have stopped using melee combat against powerful ranged attacks. Given that the Ranger absolutely has a better standard spell list than the Paladin, and can be a better spellcaster than the Paladin with optimization, I am starting to feel like you're taking this "Paladin is stronger than Ranger" April fool's thing you did a little too far.

There litterally is no way for a ranger to beat the A-Game paladin in combat Other then Mystic Ranger with SotAO. Archery? the A-Game is a full BAB DFI bard. melee? same deal.

[Big Fau]

There litterally is no way for a ranger to beat the A-Game paladin in combat Other then Mystic Ranger with SotAO. Archery? the A-Game is a full BAB DFI bard. melee? same deal.

The A-game Paladin is Pun-Pun.

[toapat]

The A-game Paladin is Pun-Pun.

for all intents and purposes, ya, theres alot of rule breaking in that build, but it still cant be beaten by Ranger without throwing ranger upto their own pinacle of strength, because anything less then that and they are outclassed at the same tasks or matched.

[Haldir]

There litterally is no way for a ranger to beat the A-Game paladin in combat Other then Mystic Ranger with SotAO. Archery? the A-Game is a full BAB DFI bard. melee? same deal.

Why specifically is Mystic Ranger being excluded? Because it never made it into Dragon Magic? Yes, I determine by your completely biased rule set you might be able to make Paladin good enough to beat Ranger. If you could find him.

But you can't, you still lack all the perception skills necessary to even get close to attacking a Ranger. You've built a WMD but have no way of actually making it land. The Ranger will get a surprise round, and given sufficient optimization, that's all it will really need.

Oh, let's not forget DFI is elementally typed damage and Ranger has spells.

Your point that "The Paladin does tons of damage" is null, because it completely lacks any other method of defeating the Ranger, and tries to get the job done in the least effective manner. Thanks to Summons, Wild Empathy, and Knowledge (Nature), Rangers can break the action economy pretty hard, and I don't need that many actions to defeat someone whose effective strategy amounts to "Alright, I'm going to wait until he shows up, and hope to survive long enough to attack him."

[toapat]

Why specifically is Mystic Ranger being excluded? Because it never made it into Dragon Magic? Yes, I determine by your completely biased rule set you might be able to make Paladin good enough to beat Ranger. If you could find him.

But you can't, you still lack all the perception skills necessary to even get close to attacking a Ranger. You've built a WMD but have no way of actually making it land. The Ranger will get a surprise round, and given sufficient optimization, that's all it will really need.

Oh, let's not forget DFI is elementally typed damage and Ranger has spells.

Your point that "The Paladin does tons of damage" is null, because it completely lacks any other method of defeating the Ranger, and tries to get the job done in the least effective manner. Thanks to Summons, Wild Empathy, and Knowledge (Nature), Rangers can break the action economy pretty hard, and I don't need that many actions to defeat someone whose effective strategy amounts to "Alright, I'm going to wait until he shows up, and hope to survive long enough to attack him."

The reason Mystic ranger is banned is because you grab Academic Priest, Sword of the Arcane Order, Wildshape Variant, and Natural spell for it, and its a Wizard with some druid spells and wildshape. its the only thing that can match Tempest_Stormwind's A-Game Paladin that Ranger has. Sniping a paladin at range? not an option because the A-Game has better ranged offense because it has access to DFI. Interaction and research? Other then the Serenity variant, paladin will be a Charisma class. they match or exceed what ranger can do because of access to wizard spells.

[Snowbluff]

Why specifically is Mystic Ranger being excluded? Because it never made it into Dragon Magic? Yes, I determine by your completely biased rule set you might be able to make Paladin good enough to beat Ranger. If you could find him.

The answer is yes. Dragon Magazine isn't assumed. Dragon Compendium is iffy. Bias isn't the issue here.

[Haldir]

DFI is not a strong offensive measure. Elemental resistances are quite easy to achieve.

I do not appreciate repeating myself.

Ranger has the same access to wizard spells, and the availability to hit the Paladin before the Paladin hits him. How exactly are you leveraging your negligent DFI damage to outdamage a Ranger, ever? High level D&D is rocket tag and the Paladin can't shoot first.

[Curmudgeon]

The reason Mystic ranger is banned is because you grab Academic Priest, Sword of the Arcane Order, Wildshape Variant, and Natural spell for it, and its a Wizard with some druid spells and wildshape.
Why are you mixing in a Dragonlance-only feat with D&D-only build elements? These two games only have one book in common: Dragonlance Campaign Setting.

[toapat]

DFI is not a strong offensive measure. Elemental resistances are quite easy to achieve.

I do not appreciate repeating myself.

Ranger has the same access to wizard spells, and the availability to hit the Paladin before the Paladin hits him. How exactly are you leveraging your negligent DFI damage to outdamage a Ranger, ever? High level D&D is rocket tag and the Paladin can't shoot first.

Have you ever looked at A-GAME paladin? you get +10/+10D6, At 10th level, to all attacks. Of technically Any type of non-evil dragon, you can pick Amethyst and have maybe 5 total unique enemies who can even resist your bonus damage. Oh, and paladins still have Divine Sacrifice for another +5d6 untyped damage on hit. Ranger is dealing at best at max range (([W] + 1 + STR bonus) + 9d6 + 10) x2 damage, with at best +23 Attack bonus (and thats from casting True strike, If you dont you only have a pitiful +3). a Level 5 can easily have non magical armor that adds up to more then that. Its more likely that the Paladin will be dealing more damage to themselves in a round through divine sacrifice between shots of a longbow then the ranger, and the paladin will be attacking at +10 over what the ranger has. There is a REASON the only farshot builds only use the bare minimum of a martial class, Range increment penalties overcome too much to even bother. You want to bring a longbow's range to bear you have to take Arcane archer and fire spells like Apocalypse from the sky. Ranger doesnt do that.


Why are you mixing in a Dragonlance-only feat with D&D-only build elements? These two games only have one book in common: Dragonlance Campaign Setting.

I dont really see Academic/Dynamic priest as campaign specific feats.

[Thealtruistorc]

Two words: freezing fog.

[Coidzor]

I dont really see Academic/Dynamic priest as campaign specific feats.

It's more the sourcing and difference between 1st party and 3rd party, I believe.

[toapat]

It's more the sourcing and difference between 1st party and 3rd party, I believe.

its technically second party, Same as Dragon.

[Snowbluff]

DFI is not a strong offensive measure. Elemental resistances are quite easy to achieve.
Actually, DFI can be stacked with Inspire Courage. It's a pretty crazy combination, with 10d6 energy damage with +10 damage/ +10 hit.


Ranger has the same access to wizard spells, and the availability to hit the Paladin before the Paladin hits him. How exactly are you leveraging your negligent DFI damage to outdamage a Ranger, ever? High level D&D is rocket tag and the Paladin can't shoot first.

Not to mention paladins could DMM Persist Friendly Fire.

[Curmudgeon]

its technically second party, Same as Dragon.
Second party is homebrew: i.e., created by the second party in a commercial transaction (the customer). First party is the primary seller (in this case, Wizards of the Coast).

Dragon magazine (published by Paizo) and Dragonlance game (mostly Margaret Weis publishing) are third party sources. The difference is that Dragon content is authorized for D&D use by WotC; Dragonlance (except for Dragonlance Campaign Setting, which was published by Wizards of the Coast) is not.

[toapat]

Actually, DFI can be stacked with Inspire Courage. It's a pretty crazy combination, with 10d6 energy damage with +10 damage/ +10 hit.

I thought DFI replaced the +10 damage from Inspire Courage, if it doesnt then Ranger cant beat the A-Game Paladin at range.


Second party is homebrew: i.e., created by the second party in a commercial transaction (the customer). First party is the primary seller (in this case, Wizards of the Coast).

Dragon magazine (published by Paizo) and Dragonlance game (mostly Margaret Weis publishing) are third party sources. The difference is that Dragon content is authorized for D&D use by WotC; Dragonlance (except for Dragonlance Campaign Setting, which was published by Wizards of the Coast) is not.

This actually presents a wierd problem where Sword and Sorcery is presented with a lower degree of removal then the Dragonlance and Dragon material

[squiggit]

Second party is homebrew: i.e., created by the second party in a commercial transaction (the customer). First party is the primary seller (in this case, Wizards of the Coast).
No, that's still third party.

Second party technically doesn't have a real meaning but is sometimes used to describe heavily affiliated works that aren't directly made by the company or something made by a patrnwr or subsidiary company. So, Dragon Magazine, or hypothetically if another Hasbro owned company was subcontracted to do D&D work. I've seen it used sometimes to describe third party works that are made at the direction of the first party too. Though again, it technically doesn't refer to anything.

It gets weird because the term "second party development" doesn't actually refer to the second party. Don't ask why, that's just the way the terms have developed

Homebrew is still third party, just not commercial (in fact that's the only difference between the two). The fact that I don't have to pay for my friend's warblade port for pathfinder doesn't mean it's an entirely unique category of product than one I pay ten bucks for.

[Snowbluff]

i.e., created by the second party in a commercial transaction (the customer).

Thank you for this. I was reared by a lawyer, so this stuff bothers me. Not sure if it applies to homebrew, though. :smalltongue:

I thought DFI replaced the +10 damage from Inspire Courage, if it doesnt then Ranger cant beat the A-Game Paladin at range.

You can have both lingering. They are separate effects/bonuses. Lead with DFI, then start a standard Inspire Courage.

[Haldir]

The answer is yes. Dragon Magazine isn't assumed. Dragon Compendium is iffy. Bias isn't the issue here.

This is the definition of bias. Dragon Magazine was condoned by the creators of the game to be legal game content.

To thread-
My argument is that damage can't win this fight. All I keep hearing about is how awesome the Paladin's damage is. I'm out.

[Snowbluff]

This is the definition of bias. Dragon Magazine was condoned by the creators of the game to be legal game content. Yes and no. You were implying that we are baised against rangers, when we are actually biased against material that is not commonly available, often poorly balanced and implemented, not a first party product, and frequently banned. One would be a legitimate complaint against the argument, the other is a reasonable expectation.

[eggynack]

Yes and no. You were implying that we are baised against rangers, when we are actually biased against material that is not commonly available, often poorly balanced and implemented, not a first party product, and frequently banned. One would be a legitimate complaint against the argument, the other is a reasonable expectation.
Pretty much. The argument would be pretty much the same if the paladin were the one with dragon magazine stuff. I think that material has been seeing greater acceptance lately, but that acceptance is definitely not total.

[ryu]

Are we seriously saying that Dragon material is any less balanced than core? Really? All the proposed ranger is doing is becoming a pseudo-wizard with a wider spell list in exchange for a whole pile of missing feats. Honestly The base wizard is still stronger.

[Snowbluff]

Mystic Ranger is Lightning Warrior until level 10, but no one was joking. It's that kind of "poorly balanced." :smalltongue:

Pretty much. The argument would be pretty much the same if the paladin were the one with dragon magazine stuff. I think that material has been seeing greater acceptance lately, but that acceptance is definitely not total.

Pretty much. As the system grows older, I expect more exploration. However, since the magazines are not in print and, well... MAGAZINES, I will never assume them when I make a suggestion in a thread.

[eggynack]

Are we seriously saying that Dragon material is any less balanced than core?
Not necessarily. I mean, some of it is pretty silly, but core is usually going to have more silliness. I think it's mostly an issue of reduced access, combined with a lower quantity of understanding and knowledge relative to first party stuff. It's the same problem that homebrew tends to have, in other words. I think those issues are becoming smaller, which has resulted in broader acceptance, but it's not on the same level as first party material yet.

[toapat]

To thread-
My argument is that damage can't win this fight. All I keep hearing about is how awesome the Paladin's damage is. I'm out.

Your Argument is "Ranger has archery" which i pointed Out A-Game Paladin still Matches or Exceeds what ranger can do by virtue of what they are restricted to. Paladin has more, superior tricks.

I banned Mystic Ranger because Mystic Ranger is not an argument in a discussion about Ranger against Paladin, because for all intents and purposes, Mystic Ranger is a Wizard Variant. A-Game paladin has more damage regardless of engagement range, they have more healing, and have access to the same 4 levels of divinations as Ranger which render Spot/Listen irrelevant anyway.

For all intents and purposes, the Argument is that, At Anything less then Perfect Ranger Optimization, the 10th Percentile paladin (Dragon Magazine/Dragonlance material is needed to improve efficiency) for optimization is superior, because of the equality of their magic, but the superiority of what paladin gets. Ranger gets 3 bonus feats or wildshape? Paladin gets Earthglide, or one of the strongest In class charge modifiers, or a source of high mobility, Or the best Summons in the game, Or a magic weapon at massive discount. They get a greater Dispel Magic SLA. they can become DFI bards. They can get Domain powers and they have access to Divine Metamagic.

What notable did ranger get? they get a few sets of free feats, or Wildshape. They got numerous sets of skill swaps. They got a few poor secondary attacks. they got SotAO and Mystic variant, They got Swift hunter. Their ACF and Substitution Options are some of the weakest in the game (Only monk getting a worse shafting), their strength comes from what they innately have or from completely Reconstructing the class. It was banned because its a total conversion. Why i said Raging Wild Monk is banned from monk debates. You do not win an argument when you abandon it for an entirely new one.

[ryu]

Just taking umbrage with anyone citing balance as a reason for not allowing something in a game where wizards exist in the same multiverse as fighters let alone the same room as often happens.

[kkplx]

What can I say? It left an impression. XD

Care to pm me the respective build that led to that statement?

Also, yes, thread seems kinda pointless, as it's the usual "only beat a wizard by being a wizard, while not being a wizard"-schpiel.

[dextercorvia]

Care to pm me the respective build that led to that statement?

Also, yes, thread seems kinda pointless, as it's the usual "only beat a wizard by being a wizard, while not being a wizard"-schpiel.

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=364041

That was my Wizard that took out the level 3 party without a scratch (twice). I don't have the link to LonelyTylenol's barbarian.

[animewatcha]

Wizard aside because everyone else that isn't toapat can guess why, I am looking the acfs that he keeps spout off non-stop for the paladin and seeing a 'we can't reconstruct ranger, but we can totally reconstruct paladin cause I say so.' One single paladin can't have all these features at once due to restrictions and a couple here or there than can't be used at same time effectively. The point of 'paladin using wizard spells instead of his own in spell slots' has already shown that paly isn't the one the work but rather 'paly+wizard' which kills the 'paly is doing this on his own.' Heck,

Take earthglide. Paladin either broadcasts where he is ( singing ) or he is underground ( where he begins to suffocate. At the level the paladin gets it, wizard and ranger are pretty much in the air when traveling and much of combat neutralizing much of that. Unless toapat can list source for domain power access besides catalogues of enlightment and eternal order, the domain power access is only greater turning.

Please list out all the acfs being used as the paladin. What is the source of the inspire courage stacking for +10? On it's own, paly version alone is only granting a +1 no matter the level. Also, how is paladin gaining bardic music specifically ( as in actual bardic music usages )? If not, then he very likely is NOT gaining DFI.

If the above were legal, said paladin would be blowing through 'bardic musics' quick as the effects would eventually go bye bye when not continually song. Spellshatter ( the SLA greater magic dispel ) is a once per day melee attack that is wasted if misses. Having spellshatter keeps the paladin from other features used in the argument.

[ShurikVch]

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=364041
Please, excuse me for my ignorance, but why he have Simple Weapon Proficiency instead Wizard Weapon Proficiency, and since when IUS is "metamagic feat, an item creation feat, or Spell Mastery"

[animewatcha]

Dunno on simple weapon prof, but improved unarmed can be gotten for the fighter bonus feat sub in UA ( IIRC? ). You give up scribe scroll and wizard bonus feats to pick up fighter bonus feats as wizard level rate. Gotta qualify for feat.

[Snowbluff]

Please, excuse me for my ignorance, but why he have Simple Weapon Proficiency instead Wizard Weapon Proficiency, and since when IUS is "metamagic feat, an item creation feat, or Spell Mastery"

Allow me to educate you. Wizards can swap fighter feats for their wizard feats. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm)
:smallsmile:

[Coidzor]

Allow me to educate you. Wizards can swap fighter feats for their wizard feats. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm)
:smallsmile:

Specifically this one. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#wizard) No idea about the Simple Weapon Proficiencies bit offhand, possibly an artifact.

[squiggit]

I banned Mystic Ranger because Mystic Ranger is not an argument in a discussion about Ranger against Paladin, because for all intents and purposes, Mystic Ranger is a Wizard Variant.

So the ranger that trades in most of his class to become a wizard/druid is too far from the core ranger to count but the paladin that trades in most of his class to become a wizard/bard is fine?

I'm confused.

[toapat]

*Snip*

Ive been refferencing, primarily, this topic (http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/3407376). The only real Rules grey area he uses involves Battle blessing.

Paladin domains and Sword of Celestia are in later issues of Dragon. I am not spending an hour dredging the Crystal Keep Index to find the specific issues.

What Spellshatter is mutually exclusive with is not, under any circumstances, superior to having Greater Dispel magic on a stick 5/day, and its not mutually exclusive with anything i listed.


So the ranger that trades in most of his class to become a wizard/druid is too far from the core ranger to count but the paladin that trades in most of his class to become a wizard/bard is fine?

I'm confused.

A-Game paladin still relies on being a paladin. It wants that high cha, it still casts Paladin spells, but it intersperses them with wizard spells, it uses DS (a Paladin ACF that has no equivalent anywhere), it only uses From Smite to Song because its more reliable then smiting. Paladin still has mass buffs native to itself that they use. Functionally, this makes them look alot like a bard. That is because they already had or were intended to have the functionality of one without the bard abilities.

the Mystic Wildshape Ranger doesnt attempt to be a ranger, Sword of the Arcane Order defines that class's Entire existence. The spells designed for ranger? Dont work with Mystic Ranger, Its all about bow combat, and you are playing a class who has effectively thrown out their entire native structure for, again, being a heavily modified wizard. The line is specifically the Mystic Variant, SotAO and Wildshape are fine, but the point is, taken as far as they can, Ranger, while staying Ranger, does not compete with paladin. When you cross that line, and take a standardly optimized Mystic ranger, That ranger competes at T2 because its not a mundane or gish.

[Captnq]

So the ranger that trades in most of his class to become a wizard/druid is too far from the core ranger to count but the paladin that trades in most of his class to become a wizard/bard is fine?

I'm confused.

Allow me to explain:

What is a Mystic Ranger?

A ranger is a class that is supposed to be the specialist. He specializes in killing one type of critter. He’s that critter’s worst nightmare, supposedly. As it turns out, being a specialist at hurting people makes you a fairly lousy member of the party. While rangers look cool, a straight up fighter spending feats the right way can usually kill anything much faster then a ranger can kill his one specific critter.

Then came the Mystic Ranger Variant Class.

And now you have a ranger who is not as effective at combat, but SLIGHTLY more effective at magic and still not as good at killing something as a fighter or a wizard.

That said, it sure is fun.

Seriously. It’s actually got quite a bit of punch between 6th and 10th level. Before that other fighter classes are far superior. After that it quickly gets over shadowed by other spellcasters. But, for that short five level window, boy, can you have some fun. Here’s the summary


Pros:
• Full BAB
• 2 Good Saves
• 6+Int Skill points and a good skill selection
• Bonus feats
• Combines well with Wizard for superior spell selection.
• A wide selection of ACFs.

Cons:
• Armor and shield goes out the window.
• Melee combat difficult to optimize.
• Ultra MAD.
• Many class features come too late to be useful.
• After 10th level spellcasting is neutered.

Now before we go any further, we will have to examine the main lynch pin of the more popular mystic ranger builds. The feat Sword of the arcane order

SWORD OF THE ARCANE ORDER [General]
- Champions of Valor (3.5)
Description: Members of your military order have a special connection with arcane magic.
Prerequisites: Paladin 4th of Azuth or Mystra, or ranger 4th of Mystra; member of the Knights of the Mystic Fire , the Order of the Shooting Star, or the Swords of the High One.
Benefit: You can use your paladin and ranger spell slots to prepare wizard spells. You must have a minimum Intelligence score of 10 + the spell’s level to prepare it, and the save DC of the spell is equal to 10 + your Int modifier (as if you were a wizard). These wizard spells can be taken either from your spellbook (if you have one) or from another character’s spellbook (though in the latter case you must decipher the writing in the book and succeed on a Spellcraft check to prepare the spell, just as a wizard using a borrowed spellbook; see Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks, page 178 of the Player’s Handbook, for details). If you also have levels in wizard, your wizard caster level is treated as the sum of your wizard, paladin, and ranger class levels.
Special: Azuth has a paladin order called the Swords of the High One, Mystra has a paladin order called the Knights of the Mystic Fire and a closely allied group of rangers called the Order of the Shooting Star. Members of all three of these groups can select this feat as long as they are at least 4th level in their respective order’s primary class.

Also important is the part from the feat summary table in Champions of Valor. “Use paladin or ranger spell slots to prepare wizard spells that you know; add paladin and ranger class levels to your wizard level to determine your wizard caster level.” (Emphasis is the editor’s)

Problem #1
Does This Feat Give You Access To Wizard Spells?
Now, at first glance, the answer would seem obvious. If you can memorize wizard spells, you clearly have access to the spell list. This would be the RAW reading of the feat. It’s poorly worded, but clearly, you can read the spells from other spellbooks, so you must be able to cast them, ergo, you have access to the wizard spell list.
That’s why I included the section from the feat summary table. The feat summary has additional words the feat itself does not, “…wizard spells that you know.” Now this would imply that the intention of the feat was to allow you to use the wizard spell list that you get from a level of wizard and memorize those spells in your ranger spell slots.
However, information under the feat summary table is not valid. WotC has specifically stated that only the information written under a specific feat pertains to that feat. The information from the table is informative, but circumstantial and cannot be used in game. So we have the problem of which way to read it. Does it give a ranger access to the wizard spell list, or must he take at least one level of wizard to have access to the spells so he can have access to the list, and thus memorize wizard spells in his ranger spell slots.
If it is the first way (RAW), then a level of wizard is not needed. You can learn any wizard spell, use magic items that require access to the wizard spell list, and all the other perks that go with it. If it is the second way (RAI), then you need to buy at least one level of wizard to use this feat, or it is worthless. However, once you have that level, you do not need to buy any more levels.
For example, if you were a mystic ranger 4th/wizard 1st, then you can memorize second level wizard spells in your 2nd level mystic ranger spell slots, without being a 3rd level wizard. Once you have the first level of wizard you “know” all spells on the list. You just need to get a copy in a spellbook. Once you have a copy, you can memorize it.
Which one is correct? That is up to your DM to choose. It could go either way, but the editor has a leaning towards the second (RAI) interpretation. The reason will be evident in the answer to the next question.

Problem #2
Are Wizards Spells Cast From Ranger Slots Arcane Or Divine?
Rangers are divine spellcasters. Wizards are arcane spellcasters. If you have a wizard spell in an ranger spell slot, which one it is? I believe the answer depends on if you think the ranger needs to take a level of wizard to have access to wizard spells.
If you believe the ranger does not need to take a level of wizard, then effectively you are giving the mystic ranger access to the wizard spell list. This means that despite the fact that the spell requires you to have intelligence to cast the spell, you are still just casting the spell using ranger spell slots. Ergo, the spell has to be divine.
If you believe that the ranger has to take a level of wizard, then effectively the ranger is loaning spell slots to the wizard class. If you are giving spell slots to the wizard class, then the spells remain arcane. As evidence that this is the intent of the feat is that it specifically states that all wizard spells are cast off of intelligence and not off of wisdom.
So what’s the difference? It’s all just semantics, right? Well, the difference in divine verses arcane affects how you build your character. It determines if you need to spend a level on wizard or not. When you qualify for certain PrCs. Weird spell combinations. Frankly, being able to convert wizard spells into divine spells opens up a whole world of opportunity, the least of which is, no arcane spell failure. So which one is it? Again, depends on how you answer the first question.

Problem #3
What Level Should You Be To Take This Feat?
The feat clearly says that you need to be a fourth level ranger to take it. That’s RAW, plain and simple. But why is it fourth? It’s fourth because the base ranger class doesn’t get spells before fourth level. The mystic ranger gets spells at first level. So, you could make a case for being able to learn this feat at first.
Is that balanced? Well, to capitalize on a number of builds, you would have to be a fourth level ranger anyways. So what’s the point? Well, you only get feats at 1st, 3rd and 6th level. So that means that you either need a DM who allows retraining, you need to take endurance at 3rd level and then when you get endurance at 4th level you automatically get to retrain your 3rd level feat, or you have to suck it up and take it at 6th level. Allowing the feat to be available at 1st level makes such feat juggling unnecessary and simplifies things. Talk it over with your DM to determine his preference.

Problem #4
What Gods Should be Allowed For This Feat?
By RAW, you must worship either Mystra and Azuth to get this feat. However, not everyone plays in Forgotten Realms. It is suggested that you allow anyone who worships a god of magic to take this feat.

There is, of course, a way around needing a level of wizard and satisfying a DM who insists that you know the sor/wiz spell list. That would be this feat.

MAGICAL TRAINING [Regional]
You come from a land where cantrips are taught to all who have the aptitude tolearn magic. Every crafter and artisan, it seems, knows a minor spell or two.
Prerequisites: Int 10 or Cha 10, elf (Evereska or Evermeet) or human (Halruaa or Nimbral).
Benefit: You can cast three 0-level arcane spells per day as either a sorcerer or wizard (your choice, so long as you have a score of at least 10 in the ability that controls the spellcasting for that class). You must make this decision when you first take the feat. Thereafter, you have an arcane spell failure chance if you wear armor and are treated as a sorcerer or wizard of your arcane spellcaster level (minimum 1st) for the purpose of determining level-based variables of the spells you cast. If you choose to cast spells as a sorcerer, the DC for saves against your spells is 10 + your Cha modifier. You know two 0-level spells of your choice from the sorcerer/wizard list. If you choose to cast spells as a wizard, the DC for saves against your spells is 10 + your Int modifier. You have a spellbook with three 0-level spells of your choice from the sorcerer/ wizard list. You prepare your spells exactly as a wizard does.
Special: If you already have levels in sorcerer or wizard, increase the number of 0-level spells you can cast per day by three. You may select this feat only as a 1st-level character. You may have only one regional feat.
Editor: So, as you can see, this gives you access to the spellbook without the need for a level in wizard. However, it doesn’t settle if you are casting spells as a divine spellcaster or an arcane spellcaster or both. So if you have approval to take this feat, make sure to confirm with your DM about the Arcane/Divine caster issue before you proceed with character design.


Party Role: The Magic Addict
The magic addict doesn’t have the best spell selection in the world, but he does have the highest caster level in the world. The magic addict depends on a combination of the feats Sword of the Arcane Order and Practiced Spellcaster and how it interacts with certain PrCs.
The first one is the easiest, Mystic Theurge. Once you have Mystic Ranger: 4, Wizard: 1 and SotAO feat, you are casting 2nd level divine and arcane spells. A few skills and you qualify for Mystic Theurge. Each level adds one to mystic ranger and wizard. And with each level, you add 2 total to your wizard caster level, but only one to your ranger caster level. So when you add three levels of Mystic Theurge, you can use Practiced Spellcaster to give yourself +4 levels of caster level for ranger. Which, also adds to your wizard level.
The second PrC is Sublime Chord. Now, you can’t take it before you reach 11th level, unfortunately. The skill requirements simply cannot be gotten around. Plus, you also need bardic music ability. So that means you need to take a level of bard. I’m sure there are other ways, but this is the easiest and it helps with other requirements later. Now sublime chord gives you 4th through 9th level bard and sorcerer spells as a spontaneous arcane spellcaster. You also pick an arcane spellcaster class (wizard) and add it’s caster level to your sublime chord caster level, and vice versa. Now, the problem is, your Sublime Chord spells are based on charisma, so this adds just one more attribute to your list of attributes you must have at a certain level. To really take advantage of Sublime Chord, you need a charisma of 19, a wisdom of 15, and an intelligence of at least 13.
The third PrC is Fochlucan Lyrist. Now, the problem for qualifying for this PrC is figuring out how to gain evasion. Alas, this means picking up non-spell caster levels, most likely. Rogue 2 or Monk 2. Rogue helps with skills and gives you sneak attack. Monk adds to your AC, gives you unarmed strike, and is far better suited for someone who is not using a shield or wearing armor. Alas, this is effectively 2 dead levels for the magic addict. Now, the PrC adds to arcane and divine spell casting class and also adds to your bardic knowledge and bardic music, so it does have some advanatages, depending on your eventual goal.
The fourth PrC is Arcane Hierophant. Alas, to qualify you need to have trackless step. That means being a half-elf or elf and taking wildrunner for one level, being of the bamboo spirit race, or taking three levels in scout or druid. That makes it a bit expensive in optimizing your wizard caster level. That said, it has the perk of ignoring arcane spell failure while wearing light armor. That means you can add armor which is something you couldn’t before. It also adds to wild shape, which is something you’d get if you took three levels of druid Of you can take one level of shapeshifter, which is a vastly superior form of wild shape.. Of course the real perk is that it also adds to one arcane and one divine spellcasting class.
The fifth class is Ultimate Magus. You qualify for this one easily, but you don’t want to take it until after your first level of Sublime Chord. It adds to a spontaneous arcane caster and an arcane caster who prepares from a spellbook. Now, technically, the sublime chord cannot cast 1st level arcane spells. And if you take one level of bard, you can only cast 0-level spells spontaneously. You will have to add to your bard spellcasting level, most likely with mystic theurge, for one level. Then you can add Ultimate magus to Sublime Chord and Wizard. Now while Mystic Theurge adds a total of 20 spell casting “levels”, ultimate magus adds only 17. You “lose” a level at 1st, 4th, and 7th. At that level, you get to pick which class to add it to, Wizard or Sublime Chord. You should always add to Sublime Chord, you will get higher level spells out of it. Now, if you are choosing the ultimate magus route, you may wish to look into metamagic feats to maximize the PrC’s usefulness. I suggest the old standbys of empower and maximize. Extend is also useful, but at that level, your more likely to use an extend metamagic rod.
By using the Fochlucan Lyrist, Arcane Heirophant, Ultimate Magus, and Mystic Theurge, you can add to Mystic Theurge as the divine spellcaster, while also adding to wizard. You should switch to adding to Sublime Chord as soon as possible. Sprinkle in some practiced spellcaster feats here and there and you will see your Caster Level really take off.
Now, there is one combo that you are unlikely to get past your DM, but it’s worth a shot. If you are casting spells with mystic ranger 4, you are casting arcane and divine spells with that class. So, technically, you can add both +1 arcane and +1 divine from Mystic Theurge to mystic ranger. If your DM allows it, a Mystic ranger: 4/Mystic Theurge: 3, is casting 5th level spells at 7th level, two whole levels before a wizard. Even if your DM requires you to take a level in wizard, you’d still get 5th level spells one level before a wizard. The problem is, there is little point in taking mystic ranger past 10th level, as far as spellcasting is concerned. Now it does give you more spells, and it does add to your wizard level, but really, you’d be better putting that level elsewhere, so you can spread it out a bit. So, while this is dang cool, the advantage only lasts for one level, then you start to fall behind.


Mystic Ranger: 1-4 (Mystic Ranger Caster Level:4)
Wizard: 1 (Wizard Caster Level: 5)
Mystic Theurge: 1 (MR/W:6/2[7])
Mystic Theurge: 2 (MR/W:7/2[9])
Mystic Theurge: 3 (MR/W:9/2[11])
Bard: 1
Mystic Theurge: 4 (MR/W/Bard:10/2[12]/2)
Sublime Chord: 1
Ultimate Magus: 1 (MR/W/B/SC:10/2[14]/2/1)
Ultimate Magus: 2 (MR/W/B/SC:10/3[16]/2/2)
Ultimate Magus: 3 (MR/W/B/SC:10/4[18]/2/3)
Ultimate Magus: 4 (MR/W/B/SC:10/4[20]/2/4)
Ultimate Magus: 5 (MR/W/B/SC:10/5[22]/2/5)
Ultimate Magus: 6 (MR/W/B/SC:10/6[24]/2/6)
Ultimate Magus: 7 (MR/W/B/SC:10/6[26]/2/7)

You get the idea.

[animewatcha]

snip



I took a bit of a look now ( will do more later ) because it's late at night for me.

The build is illegal due to confliction between the sub levels. Build is illegal due to not having bardic music specifically. Paladin domains mean no Turn Undead which means no DMM. Sword of Celestia means no special mount aka no Divine Spirit. Spellshatter means no use of anything that requires giving up remove disease. Spellshatter also means no barding. Also, sword of arcane order paladin means no barding.

[Vknight]

So the new argument that is being pushed for is that.

A Ranger with scrolls/rods/wands/whatever. Of Dispel Magic etc. can destroy the buffs on the mage and then go too town.
So somehow the Ranger is too use these items too win the day

So carrying around a lot of magical gear specifically made too counter a mage too fight the mage.
Along with the ability too be good at ranged combat will stomp a mage.
And that the Ranger is the best at these

And somehow the Caster Level of the Ranger/Item in question generally being lower isn't a good argument for why things like that would not work.

So a lot of it is negate all the wizards magical effects and then hit him as hard as you can before he is able too escape/put new buffs up etc.

Also readied actions.

Also the Ranger is going too beat the mage too the draw every time on initiative.
Also their is a feat like manyshot that has no range requirements and can be added into a full attack etc.


And its 3rd/3.5 Edition no Pathfinder.

[animewatcha]

Notice the likely ignoring of fine-print or heck anything that wizard might actually do prior to or during.

[Vknight]

Notice the likely ignoring of fine-print or heck anything that wizard might actually do prior to or during.

Yes keep this in mind, it will help make you understand. He also thinks he's done more research then others

[eggynack]

Also the Ranger is going too beat the mage too the draw every time on initiative.
When did that happen? I'm pretty sure that the facts were indicating the exact opposite of that. If we are assuming mystic ranger, then hummingbird familiar is a thing, and if we're not, then we're still talking about easier access to improved initiative combined with easier access to nerveskitter. It really just feels like most evidence is supporting wizard victory, with the only plausible path for ranger victory being wizard copying. Otherwise, your archery plan can be stopped pretty easily, especially as both competitors apparently know about this fight. You can't have the ranger push all of his resources towards wizard stomping, and then not have the wizard push all of his resources towards ranger stomping, after all. That makes the exact opposite of sense.

[Haldir]

Your Argument is "Ranger has archery" which i pointed Out A-Game Paladin still Matches or Exceeds what ranger can do by virtue of what they are restricted to. Paladin has more, superior tricks.

Strawman much? My argument was that the Ranger had strategic initiative, and I'll give you a goddamned cookie if you can quote me mentioning Ranger archery ever, because I intentionally made no mention of how that strategic initiative would be leveraged. Even if the Paladin wins in ranged damage, he has no way to make that worth anything against the Ranger. Power you can't use is no power at all.

4th Level Divination renders Spot and Listen irrelevent? I'm fairly certain Ranger gets access to all the same divination blocking measures a wizard gets, no? Or is Nondetection native on the Ranger list not enough?

Oh! More arguments about how you get cool damage stuff. Charging something you can't find sounds like a great strategy! Lucky for me I've got plenty of Skillpoints for Knowledge Devotion if I were to be so crass as to require dealing damage at any point.

Summons and companions? Psh. You don't want to go down that road with someone who has Knowledge (Nature), Track, and Wild Empathy as native features, ontop of that sweet Urban Companion which is essentially a free Familiar. Paladins get a single silly summon, whereas a Ranger potentially gets every animal monster in any MM if he wants to.

Getting a nice free magic weapon, sweet, except any weapon a Ranger holds can be Bane against a favored enemy. Oh, and Rangers can take organizations as Favored Enemies too, as an optional rule (Cityscape or CmpScound). Arrogant overbearing zealots who try to use muscle to force me to act like them sounds like a good one. Maybe my Ranger hunts Paladins.

The Paladin has nothing that a Ranger doesn't have, except an arbitrary moral code.

[Gwendol]

There is a reason why even humans on Earth, who have very little magic, have stopped using melee combat against powerful ranged attacks. Given that the Ranger absolutely has a better standard spell list than the Paladin, and can be a better spellcaster than the Paladin with optimization, I am starting to feel like you're taking this "Paladin is stronger than Ranger" April fool's thing you did a little too far.

"Humans on Earth" isn't really a yardstick for performance in 3.5 D&D.

Barring Mystic Ranger, how is the ranger a better spellcaster? Please give me the breakdown.

As for stronger, it is you who keep saying the paladin will be destroyed by a well-built ranger, I'm still in doubt of that. The ranger is skillfull and his ability to hide and spot are an asset. Depending on the game and the party though, those skills can be niche or immensly useful. I think the party buffing and remote healing, etc, the paladin offers are more generally useful, but YMMV.

[Gwendol]

The Paladin has nothing that a Ranger doesn't have, except an arbitrary moral code.

Detect evil, Aura of Courage, Divine Grace.

[Snowbluff]

Don't forget Turn Undead. I like Turn Undead.


A Ranger with scrolls/rods/wands/whatever. Of Dispel Magic etc. can destroy the buffs on the mage and then go too town.
So somehow the Ranger is too use these items too win the day
Wizard wins init (or acts in the surprise round with Shapechange, Foresight, etc), disjunctions the scrolls, targeting a crummy will save.
Ranger wins init, has a chance to has a chance to dispel a spell, rolling for each one. And the wizard gets to keep his items. :l
So carrying around a lot of magical gear specifically made too counter a mage too fight the mage.



And its 3rd/3.5 Edition no Pathfinder.
This ranger is screwed.

[toapat]

I took a bit of a look now ( will do more later ) because it's late at night for me.

The build is illegal due to confliction between the sub levels. Build is illegal due to not having bardic music specifically. Paladin domains mean no Turn Undead which means no DMM. Sword of Celestia means no special mount aka no Divine Spirit. Spellshatter means no use of anything that requires giving up remove disease. Spellshatter also means no barding. Also, sword of arcane order paladin means no barding.

There are no rules that say every single character is monotheistic. A paladin of Milil and Mystra is technically non-conflicting, but only so long as its not a Paladin of Tyranny.

Spellshatter removes remove disease with an equal progression of itself, it may bast more often but its the same thing. Inspire greatness would replace the 2-5th charges but even a single use of a spell you cant prepare is superior to not having it at all. However since Inspire Competence is needed its not taken at all.

The alternatives to the mount were to point out just how much paladin has in that slot.

The only "Legitimate" issue is Dragonfire Inspiration's pre-requisite. I forgot A-Game doesnt actually take that. My appologies.


Strawman much? My argument was that the Ranger had strategic initiative, and I'll give you a goddamned cookie if you can quote me mentioning Ranger archery ever, because I intentionally made no mention of how that strategic initiative would be leveraged. Even if the Paladin wins in ranged damage, he has no way to make that worth anything against the Ranger. Power you can't use is no power at all.

4th Level Divination renders Spot and Listen irrelevent? I'm fairly certain Ranger gets access to all the same divination blocking measures a wizard gets, no? Or is Nondetection native on the Ranger list not enough?

Oh! More arguments about how you get cool damage stuff. Charging something you can't find sounds like a great strategy! Lucky for me I've got plenty of Skillpoints for Knowledge Devotion if I were to be so crass as to require dealing damage at any point.

Summons and companions? Psh. You don't want to go down that road with someone who has Knowledge (Nature), Track, and Wild Empathy as native features, ontop of that sweet Urban Companion which is essentially a free Familiar. Paladins get a single silly summon, whereas a Ranger potentially gets every animal monster in any MM if he wants to.

Getting a nice free magic weapon, sweet, except any weapon a Ranger holds can be Bane against a favored enemy. Oh, and Rangers can take organizations as Favored Enemies too, as an optional rule (Cityscape or CmpScound). Arrogant overbearing zealots who try to use muscle to force me to act like them sounds like a good one. Maybe my Ranger hunts Paladins.

The Paladin has nothing that a Ranger doesn't have, except an arbitrary moral code.

1: You never said in any way that the Ranger was superior. Everything they have, Paladin has access to except for a familiar and 5th or higher spellslots. And mystic Ranger doesnt count

2: Counter Divinations are much higher level then the divinations themselves, higher then 4th level at any rate.

3: Again, you are saying things, not proving

4: You are claiming that a ranger has good summons. No. Bubs the Commoner has good summons, ranger has mooks. The familiar is loosing you the best ally ranger gets one on one AND you dont have worthwhile DCs, your summon spells conjure tissuepaper, and Knowledge has no applicable uses outside of identification in the rules.If you are talking about WIild Empathy diplomancy, still doesnt work because everything worthwhile is either Engineered (Battle Titan) or Natively Hostile (Dire anything)

5: Your ranger wouldnt be alive for very long if he has Knights of the Mystic Fire on his hated enemy list. having the LG/CG Happy go lucky Paladin of Mystra+Milil hunting you is nothing compared to what the LE Paladin of Mystra will do to you, And theres no way in hell you have SotAO as a feat if you picked Knights of the Mystic Fire, because a ranger has to be a member of the Order of Shooting Stars to get SotAO, and thats a subdivision of the KoMF.

[dextercorvia]

Please, excuse me for my ignorance, but why he have Simple Weapon Proficiency instead Wizard Weapon Proficiency, and since when IUS is "metamagic feat, an item creation feat, or Spell Mastery"


Dunno on simple weapon prof, but improved unarmed can be gotten for the fighter bonus feat sub in UA ( IIRC? ). You give up scribe scroll and wizard bonus feats to pick up fighter bonus feats as wizard level rate. Gotta qualify for feat.

Exactly. I swapped Scribe Scroll for Improved Unarmed Strike using the UA Variant. Then I took Combat Reflexes as my level 1 feat. I have two flaws which got my Stand Still, and Simple Weapon Proficiencies(as a feat).

I used SWP since I needed a reach weapon, and a close quarters weapon. (Actually I never used the close quarters weapon, but I was prepared.) You need a BAB of +1 to take EWP-Spiked Chain, and armor spikes weren't really an option. So, I opted for a reach weapon, and Unarmed Strike if they got close. Wizards, like monks, aren't proficient with their unarmed strikes, so SWP got me both with one feat.

[Talya]

• Combines well with Wizard for superior spell selection.


Unnecessary. Assuming you houserule that they can't just start scribing into any spellbook that they buy, using a feat for magical training is better than wasting a whole level.


• Armor and shield goes out the window.
Armor does not. Wizard/sorcerer spells you cast from your divine slots using sword of the arcane order are still divine spells, and do not suffer from arcane spell failure.
Rangers never used shields anyway.



• Melee combat difficult to optimize.
It's as difficult as taking the wildshape ACF. As the Mystic ranger source is far more obscure than the wildshape ranger variant (which is SRD), i think if you can manage one, you can manage the other.

Now, you try to address this in your subpoints, but they're nothing more than your opinion, and I disagree with all of them. The spell has nothing to do with multiclassing ranger and wizard, apart from the tertiary effect of caster level mixing. RAW is also RAI here, SotAO it simply allows you to memorize wizard spells you have access to from a spellbook into your ranger spell slots. They are still divine spells (casting from INT doesn't matter - archivist also uses INT), as the feat doesn't say otherwise. I see nothing to indicate difference in RAI from RAW here.

One thing I've found with Mystic Ranger - SotAO goes unused a lot, even though I'm playing an archer-mystic ranger who has it. The reason? The accellerated spell progression is great, but you're still getting access to wizard spells at a sorcerer progression rate for 10 levels, and not really pulling ahead of anybody else. The real gems here are the higher level ranger spells. With splatbook access, there are some incredlbe Level 3&4 ranger spells, that are intended for late game use, that come online quite early using mystic ranger.

[toapat]

Unnecessary. Assuming you houserule that they can't just start scribing into any spellbook that they buy, using a feat for magical training is better than wasting a whole level.

technically, RAW, it has to be a Wizard's spellbook, so even Magical Training doesnt work.

I honestly dont see any DM enforcing that, and i can see the KoMF having wizards paid to have a high Forgery skill and scribing books for the members of the order.

[Talya]

Magical training gives you a wizard spellbook.

By RAW, so does 15gp, however (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm). I believe even magical training is entirely unnecessary. Your spellcraft skill is the lone requirement for scribing spells into a spellbook.

[dextercorvia]

technically, RAW, it has to be a Wizard's spellbook, so even Magical Training doesnt work.

I honestly dont see any DM enforcing that, and i can see the KoMF having wizards paid to have a high Forgery skill and scribing books for the members of the order.

The spellbook is the least of your worries. You can prepare from a "borrowed" spellbook. So, you spend a little WBL getting Wizards to make copies of their spellbook. That isn't much of a hindrance.

Edit: And no, the RAW is that it has to be a Wizard spell prepared from a spellbook, not prepared from a Wizard's spellbook. You could, in theorey use a WuJen's or Chameleon's Spellbook, so long as the spell was on the Wizard list.

[CombatOwl]

Good point, but read the surprise round rules, please. You can't full attack in the surprise round. Without Master hunter, which requires having Favored Enemy (no freebooters), the ranger won't down the wizard in a singular hit.

A) If you're playing a guide, you're not playing a freebooter. Remember; the ranger does not require any damage boosts from his class abilities to rocket tag that wizard. None of the math I did even included favored enemy bonuses.

B) This is the same situation as the Infiltrator, where it was noted that archetypes which replace class features may include abilities that also meet the qualifications for later abilities. It depends on the wording of the ability, and there is no reason whatsoever to think that master hunter would not apply to the target of a freebooter's bane, as would quarry. But again, even if we ignore that, this wouldn't turn out well for the wizard.

C) Alright, let's think about this for a moment. The wizard is a diviner, so he knows something is up. He doesn't necessarily know what's going on. He gets to act in the surprise round, but he doesn't know what he needs to act against. So the stealthed ranger readies an action. The wizard, being a wizard, thinks "danger!" and casts either a teleportation spell or some sort of divination to figure out what's going on. Note; his simulacrum does not get to act in the surprise round. The ranger's readied action goes off, which was to attack the wizard if he tried to cast something. The wizard then has to make (on average) a DC 41 + Spell Level concentration check. Now, this is a Pathfinder concentration check, so he only gets his level and stat bonus to the roll. We'll give the wizard a 30 int for the same reasons the ranger has a 30 strength, giving him a +30 to the check. So he has a 45% or less chance of getting that spell off--45% only if he is doing a 0th level spell, which seems unlikely. Even if he's only using a 5th level spell (say, teleport), that's only a 20% chance of making it work. Now we get to the first round of combat. The ranger wins initiative again, and plugs the wizard before that solar gets its shield other off. Now, maybe that wizard is rolling around with his solar holding a shield other on him all the time--possible by the rules--but now you're getting into a very specific sort of counter to this ranger. That's a far cry from the notion that wizards are just so much more powerful than rangers that to suggest that either could rocket tag the other at level 20 is foolish nonsense. If that wizard isn't a diviner, or picks something that doesn't have shield other, he's going to get rocket tagged in the above scenario. By a lone ranger with a (by 20th level standards) crappy bow, who isn't even counting large portions of his class features.

Also, the ranger could just precede his attack by shouting "Hail there, traveler!" as loudly as possible and taking surprise rounds out of the equation. You only get to act in the surprise round if there is a surprise round, and the ranger making everyone aware of his presence eliminates the surprise round entirely. The diviner ability just lets you always count as aware in surprise rounds, it doesn't guarantee a surprise round. Nothing about the ranger's ability to one-shot the wizard in a full round requires him to be hidden. The only thing that spoils it is the theoretical possibility that the wizard might have a simulacrum with shield other--which is getting rather too specific to argue that the contest is inherently in the wizard's favor.


Special senses. See below. Also, the similacrum text allows for a level 20 resulting creature (20 CL x2 max target HD, cut the result in half).

The wizard would have been better off using himself as a simulacrum. At least with that there is a 50% chance that the ranger would rocket tag the wrong target.

[quote]Solar has regeneration, and can cast shield other. The wizard takes half damage. Hour/level. That's even if they lose half of their casting.

You're getting into an awful lot of "ifs" to argue that the wizard is so superior that the contest is laughable.


Pseudodragons have blindsense, and are cheap as dirt.

Please, they don't have blind-sense at hundreds of feet.


Faerie Dragons simulacrum casts as a third level sorcerer. They're really cheap, too.

Third level sorcerer isn't going to change that contest. The DCs are laughable for a 20th level character and the awful no-save-and-sucks at low level were taken out of Pathfinder. Best he could do is put invisibility on the wizard, but the simulacrum gets its own initiative so that doesn't matter.

The only simulacrum you've mentioned that would prevent the wizard from being killed in one round is the solar having shield other up. Which is now bringing us into some absurdly specific circumstances. Must be a diviner with a solar simulacrum holding shield other up all the time, etc. Whereas the ranger must be... a guide who learned archery. Might as well just assume the ranger has a [wizard's race] bane bow with [wizard's race] greater slaying arrows. I mean, even with shield other that wizard dies to 910 damage. Even if he makes every save he'd take 910 damage. With shield other up, that would kill both the wizard and the solar. 7 greater slaying arrows of a humanoid type is only 28,000. Totally in the price range for a 20th level ranger.


Uh, duh and or hello! The point is the feat tax for running an archer can really hurt sometimes. You're suckered into the cookie cutter feats without gaining any real gems in return.

Except having one of the highest damage outputs in the game, short of charging vital striking cavaliers with a lance. Ranger happens to lower the feat tax by quite a lot.


Hammer the gap isn't particularly impressive. Assuming every hit in full attack hit with haste and rapid shot, you have +15 damage.

One feat with no penalty for an extra +15 damage per round? That's quite feat efficient.


With a decent knowledge devotion (+2 damage with a weepy 16), you could get 12 damage, not to mention the bonus to hit. It comes online much earlier without a hard BAB requirement. The skill points hurt unless you're int based, but you should have points in knowledge for the things you fight.

More investment for a weaker bonus. That's not efficient.


For the less intelligent, Law Devotion would aid greatly in for a fight. I'm more of a Trickery Devotion or Travel Devotion guy, myself. I like having other things to do other than "I attack."

Feats are for establishing how you attack.

[toapat]

The spellbook is the least of your worries. You can prepare from a "borrowed" spellbook. So, you spend a little WBL getting Wizards to make copies of their spellbook. That isn't much of a hindrance.

i was thinking that the forgery check was to write it as the paladin/Rangers's spellbook.

granted, just keeping the DCs for upto 4th level spell inscription is much easier and cheaper.


*Snip*

You are trying to debate optimization against one of the best people at it on this forum. you have already lost.

[Talya]

Edit: And no, the RAW is that it has to be a Wizard spell prepared from a spellbook, not prepared from a Wizard's spellbook. You could, in theorey use a WuJen's or Chameleon's Spellbook, so long as the spell was on the Wizard list.

Besides, "Spellbook, Wizard's" is the name of the item, purchasable for 15gp. It has nothing directly to do with the class, except that Wizards use them.

[CombatOwl]

You are trying to debate optimization against one of the best people at it on this forum. you have already lost.

Nothing he's proposed so far is beyond the capabilities of an archery ranger to solo. Not even a particularly well optimized archery ranger. But you're right, it's probably pointless. I'm sure there is some absurdly specific combination of feats, simulacrums, and class abilities that could theoretically be taken that will allow the wizard to flee the encounter, and so therefore all of that is, of course, the only rational choice that any wizard is likely to make.

[Talya]

You know, Snowbluff knows his stuff, but he's not always right.

He may be right here, I'm not really paying attention. I just object to the suggestion that if one is debating a master, they might as well shut up, because they've already lost. (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority)

Someday, someone might even out-Tippy Tippy.

[toapat]

Nothing he's proposed so far is beyond the capabilities of an archery ranger to solo. Not even a particularly well optimized archery ranger. But you're right, it's probably pointless. I'm sure there is some absurdly specific combination of feats, simulacrums, and class abilities that could theoretically be taken that will allow the wizard to flee the encounter, and so therefore all of that is, of course, the only rational choice that any wizard is likely to make.

Archery has 2 paths: Swift Hunter, and Arcane Permafrost Archer. Swift Hunter is Innately DEAD vs the wizard. the Permafrost Archer is a Wizard himself. The only other thing is a Targeteer variant Fighter that will Instagib anything, but this is PF, so no.

Astral Projection works anywhere in PF, and there is no RAW way to sever the silver cord. You will never be fighting a wizard directly as a Ranger unless you can cast Planar travel spells, because there is no wizard to kill, just an astral projection. And this is for very unoptimal choices of invulnerability.

[Segev]

Well, to be fair, with only 4th level spells available, he is limited to lesser celerity, which only gives him a move action to find cover.

A ranger who wins init (which is doable, but hard, for reasons already given) can possibly surprise-round murder the wizard before the wizard has access to 5th level spells. Once he has Contingency, a wizard all but certainly will have a contingent Dimension Door or Teleport to get him out of danger.

But at 7th level, he's only got up to 4th level spells. He doesn't yet have the "mid-level" "I win" spells that ensure no wizard is ever really in danger.

[Snowbluff]

You know, Snowbluff knows his stuff, but he's not always right.

He may be right here, I'm not really paying attention. I just object to the suggestion that if one is debating a master, they might as well shut up, because they've already lost. (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority)

Someday, someone might even out-Tippy Tippy.

I'm flattered that I could be used a fallacy. However, I really want to know what's going on. :smallsmile:

[Talya]

Well, to be fair, with only 4th level spells available, he is limited to lesser celerity, which only gives him a move action to find cover.



Wait...are we still talking Mystic Ranger? They get 5th level spells at level 10.

[Segev]

Wait...are we still talking Mystic Ranger? They get 5th level spells at level 10.

I thought we were talking about level 7 rangers and wizards. I may be confused.

[Snowbluff]

Wait...are we still talking Mystic Ranger? They get 5th level spells at level 10.

Not to mention that Lesser Celerity is a second level spell.

[Talya]

I'm flattered that I could be used a fallacy. However, I really want to know what's going on. :smallsmile:

Oh, CombatOwl replied to one of your posts that I didn't really read with a big long argument I didn't read. Toapat told him he was wrong and had lost, not due to the content of his post, but because he was arguing with YOU.

I objected on principle! :smallbiggrin:

[CombatOwl]

Archery has 2 paths: Swift Hunter, and Arcane Permafrost Archer. Swift Hunter is Innately DEAD vs the wizard. the Permafrost Archer is a Wizard himself. The only other thing is a Targeteer variant Fighter that will Instagib anything, but this is PF, so no.

Astral Projection works anywhere in PF, and there is no RAW way to sever the silver cord. You will never be fighting a wizard directly as a Ranger unless you can cast Planar travel spells, because there is no wizard to kill, just an astral projection. And this is for very unoptimal choices of invulnerability.

Pathfinder archery really only has one path, with slight variations depending on class. I guess you might classify archery bards as a different sort of path, but the feats and principles are largely the same. That one path just happens to be insanely devastating.

Any ghost touch weapon would do. Any force effect. PF silver cords are merely incorporeal. That is their only defense. it doesn't require special conditions like the 3.5e silver cords. Not sure where this meme that you can't damage incorporeal things comes from? Do your high level characters not carry some weapon or another that's been enchanted with ghost touch? Wizards usually have a low CMD--they're pretty foolish if they use Astral Projection without at least picking up Defensive Combat Training.

Alternately any magic weapon, since it still deals 50% damage to incorporeal things. The cord isn't even invisible anymore.

Pathfinder nerfs most of the "lol, I never leave my sanctum" nonsense from 3.5e. If you want to actually get things done in Pathfinder, you usually have to get up out of your chair and teleport there.

[toapat]

Pathfinder archery really only has one path, with slight variations depending on class. I guess you might classify archery bards as a different sort of path, but the feats and principles are largely the same. That one path just happens to be insanely devastating.

Its still Invisible, its still Incorporal, and it is still Undefined asto HP and hardness. and you cant claim that Alchemical silver is usable as the standard because its not Alchemical silver.

And archery in PF isnt as effective as in 3.5. It cant be when its competition is 12d6 bonus damage per round with an armor boost, Herald of the end times, or a Fighter who in a single full attack action fires NI crossbow bolts

[CombatOwl]

Its still Invisible,

Sure, but that is a solvable problem.


its still Incorporal,

Which is a non-issue for a 20th level character. Even without a ghost touch weapon, surely they have a magic weapon.


and it is still Undefined asto HP and hardness.

AKA DM's call. He'll probably just crib the stats from 3.5e except as changed by Pathfinder (for example, it no longer requires a special weapon or environmental effect--anything that damages incorporeal things works against one). So, hardness 10, HP 20. No big deal at those levels.


and you cant claim that Alchemical silver is usable as the standard because its not Alchemical silver.

No longer requires silver. Its only protection is being invisible and incorporeal.


And archery in PF isnt as effective as in 3.5. It cant be when its competition is 12d6 bonus damage per round with an armor boost,

12d6/round is 42/round on average. There are plenty of archery builds that far exceed that. The Deadly Aim feat alone will add 70 damage per round at level 20, and not available in 3.5e. You'd have a point if it was 42 per arrow in a full attack, but per round? No way. Even if you rolled all 6s, your bonus damage from that does not exceed the deadly aim feat all by itself.


Herald of the end times,

Not sure what you're referring to.


or a Fighter who in a single full attack action fires NI crossbow bolts

Name me one DM who has ever allowed the splitting hand crossbow trick in actual play.

[Doc_Maynot]

Name me one DM who has ever allowed the splitting hand crossbow trick in actual play.

*Slowly Raises Hand*

[CombatOwl]

*Slowly Raises Hand*

Really? Why?

[Snowbluff]

C) I'd like to remind everyone that if anyone is getting an ambush, it's not the ranger. For the sake of parity, if the ranger knows anything about his target, the wizard is also aware of the ranger, and is much more capable of preparing a head of time.

Also, you still can't full attack on a surprise round, where as a combination of quickened spells and immediate spells would be enough to ward a wizard.


Also, the ranger could just precede his attack by shouting "Hail there, traveler!" as loudly as possible and taking surprise rounds out of the equation. You only get to act in the surprise round if there is a surprise round, and the ranger making everyone aware of his presence eliminates the surprise round entirely. The diviner ability just lets you always count as aware in surprise rounds, it doesn't guarantee a surprise round. Nothing about the ranger's ability to one-shot the wizard in a full round requires him to be hidden. The only thing that spoils it is the theoretical possibility that the wizard might have a simulacrum with shield other--which is getting rather too specific to argue that the contest is inherently in the wizard's favor.
To be fair, it could be familiar using a wand of Shield Other. Some of them have regeneration.

Again, parity. The wizard would attack the ranger or put up a spell if he located the ranger.

You're getting into an awful lot of "ifs" to argue that the wizard is so superior that the contest is laughable.
A solar is the first thing a person with Simulacrum would make when he gets the spell.



Please, they don't have blind-sense at hundreds of feet. They have telepathy, and communicate to each other silently. It's kind of like the hive mind for drones DARPA is working on. Any creatures within an attack range or simulacrums lost could be reported to the wizard.



Third level sorcerer isn't going to change that contest. The DCs are laughable for a 20th level character and the awful no-save-and-sucks at low level were taken out of Pathfinder. Best he could do is put invisibility on the wizard, but the simulacrum gets its own initiative so that doesn't matter. You have to roll a one sometime. 100 of these is only 50 kgp. If I was aware of the attack, I would totally have them spam things like grease on ranger's equipment.


The only simulacrum you've mentioned that would prevent the wizard from being killed in one round is the solar having shield other up. Which is now bringing us into some absurdly specific circumstances. Must be a diviner with a solar simulacrum holding shield other up all the time, etc. Whereas the ranger must be... a guide who learned archery. Might as well just assume the ranger has a [wizard's race] bane bow with [wizard's race] greater slaying arrows. I mean, even with shield other that wizard dies to 910 damage. Even if he makes every save he'd take 910 damage. With shield other up, that would kill both the wizard and the solar. 7 greater slaying arrows of a humanoid type is only 28,000. Totally in the price range for a 20th level ranger.
You mean a guide in his favored terrain who happens to have the... wait, no master hunter? Even with readied shots on "casts a spell," this sucks. You can't kill the wizard in a standard action, and that's assuming he's done nothing to avoid being ambushed.

Guide doesn't even match up to the Diviner's +10 to initiative and +4 from a familiar. When speaking of potential init, the wizard seems to be winning handily. Do you have other bonuses past your higher dex that a wizard can't access?

The only assumption I am making is that the wizard is making a singular spell choice and an intelligent school choice, which is a fraction of a feat in terms of selection. I mean, for 28 kgp a wizard can have 5 simulacrums of himself as decoys. That's assuming he doesn't spend all of his free time casting Blood Money (having a Solars restore his stats and health) and making more Simulacra. This is just an example of how one spell grants a significant advantage over a ranger. I haven't otherwise touched his wibblemancy, said anything about Astral Projection, Gate, Planar Binding, Genesis, Blood Money subsidized Wishes...

To paraphrase Tippy "If a wizard makes it to level 20 without dying, he's already a better optimizer than you."



One feat with no penalty for an extra +15 damage per round? That's quite feat efficient.
You would have to hit with each attack, at -2 and iterative penalties, with the highest damage attack being done with the large penalty. If you do the math, I think the damage falls short quite easily.



More investment for a weaker bonus. That's not efficient.
Making a 16 is easy, and it doesn't require a higher level feat slot. However, this also includes an equal bonus to attack. It also can give +5 atk/dmg, which means it does twice as much damage as the above feat and grants another ~25% chance to hit.



Feats are for establishing how you attack.
Not in PF. AFAICT, no combat-centric feats offer new abilities. They merely improve upon options that are available to everyone.

Oh, CombatOwl replied to one of your posts that I didn't really read with a big long argument I didn't read. Toapat told him he was wrong and had lost, not due to the content of his post, but because he was arguing with YOU.

I objected on principle! :smallbiggrin:
Oh, he posted against me again. I thought he bowed out. To be fair, this is a little crazy.

[Vknight]

The guy is working on a slippery slope.
Because A can happen Z will happen so don't allow A.

Also I know a Wizard can easily win initiative but he won't listen too that reasoning because Rangers have higher dex.

Also leave the Paladin vs. Ranger fight alone thank you.

CombatOwl the point isn't that the ranger can counter it. But look at what the Ranger needs too counter it. The Wizard spends some time makes something and then the Ranger needs too carry around all these things too counter just one thing.
CombatOwl you must also remember that too take a readied action the Ranger has too have a higher initiative, because that determines who acts first in a surprise round.

Also he brought up hiring another Wizard too cast dispel/Anti-Magic then attacking the wizard. And hiring a Wizard too beat the opponents wizard is somehow the ranger besting the wizard/makes the wizard balanced.

Also what is the max caster level one can make a scroll and rod. And what are the Will Saves for magic items or where are they in the book.

[toapat]

12d6/round is 42/round on average. There are plenty of archery builds that far exceed that. The Deadly Aim feat alone will add 70 damage per round at level 20, and not available in 3.5e. You'd have a point if it was 42 per arrow in a full attack, but per round? No way. Even if you rolled all 6s, your bonus damage from that does not exceed the deadly aim feat all by itself.

I forgot Greater Manyshot and splitting, its 24d6/standard action to 4 targets with multi-designation possible. on a single target that is +344 damage/round

the other build is an arcane archer who uses spells like Fimbulwinter as a standard action to completely screw with their enemies.

[Sjlver]

Snowbluff would be right because he is right, not because he is an authority. The fact that he is an authority on the matter certainly doesn't hurt and I'd say it helps the credibility of the argument.

[Snowbluff]

I forgot Greater Manyshot and splitting, its 24d6/standard action to 4 targets with multi-designation possible. on a single target that is +344 damage/round In 3.5? Damage is higher for a 3.5 archer with splitting and energy bow, which can up to +20 damage per attack.


the other build is an arcane archer who uses spells like Fimbulwinter as a standard action to completely screw with their enemies.

Wasn't that a hexblade build?

[toapat]

In 3.5? Damage is higher for a 3.5 archer with splitting and energy bow, which can up to +20 damage per attack.


Wasn't that a hexblade build?

its +~344 from the weapon alone, i dont know what the other +7 worth of enhancements is that yields +7d6, but i accounted for the manditory +1 and Splitting.

the original (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=11663884&postcount=122), yes, but it spawned a few evolutionary builds that actually can do things that arent completely lock down the battlefield forever.

[CombatOwl]

I'd like to remind everyone that if anyone is getting an ambush, it's not the ranger. For the sake of parity, if the ranger knows anything about his target, the wizard is also aware of the ranger, and is much more capable of preparing a head of time.

Nothing I have stated here requires any of the above. The two could be standing a hundred feet apart on an open field and the ranger could still rocket tag him by winning initiative. As you point out, it would actually be easier for the Ranger in this case because he could open with a full round volley of death.


A solar is the first thing a person with Simulacrum would make when he gets the spell.

Where are you getting an ice sculpture of a solar from? The material component of the Pathfinder Simulacrum is quite a bit harder to cough up because it has to specifically be an ice sculpture of the target--a specific solar, as it were. What Solar is going to stand around and let you carve an ice sculpture of it? I mean, yeah, you could probably eventually get one if you really wanted to and were high enough level, but that's hardly the first thing on the list unless you planned on not using simulacrums for awhile. I've been playing D&D for over two decades now. I have literally never seen anyone playing a wizard who walked around every day with a solar simulacrum shielding him.

Also, how is this 11 HD solar surviving your encounters when it rolls around with shield other on all the time? Its regeneration doesn't apply against the damage from shield other, and it has fewer hit points than you do. You not only have to get an ice sculpture of a solar, you have to keep getting ice sculptures of solars every time some random encounter rolls your simulacrum. Every time that thing gets destroyed you're looking at 11,500gp lost and another quest to go carve a new ice sculpture of a solar. It's highly impractical. This was a valid strategy in 3.5e because of the easier material components, but not in Pathfinder. Simulacrums of common creatures are one thing, simulacrums of exotic ones are quite another. Even if you had a captive solar in your laboratory, that's just inviting outsiders to hassle you. Impractical.

Let us not forget also that simulacrums are still quite specifically made of ice. There is nothing in the description that even remotely suggests that they do not melt in above-freezing weather like normal ice. Admittedly, this is up to the DM since there are no first party rules on ice melting.


They have telepathy, and communicate to each other silently. It's kind of like the hive mind for drones DARPA is working on. Any creatures within an attack range or simulacrums lost could be reported to the wizard.

Another use for that ranger's infinite horde of friendly woodland animals (or animal companion). Blindsense just tells you were a creature is, not anything about the creature.


You have to roll a one sometime. 100 of these is only 50 kgp.

Well, it is more practical than the Solar.


If I was aware of the attack, I would totally have them spam things like grease on ranger's equipment.

And there's about a dozen ways he can foil them ever noticing him till he popped out and spoiled the surprise round. If nothing else, Burrow would work, and it's only a 3rd level spell. The ground blocks line of effect, so blindsense doesn't work. He would obviously need a necklace of adaptation, but I've barely even spent any of his money.


You mean a guide in his favored terrain who happens to have the... wait, no master hunter? Even with readied shots on "casts a spell," this sucks.

It's probably about the best he could do with a standard action--there are a few spells that might be helpful, but none more than hindering the wizard's casting. Which is, again, why he should spoil the surprise round and just full attack. Also, there's a ranger spell that solves that favored terrain problem (Terrain Bond, hour/2 levels), so that's a non-factor.


You can't kill the wizard in a standard action, and that's assuming he's done nothing to avoid being ambushed.

Again, why he would be better off spoiling the surprise and using a full round action.


Guide doesn't even match up to the Diviner's +10 to initiative and +4 from a familiar.

Sorry, sorry, it was Warden, not guide. Guide gets something better than favored enemy, but I meant Warden above. He actually does give up favored enemy, but he gains up to five favored terrains (so a +10 to initiative with Terrain Bond). He gets an additional +2 from being able to hear himself after level 4 (because of some stupid interactions about who counts as an ally--you are your own ally). That's +12. It's likely that the ranger would have a better dex than the wizard which should make up the difference. Traits, races, and feats are the same for both classes for initiative bonuses. Both classes can Anticipate Peril. If he really needed to mess with this, the ranger could buy a dueling cestus and still use his bow, which is actually reasonable since it's cheap and lets him threaten adjacent squares without snap shot.


When speaking of potential init, the wizard seems to be winning handily. Do you have other bonuses past your higher dex that a wizard can't access?

It seems to be that the ranger would eck out +1 over the wizard assuming the wizard optimized for con rather than dex as his secondary attribute.


The only assumption I am making is that the wizard is making a singular spell choice and an intelligent school choice,

Only assumption about the ranger is that he picked an archetype and focused on a bow. But you are also assuming quite a bit more than that by devoting large portions of your starting gold to simulacrums and that your character regularly acquires ice sculptures of solars and such. Again, I wasn't even giving that ranger particularly good equipment. An archery ranger at level 20 with a +5 bow? Please?


which is a fraction of a feat in terms of selection. I mean, for 28 kgp a wizard can have 5 simulacrums of himself as decoys.

Actually 50k--they cannot be assumed to last forever because eventually they would either be destroyed or melt.


That's assuming he doesn't spend all of his free time casting Blood Money (having a Solars restore his stats and health) and making more Simulacra. This is just an example of how one spell grants a significant advantage over a ranger. I haven't otherwise touched his wibblemancy, said anything about Astral Projection, Gate, Planar Binding, Genesis, Blood Money subsidized Wishes...

Ranger's got money, means he's got wizardry. Anything you can do, he can do 1/day. Anyone at that level can pull stupid spell tricks.


To paraphrase Tippy "If a wizard makes it to level 20 without dying, he's already a better optimizer than you."

And Tippy is flat out just plain wrong about that in 99% of cases. Funny how all them sub-optimal fighters, ranger, rogues, etc make it to 20th level without being optimized wizards. Might suggest unoptimized wizards can make it there too.


You would have to hit with each attack, at -2 and iterative penalties,

Not really a problematic assumption at that level against a wizard who isn't buffed for combat.


with the highest damage attack being done with the large penalty. If you do the math, I think the damage falls short quite easily.

My calculation didn't even include hammer the gap. Note how I point out that it does not include critical hits, hammer the gap, favored enemy bonuses, etc. That's over 210 average off a **** weapon with nothing but a high strength and deadly aim. Plus 7d6 in elemental damage which may or may not be resisted. Literally, I'm not even counting everything and I've got your wizard's HP beat.


Oh, he posted against me again. I thought he bowed out. To be fair, this is a little crazy.

Well, I admit I'm getting a bit tired of you ignoring whole portions of the argument, such as the parts where I'm not even including the things you're arguing about int he calculation. I'm being super conservative on this estimate, and it's pretty clear the wizard is in danger of dying in the first round. Which is pretty much always the case for any contest between 20th level optimized characters.

Wizards aren't high tier because of their combat potential, they're high tier because of their versatility. There's lots of stuff that can kick the **** out of them in a straight numbers game. Rangers included. Wizards are Tier 1 because they can avoid this ever happening, but were it to happen, it's pretty clear the ranger could very easily kill the wizard or at least force them to emergency teleport out.

[Talya]

Well, I admit I'm getting a bit tired of you ignoring whole portions of the argument

To go the other way, I do this frequently. Sometimes a person's argument against me is so convoluted and nonsensical there's no point to addressing some portion of it. Much like at a trial, the defense and prosecution don't go back and forth ad nauseum, sometimes the crossexamination simply doesn't do enough to contest their point, so you ignore it.

I only address the items I feel need to be addressed in any given post.

(With the same caveat as before - I didn't read the argument in question.)

[Vhaidara]

And its 3rd/3.5 Edition no Pathfinder.

And thus, we are using the 3.5 Simulacrum, not the PF one. And all of your various archetype bonuses are gone.

[CombatOwl]

The guy is working on a slippery slope.
Because A can happen Z will happen so don't allow A.

Also I know a Wizard can easily win initiative but he won't listen too that reasoning because Rangers have higher dex.

Rangers get some stupid class bonuses to initiative if you keep terrain bond up. Which, at level 20, is totally doable. Wardens specifically are right up there with diviners. Literally the diviner gets a +14 init bonus from his class @ 20, the Warden gets a +12 @ 20. They both have the same ability to automatically take 20 an initiative check. It seems reasonable to assume that an archery focused character can squeak out an extra +2 or +3 over the wizard regarding dex. They can both do stupid things with initiative.


CombatOwl the point isn't that the ranger can counter it. But look at what the Ranger needs too counter it.

... picking an archetype, the one count-um martial archery chain, and a crappy bow? I'm not really giving the ranger very much here. His simulacrums cost more than that archer's entire specified loadout. There's no countering here--ranger wins initiative, he plugs the wizard. Wizard wins initiative, he plugs the ranger. This is how 20th level combat works. Pretty much anyone who focuses on fighting can one-shot anyone else in an even contest in one round. Mounted chargers, pounce barbarians, archers, wizards, they all have options for one-shotting pretty much anyone.


The Wizard spends some time makes something and then the Ranger needs too carry around all these things too counter just one thing.

Carry around what? A really bad bow? I've not given the ranger hardly any equipment.


CombatOwl you must also remember that too take a readied action the Ranger has too have a higher initiative, because that determines who acts first in a surprise round.

Both of them have ludicrous initiative, and it's very likely the archer's is one or two higher than the wizard. Which is important, since the initiative is automatic here.


Also he brought up hiring another Wizard too cast dispel/Anti-Magic then attacking the wizard. And hiring a Wizard too beat the opponents wizard is somehow the ranger besting the wizard/makes the wizard balanced.

I never mentioned a damn thing about hiring anyone. Requirements for killing a wizard: the martial archery build, the warden archetype, a ****ty +2 speed bow, being 20th level. Those are actually the only things I've made a requirement here. If the wizard isn't a diviner, then you can pick pretty much any archer archetype instead.

[Vhaidara]

Rangers get some stupid class bonuses to initiative if you keep terrain bond up. Which, at level 20, is totally doable. Wardens specifically are right up there with diviners. Literally the diviner gets a +14 init bonus from his class @ 20, the Warden gets a +12 @ 20. They both have the same ability to automatically take 20 an initiative check. It seems reasonable to assume that an archery focused character can squeak out an extra +2 or +3 over the wizard regarding dex. They can both do stupid things with initiative.

PF, irrelevant


Both of them have ludicrous initiative, and it's very likely the archer's is one or two higher than the wizard. Which is important, since the initiative is automatic here.

Not in 3.5


I never mentioned a damn thing about hiring anyone. Requirements for killing a wizard: the martial archery build, the warden archetype, a ****ty +2 speed bow, being 20th level. Those are actually the only things I've made a requirement here. If the wizard isn't a diviner, then you can pick pretty much any archer archetype instead.

not PF, no archetypes.

[CombatOwl]

PF, irrelevant



Not in 3.5



not PF, no archetypes.

This tangent is about pathfinder ranger vs. pathfinder wizard, for reasons discussed when I started it. If you're going to argue rangers are better than wizards, you obviously aren't talking about 3.5e.

[Snowbluff]

Wow, these posts are bloated. Thanks, Talya.

Read Simulacrum. 500 GP per HD of the simulacrum, not of the original creature.

Read Bloody Money. I don't have to pay for the simulacra. Not really.

As for buying wizard services, that's not the ranger winning. We know this.

For the numbers game thing, I don't know about optimizing wizard AC. I know he can match all but ~12 of the ranger's dex. He can carry all the same items for init, too. Wearing some armor with reduced ASF (Arcane Armor Training? Maybe), using Limited Wish to buff the AC of the Buckler and Armor. When all is said and done, the Ranger shouldn't have 100% to hit.

Hammer the Gap is actually a seperate argument. If you want, I can crunch the numbers and give a numerical objective level of how good/bad it is. 18+10+6= 34 dex, with a 14 bonus, 20 BAB, +5 from weapon sounds good, right?

[CombatOwl]

As for buying wizard services, that's not the ranger winning. We know this.

Fine, he buys cleric services. At 20th level it's about your treasure and initiative bonus anyway.


For the numbers game thing, I don't know about optimizing wizard AC. I know he can match all but ~12 of the ranger's dex. He can carry all the same items for init, too. Wearing some armor with reduced ASF (Arcane Armor Training? Maybe), using Limited Wish to buff the AC of the Buckler and Armor. When all is said and done, the Ranger shouldn't have 100% to hit.

It is unlikely that an optimized wizard will use ASF, because it requires a swift action to use meaning no quickened spells. You put on bracers of armor and a ring of protection and that's about all you get. It's not very high. Exactly where it is depends on how much you want to spend on what is usually irrelevant protections. It is possible that the last arrow has a reasonable chance of missing. However, I was also not considering critical hits in that calculation. That's probably a wash since he'd be using a 19-20/x3 weapon and will almost certainly confirm any earlier crits.


Hammer the Gap is actually a seperate argument. If you want, I can crunch the numbers and give a numerical objective level of how good/bad it is. 18+10+6= 34 dex, with a 14 bonus, 20 BAB, +5 from weapon sounds good, right?

Not really much of a point. It's widely regarded as extremely feat efficient because it's a fair bit of extra damage that costs nothing but a feat. 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 is still +15, even if the last hit misses--which is really the only one likely to miss.

The problem here is that it's not actually required for this scenario. Even if you didn't take hammer the gap, even if you don't have favored enemy bonuses, even if you haven't boosted your strength with tomes, even if you use a ****ty +2 speed bow, it's still doing enough damage to kill a wizard who started with 16 con (who has a +6 con item), on average. Rangers aren't even particularly good archers in PF without their favored enemy bonus, and even a bad archer is enough to kill a wizard with optimal HP at the level. Admittedly, if it was another class, the initiative would be a problem--the wizard would be able to flee or wind wall to save himself. But the particular case given here--a pathfinder ranger with Warden faces a pathfinder wizard (diviner) without anything but very long term buffs up... the ranger has good odds of being able to win that combat. Because he's probably going to edge out the wizard by +1 or +2 init and can throw enough damage to win. It is possible that the last shot misses, in which case the wizard will likely be able to turn that around on the archer.

Even being generous here, that wizard can easily get rocket tagged in this encounter. It's not a slam dunk victory as was originally portrayed. Absolutely the wizard has more options on how to deal with this or avoid it--that's the point of a wizard. But they certainly are not the kings of the combat numbers game.

[Vknight]

This tangent is about pathfinder ranger vs. pathfinder wizard, for reasons discussed when I started it. If you're going to argue rangers are better than wizards, you obviously aren't talking about 3.5e.

I don't care CombatOwl... go whine about that somewhere else not here.
This is 3/3.5 because that is the system in question, pathfinder is irrelevant too this.
Finally your assuming the Ranger with a bow setup too counter all wizard defenses. Which is kind of hard.
Also the Wizard at level 20 doesn't go out and adventure he hides away he can bring out armies with summon. Gate in a Solar too fight for him and leave directions too an Astral Projection

I was also talking about the guy who is claiming a Ranger beats a Wizard. His solution or at least one of them was hiring a Wizard.

[Snowbluff]

Fine, he buys cleric services. At 20th level it's about your treasure and initiative bonus anyway.
*facedesk* That's not any better. Not a win for the Ranger, either. :smallsigh:



It is unlikely that an optimized wizard will use ASF, because it requires a swift action to use meaning no quickened spells. You put on bracers of armor and a ring of protection and that's about all you get. It's not very high. Exactly where it is depends on how much you want to spend on what is usually irrelevant protections. It is possible that the last arrow has a reasonable chance of missing. However, I was also not considering critical hits in that calculation. That's probably a wash since he'd be using a 19-20/x3 weapon and will almost certainly confirm any earlier crits.
Bracers of Armor? Maybe, depending on the build. +8 bracers +5 Nat Armor, +5 def, +6 Shield from mithril buckler (Magic Vestment Limited Wish), some dexterity mod(variable, but at least 21 dexterity) isn't much, though. This turns out to be 38ish. 51 would be a desirable , but iteratives past the second attack can miss without a 1.


Not really much of a point. It's widely regarded as extremely feat efficient because it's a fair bit of extra damage that costs nothing but a feat. 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 is still +15, even if the last hit misses--which is really the only one likely to miss.

I don't care how you use it. This is a bit about PF feats, which agitate me. I was going to run the numbers with the average values of AC at various level to determine how much damage it actually adds, or at least determine the odds it actually does 15 damage (which relies on many conditional calculations). All to show why a 3.5 exclusive feat is better.

Numbers are something I am not to concerned with in the end. You can claim Numbers King, but that was never what made a Wizard good.

[Vhaidara]

I was also talking about the guy who is claiming a Ranger beats a Wizard. His solution or at least one of them was hiring a Wizard.

Then point out that your Wizard could hire a Ranger to kill the Ranger. It's only fair, since the Ranger gets to hire a Wizard to kill the Wizard.

[toapat]

Fine, he buys cleric services. At 20th level it's about your treasure and initiative bonus anyway.

Buying the services of any other class is forbidden in class vs class debates

[Talya]

But... Lex Luthor is physically stronger than Superman because he can buy Kryptonite!

[eggynack]

Also I know a Wizard can easily win initiative but he won't listen too that reasoning because Rangers have higher dex.
Why exactly are you arguing against this person? It honestly doesn't seem worthwhile, if he's doing things like this. I mean, you can demonstratively prove to him that he's wrong on this count. If he's just going to ignore the things you say, why say things at all?

[Doc_Maynot]

Buying the services of any other class is forbidden in class vs class debates

Not saying i'm for or against either side, just want to bring up a point.

Wouldn't magic items be reliant of another class unless you made them yourself?

[Talya]

Why exactly are you arguing against this person? It honestly doesn't seem worthwhile, if he's doing things like this. I mean, you can demonstratively prove to him that he's wrong on this count. If he's just going to ignore the things you say, why say things at all?

Most people were trained to debate on the Internet?

[Vhaidara]

Not saying i'm for or against either side, just want to bring up a point.

Wouldn't magic items be reliant of another class unless you made them yourself?

That isn't hiring the services of. Equipment is fine, the problem is when your reasoning for a Ranger being stronger than a Wizard is that the Ranger can hire a Wizard to help him fight the Wizard. Or rather, to fight the Wizard for him.

[toapat]

Not saying i'm for or against either side, just want to bring up a point.

Wouldn't magic items be reliant of another class unless you made them yourself?


That isn't hiring the services of. Equipment is fine, the problem is when your reasoning for a Ranger being stronger than a Wizard is that the Ranger can hire a Wizard to help him fight the Wizard. Or rather, to fight the Wizard for him.

Alternatively: An arguement for all magic items without getting classes involved: its all crafted by a neutral third party of Midgard dwarves.

[CombatOwl]

*facedesk* That's not any better. Not a win for the Ranger, either. :smallsigh:

Why not? It's using an option at his disposal. I mean, if you want to argue about all these long term buffs and such--bonuses and creatures that last for days--you kind of have to acknowledge that the ranger could just devote some of his treasure to the task of solving that deficiency.


Bracers of Armor? Maybe, depending on the build. +8 bracers +5 Nat Armor, +5 def, +6 Shield from mithril buckler (Magic Vestment Limited Wish), some dexterity mod(variable, but at least 21 dexterity) isn't much, though. This turns out to be 38ish. 51 would be a desirable , but iteratives past the second attack can miss without a 1.

I don't care how you use it. This is a bit about PF feats, which agitate me. I was going to run the numbers with the average values of AC at various level to determine how much damage it actually adds, or at least determine the odds it actually does 15 damage (which relies on many conditional calculations). All to show why a 3.5 exclusive feat is better.

Numbers are something I am not to concerned with in the end. You can claim Numbers King, but that was never what made a Wizard good.

I agree that it isn't the point of playing a wizard, which is why I think this whole line of argumentation is rather absurd. Obviously the ranger is going to kill that wizard if it becomes a numbers game. Why? Because combat numbers are what martial characters are designed to be good at doing. Obviously no wizard worth their salt will actually be caught in this situation--because the whole point of a wizard is to have enough options to avoid this sort of thing. In actual late game play, martial supremacy doesn't mean much because you just avoid the situations where martial supremacy means anything. But if you want to compare whether one can ace the other reliably, you have to have some common basis for comparison. You kind of have to assume that neither side has used all of the stupid tricks available because if they had A) the contest would never happen and B) late game gold trumps everything but initiative bonuses.


Buying the services of any other class is forbidden in class vs class debates

So, is equipment allowed? Because if it is, he can buy one-use items or 1/day items to fill his spellcasting needs. Arguing 20th level characters without considering what their gold brings to the table is silly. The class features don't exist in a vacuum--actual characters have equipment to fill in weak points.

[eggynack]

Why not? It's using an option at his disposal. I mean, if you want to argue about all these long term buffs and such--bonuses and creatures that last for days--you kind of have to acknowledge that the ranger could just devote some of his treasure to the task of solving that deficiency.
Because it's not a thing that the ranger makes significantly better use of than the wizard does, so the wizard can also hire a cleric friend. I mean, I suppose there's some sort of argument about ideal class synergies, but it's an argument that goes to silly places, with the wizard bringing in a psion, and the ranger tossing out a druid, and then the wizard teams up with pun-pun, because why not? Rangers have ranger stuff, which generally means all of their class features, including feats. We tend to accept the use of WBL, despite the fact that it relies on outside support in most cases, because some form of magic mart is going to exist in what I believe to be the majority of games. Hiring on other classes is just pointless, because showing that a cleric plus a ranger can beat a wizard tells us nothing about how good a ranger is. Realistically, based on what we know of the game's balance, it would only tell us how good a cleric is.

[toapat]

So, is equipment allowed? Because if it is, he can buy one-use items or 1/day items to fill his spellcasting needs. Arguing 20th level characters without considering what their gold brings to the table is silly. The class features don't exist in a vacuum--actual characters have equipment to fill in weak points.

Anything a Midgard Dwarf can craft with NI levels of expert is allowed so long as it does not Exceed maximum WBL.

thus, anything covered under Craft Magic Arms and Armor, Craft Wondrous Item, and Forge Ring

[animewatcha]

There are no rules that say every single character is monotheistic. A paladin of Milil and Mystra is technically non-conflicting, but only so long as its not a Paladin of Tyranny.

Spellshatter removes remove disease with an equal progression of itself, it may bast more often but its the same thing. Inspire greatness would replace the 2-5th charges but even a single use of a spell you cant prepare is superior to not having it at all. However since Inspire Competence is needed its not taken at all.

The alternatives to the mount were to point out just how much paladin has in that slot.

The only "Legitimate" issue is Dragonfire Inspiration's pre-requisite. I forgot A-Game doesnt actually take that. My appologies.

Long work day. Late night. Chiming in briefly. Will still have to read through the thread.
Say prayers to more than one deity yes. However patron deity can only be one. Gotta choose one or the other. Inspire greatness wouldn't replace if you 2th-5th if you have spellshatter. You would still need remove disease to be replaced. Some alternatives to mount also restrict what can be taken elsewhere. Song of the heart requires bardic music. I believe I saw some item in the thread you linked that enhances the inspire courage, if it has 'if you are a bard' crap, can't use with paly 20.


-edited for song of the heart-

[toapat]

Long work day. Late night. Chiming in briefly. Will still have to read through the thread.
Say prayers to more than one deity yes. However patron deity can only be one. Gotta choose one or the other. Inspire greatness wouldn't replace if you 2th-5th if you have spellshatter. You would still need remove disease to be replaced. Some alternatives to mount also restrict what can be taken elsewhere. Song of the heart requires bardic music. I believe I saw some item in the thread you linked that enhances the inspire courage, if it has 'if you are a bard' crap, can't use with paly 20.


-edited for song of the heart-

Patron Diety: Unless Faerun Explicitely states you cant, Nothing in the PHB says you cant.
Spellshatter: You saying "you cant do that" is actually homebrew.


This benefit replaces the standard paladin's remove disease class feature. If the Mystic Fire Knight would later gain an extra weekly use of remove disease, she instead gains an extra daily use of spellshatter.

The ability Itself names itself as Remove Disease (Variant)

Song of the Heart: From Smite to Song gives you bardic music: Inspire courage
The PDK armor in the thread refferenced is sold by lvl 20. And it works.
None of the mount alternatives conflict with other class features.

[animewatcha]

Patron Diety: Unless Faerun Explicitely states you cant, Nothing in the PHB says you cant.
Spellshatter: You saying "you cant do that" is actually homebrew.

The ability Itself names itself as Remove Disease (Variant)

Song of the Heart: From Smite to Song gives you bardic music: Inspire courage
The PDK armor in the thread refferenced is sold by lvl 20. And it works.
None of the mount alternatives conflict with other class features.

Deities and demigod's divine glossary page 5. Even expains it a bit more within the pages around it.

Patron Deity: The primary deity worshiped by an individual. For example, Jozan's patron deity is Pelor, for example

Translation: Choose one. Drop the other.

Spellshatter: Text from the source. Page 46.

Once per day starting at 6th level, a Mystic Fire Knight can choose to deliver a targeted greater dispel magic effect with a melee attack. The decision to use this ability must be made before the attack is rolled; if the attack misses, the effect is wasted.
If the attacks hits, treat this as if the Mystic Fire Knight had cast a targeted greater dispel magic on the creature struck, using her paladin level ( plus any arcane caster level she might have from another class ) as her caster level, up to a maximum of +20.
This benefit replace the standard paladin's remove disease class feature. If the Mystic Fire Knight would later gain an extra weekly use of remove disease, she instead gains an extra daily use of spellshatter

Translation: Can't grab anything else requiring remove disease. Locks you in at Mystra. Can't use Milil sterf. No 'remove disease (variant)'. Similar deal with Sword of the arcane order.

Song of the heart: Give you the ability to duplicate the effect. Not the actual ability of 'bardic music'. Smite to song also has no text stating that it counts of bardic music for the purposes of pre-reqs, etc. ( The lingo that some of the dodge feats get ) So while you can 'inspire courage' you can't use 'inspire courages a day' to fuel other things that require bardic musics specifically like Song of the heart .

Mount: Previous post, I jumbled a bit myself. What I meant to say was that you were coming off that a paladin had access to multiple mount-required things as once. Like having earthglade, AND sword AND etc. Switching around what ability can be used for x situation while the ranger apparently still uses 'the same thing'. Though a look back did produce a "yes it does for me.' Unicorn Mount: elf paladin. Racial exclusive that can lock out a few other acfs. Interestingly, charging smite acf requires you to have smite attempts, so if you traded that away... Few other nicnacks, like fearless mount for dragonborn's ( lowers bab, but that is more toward other things ). Lion legionnaire you get a flying lion 1/day. Ooo. You can do celestial mount, but you lose remove disease in place of it which means there is infact a confliction with Planar Paladin and no spellshattering. Looking at rest of list briefly on List of ACF from brilliant gameologists, spell-less paladin you gain better mount stuff if you give up your spellcasting. Make the wrong choices on your paladin and you come up with conflictions. There is stand fast, lose special mount to mess with divine grace ( requires you to not have traded it away ). Warded special mount. Lose use of Remove disease to up your mount.

So apparently, there are conflictions. LOL.

PDK armor: The item I was refering to was badge of valor apparently. What is this PDK armor you speak of? Cause I googled 'pdk armor dnd' and it spat out DDO. An MMO with a much different system than normal DnD.

[Doc_Maynot]

PDK armor: The item I was refering to was badge of valor apparently. What is this PDK armor you speak of? Cause I googled 'pdk armor dnd' and it spat out DDO. An MMO with a much different system than normal DnD.

I think they mean the work of Purple_Dragon_Knight (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1055926)

It is a... Thisledown-padded Mithral Breastplate +1 of Nimbleness and Twilight, with Armor Lubricant

Ends up having... AC +6; Max Dex +7; Armor Check Penalty -0; Arcane Spell Failure 0%

[animewatcha]

So what does that armor have to do with bardic music sterf that toapat is desperately trying to hold onto, but keeps getting proven wrong about?

[Coidzor]

So, is equipment allowed? Because if it is, he can buy one-use items or 1/day items to fill his spellcasting needs. Arguing 20th level characters without considering what their gold brings to the table is silly. The class features don't exist in a vacuum--actual characters have equipment to fill in weak points.

Using your WBL to pretend that you're a wizard is basically admitting defeat, and while WBL is important, it's something everyone has, so you have to show that a character can make better use of WBL than another character.

A Wizard can use Limited Wish and Psychic Reformation or another of other tricks(IIRC, there's an oragnization that Wizards can belong to that lets them benefit from a crafting feat they don't have out of a set of them) to pick up various crafting feats and break WBL by making most anything they could want themselves. Even with crafting feats and some of the DMG II variant crafting options, Rangers won't really have the same options open to them without going and paying someone else to provide the spells while they're crafting, diluting their contribution to crafting their own items. And, as mentioned, Mystic Ranger with Sword of the Arcane Order is already cribbing from the Wizard spell list, so they're no longer really the same animal, they're just a form of Arcane Gish with some divine spells for flair. Mystic Rangers without Sword of the Arcane Order are more competitive than non-Mystic Rangers though, yes.

It's one thing to win with an army of shadesteel golem ice assassins someone else made for you. It's another thing to make that army of shadesteel golem ice assassins yourself.

Also, any money spent to try to catch up to what the wizard is able to do with various buffing options is extra money the wizard has for unique things that either the ranger has to admit they can't afford to replicate or that puts the ranger further into the hole by trying to play catch up.

[Gwendol]

Deities and demigod's divine glossary page 5. Even expains it a bit more within the pages around it.

Song of the heart: Give you the ability to duplicate the effect. Not the actual ability of 'bardic music'. Smite to song also has no text stating that it counts of bardic music for the purposes of pre-reqs, etc. ( The lingo that some of the dodge feats get ) So while you can 'inspire courage' you can't use 'inspire courages a day' to fuel other things that require bardic musics specifically like Song of the heart .

Mount: Previous post, I jumbled a bit myself. What I meant to say was that you were coming off that a paladin had access to multiple mount-required things as once. Like having earthglade, AND sword AND etc. Switching around what ability can be used for x situation while the ranger apparently still uses 'the same thing'. Though a look back did produce a "yes it does for me.' Unicorn Mount: elf paladin. Racial exclusive that can lock out a few other acfs. Interestingly, charging smite acf requires you to have smite attempts, so if you traded that away... Few other nicnacks, like fearless mount for dragonborn's ( lowers bab, but that is more toward other things ). Lion legionnaire you get a flying lion 1/day. Ooo. You can do celestial mount, but you lose remove disease in place of it which means there is infact a confliction with Planar Paladin and no spellshattering. Looking at rest of list briefly on List of ACF from brilliant gameologists, spell-less paladin you gain better mount stuff if you give up your spellcasting. Make the wrong choices on your paladin and you come up with conflictions. There is stand fast, lose special mount to mess with divine grace ( requires you to not have traded it away ). Warded special mount. Lose use of Remove disease to up your mount.



A couple of observations: From Smite to Song doesn't replace smite. It allows the character to IC instead of smiting, but you can still smite if you choose to.

The A-Game paladin doesn't claim Song of the Heart comes from IC, but from the harmonious knight sub levels.

[toapat]

Deities and demigod's divine glossary page 5. Even expains it a bit more within the pages around it.

Patron Deity: The primary deity worshiped by an individual. For example, Jozan's patron deity is Pelor, for example

Translation: Choose one. Drop the other.

Spellshatter: Text from the source. Page 46.

Translation: Can't grab anything else requiring remove disease. Locks you in at Mystra. Can't use Milil sterf. No 'remove disease (variant)'. Similar deal with Sword of the arcane order.

Your section refferenced from Deities and Demigods does not support your argument that the rules say you cant have multiple primary dieties, Nor is that definition lacking in the PHB. Unless Faerun explicitely states in the Rules you cant have multiple patron dieties, then you can.

I quoted the relevant subpassage of Spellshatter. You dont care to read it and accept it for what it is, then dont, But you cant say its not Legally still considered Remove disease when other systems are relevant.

And Variants on the mount class feature are never mentioned, because they are typically too expensive to use.

[Talya]

Your section refferenced from Deities and Demigods does not support your argument that the rules say you cant have multiple primary dieties, Nor is that definition lacking in the PHB.
Yeah, in fact the rules explicitly state you can.


Serving a Pantheon: Characters who serve a pantheon venerate several deities, asking each god for intercession in matters that reflect the god’s interest (called a portfolio). For example, a cleric that worships a pantheon based on Greek gods might ask Hermes for an expeditious retreat spell, Athena for an oracular vision, or Hades for the power to repel the undead. Clerics who choose to serve a pantheon can choose their two domains from among all the domains offered by all the deities of the pantheon (except aberrant gods—those whose worship is not sanctioned by the clerics of the pantheon as a whole). A cleric can only select an alignment domain if his alignment matches that domain. The cleric’s alignment must match the alignment of some deity in the pantheon (excluding aberrant gods).

[toapat]

Yeah, in fact the rules explicitly state you can.

I didnt actually know it explicitely said yes, but i had made sure that it never said No

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Yeah, in fact the rules explicitly state you can.

Seems to me that it says you can worship multiple gods not that you can have more than one patron deity.

Unless is specifically says you can have more than one patron deity somewhere?

[toapat]

Seems to me that it says you can worship multiple gods not that you can have more than one patron deity.

Unless is specifically says you can have more than one patron deity somewhere?

/facepalm.

no, its saying explicitly that you can worship and gain the benefits of serving multiple patron deities. its worded very different from the PHB section describing how commoners interact with the gods, being that they worship beings like Pelor Sunny as their main deity but will pay respect to rain gods or to travel gods when they need to have rain/travel.

[Talya]

Seems to me that it says you can worship multiple gods not that you can have more than one patron deity.

Unless is specifically says you can have more than one patron deity somewhere?

read it again.

If you worship a pantheon, you can pick and choose from among all the domains of that pantheon. You don't have to pick a single primary patron.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

read it again.

If you worship a pantheon, you can pick and choose from among all the domains of that pantheon. You don't have to pick a single primary patron.

No. It says you can worship multiple gods but within the game it doesn't say you can have multiple patrons.

In real life sure, people have multiple patron gods. Within the game? It does not say you can have more than one patron deity (main deity).

Like I have a supervisor who is a PM (project manager), however there are multiple PMs in my company that I can ask for assistance from since they have different area of expertise. I don't get much of a choice of who my supervisor is (though my job choice (religion in this example) did..but I do get a choice with who I get info or help from.

Also it talks about Clerics and normal people. Can Paladins choose to even serve multiple gods? Paladins tend to be more strict about everything.

[dextercorvia]

The problem you are running into is that Patron Deity isn't a defined game term. The game doesn't explicitly say you can have a single patron deity, either. It talks about serving one or more deities. The deity or deities you serve are your patron(s).

[SpawnOfMorbo]

The problem you are running into is that Patron Deity isn't a defined game term. The game doesn't explicitly say you can have a single patron deity, either. It talks about serving one or more deities. The deity or deities you serve are your patron(s).

So then it comes down to DM call... And if you have to rely on DM call for your build to work...

[toapat]

The problem you are running into is that Patron Deity isn't a defined game term. The game doesn't explicitly say you can have a single patron deity, either. It talks about serving one or more deities. The deity or deities you serve are your patron(s).

It is defined, as the primary diety of worship of the individual.

However Talya linked a passage from complete divine that explicitly states you can have Multiple gods as such.

Granted a pantheon with Milil and Mystra is not official but Faerun's pantheons are all interwoven.

Not only that, but the Dogma of Milil and the Doctrine of the Harmonious Knights is so loose that they would accept a Knight of the Mystic Fire by virtue of just being able to tell a good tale or 5. And its not like anyone dislikes having a manditory attached bard. There is probably some standard forum paperwork Milil has that requests dual patronage because it would help out both the primary deity and himself.


So then it comes down to DM call... And if you have to rely on DM call for your build to work...

Talya dropped a quote that says yes you can have multiple patrons.

[Talya]

No. It says you can worship multiple gods but within the game it doesn't say you can have multiple patrons.


That's not true. Your "Patron Deity" (as dextercorvia points out, the term is not defined in game) is generally considered to be the deity that grants the spells you cast.

The part I quoted explicitly says if you worship a pantheon, different deities will grant your spells depending what you are asking for. If you ask for a charm spell, you pray to Aphrodite or Eros, who grant the spell, whereas if you ask for protection from magic curses, you might pray to Hecate.

Furthermore, once again:
"Clerics who choose to serve a pantheon can choose their two domains from among all the domains offered by all the deities of the pantheon."

Only your "patron" can grant your domain, and you can pick two domains from among all the gods of your pantheon, not needed to be two from the same deity.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

It is defined, as the primary diety of worship of the individual.

However Talya linked a passage from complete divine that explicitly states you can have Multiple gods as such.

Granted a pantheon with Milil and Mystra is not official but Faerun's pantheons are all interwoven.

Not only that, but the Dogma of Milil and the Doctrine of the Harmonious Knights is so loose that they would accept a Knight of the Mystic Fire by virtue of just being able to tell a good tale or 5. And its not like anyone dislikes having a manditory attached bard. There is probably some standard forum paperwork Milil has that requests dual patronage because it would help out both the primary deity and himself.



Talya dropped a quote that says yes you can have multiple patrons.

Still DM call to allow it. The gods have to accept that their paladin worships multiple gods as a main deity...

So your argument still relies on DM approval. Hell just because your paladin says he has multiple patrons doesn't mean those deity acknowledge it or like it.

*because the DM can say patron means 1 deity and not multiple gods since patron isnt defined.

[Talya]

Still DM call to allow it. The gods have to accept that their paladin worships multiple gods as a main deity...

So your argument still relies on DM approval. Hell just because your paladin says he has multiple patrons doesn't mean those deity acknowledge it or like it.

The rules explicitly allow it. Therefore, it relies on the DM to disallow it. By default, worshiping of a pantheon is allowed.

Now, Faerun is unique in its rules. As a DM, I probably would be rather strict about which groupings of Faerunian gods my players chose to worship.

Still, there is already a precedent in the many Faerunian organizations that have prestige-classes/substitution levels that are devoted to multiple specific deities. (Sun Soul Monks, for instance.)

[Osiris]

I'm sure this has been mentioned before, but:
1) Instantaneous Conjurations are unaffected by Anti-magic Field
2) *Dimension Doors out of AMF*

[eggynack]

2) *Dimension Doors out of AMF*
I'm pretty sure that you can't cast spells while in an AMF, though I can't be completely sure, cause AMF has odd rules. Anyway, you'd be better off just running the shrunken lead hat trick, or just keeping your distance and launching instantaneous conjurations into the AMF from outside it.

[Snowbluff]

I'm pretty sure that you can't cast spells while in an AMF, though I can't be completely sure, cause AMF has odd rules. Anyway, you'd be better off just running the shrunken lead hat trick, or just keeping your distance and launching instantaneous conjurations into the AMF from outside it.

That's generally what I think about it, but it could be argued that D Door, as an instantaneous conjuration, isn't affected by AMF.

[toapat]

I'm pretty sure that you can't cast spells while in an AMF, though I can't be completely sure, cause AMF has odd rules. Anyway, you'd be better off just running the shrunken lead hat trick, or just keeping your distance and launching instantaneous conjurations into the AMF from outside it.

did a bit of checking. Ya, AMF suppresses casting and manifesting within it. Granted a Wizard can easily get sufficiently far away with only a Lesser Celerity and a Dimension door that the field is irrelevant.



That's generally what I think about it, but it could be argued that D Door, as an instantaneous conjuration, isn't affected by AMF.

Except that "To Cast" is actually a non defined term we the players always use to refer to the expenditure of a spell slot, or in shorter terms, To use a spell. which we do see in AMF's description

[Snowbluff]

Except that "To Cast" is actually a non defined term we the players always use to refer to the expenditure of a spell slot, or in shorter terms, To use a spell. which we do see in AMF's description

Instantaneous conjurations are an exception. Spells as a whole are an effect, so it's not so cut and dry.

[eggynack]

It's not so cut and dry.
I think that makes for a reasonable description of AMF as a whole. The base rules are highly complex and open to interpretation, and the addition of changes in the rules compendium somehow made the issue even more complex and open to interpretation. Just a big ol' mess.

[toapat]

Instantaneous conjurations are an exception. Spells as a whole are an effect, so it's not so cut and dry.

The exception is the Effect (Result) of Conjurations with Duration: Instantaneous is not countered. AMF suppresses the use (colloquially: Casting) of spells within it.


Honestly, it would be better if AMF was worded in a less comprehensive manner, and (despite not being within the rules itself) said it Suppressed the casting of spells instead of being Rules correct.

[animewatcha]

Yes, a person can serve a pantheon. Getting a particular deity to count as their patron deity is a different story. Though, I have seen something like to that effect in the Sovereign Host of eberron. Though, sovereign speaker has what toapat would like to have as far as worship goes ( fluff has sovereign host being counted as a single entity/deity ). Patron deity feats even have the 'lose favor with .... or change your patron deity..' But a more direct example of 'I am right' would be forgotten realms campaign setting page under Character description religion after the feats. Namely 'Choosing a patron.'
I can screenshot it for the world to see as I am about to do for spellshatter, but that would be proving toapat wrong ( again ).

Spellshatter: Here is something better than either of our quoted passages. Screenshots.

http://i1335.photobucket.com/albums/w675/David_Fanmachine/spellshatter_zpse91cd653.png

http://i1335.photobucket.com/albums/w675/David_Fanmachine/spellshatter2_zpsabbb118f.png

http://i1335.photobucket.com/albums/w675/David_Fanmachine/spellshatter3_zps83bde354.png

Versus..

http://i1335.photobucket.com/albums/w675/David_Fanmachine/spellshatter4_zps3d638bcf.png

So as can be seen. With Spellshatter, you CANNOT make use of second-fifth remove disease. There is no variant notification or 'qualifies as' or anything. Otherwise, people could trade away divine grace and still be able to legally take Serenity ( divine grace is pre-req ).

Mounts: Depends upon what you do with the mount. Heck, healing is normally looked down, yet someone found way to pimp out the Divine Spirit.

@gwendol: The song of the heart from the paladin is that 'since you have inspire courage, it should count as you having bardic music for x'. Unfortunately, 'it should' is houserule territory. See the notes under 'Build stub: Paladin 20' and the 3rd level red asterisk and the variants section later in that post. The song of the heart feat requires you to have bardic music specifically.

http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/3407376

Pretty much acknowledgement from toapat's own super duper source that you pretty much need houseruling to get it to work.

[toapat]

*Stick up rear*

1: Read the third Paragraph of Spellshatter. Which you clearly haven't been. At all.

2: From Smite to Song does not give a class feature called Inspire courage like Harmonious Knight 1. It gives the ability to Duplicate the Inspire Courage Bardic Music ability. And as anyone who has read Complete Arcane knows, If it walks like a class feature, talks like a class feature, and smells like a class feature, it qualifies as that classfeature for all intents and purposes.

[animewatcha]

1. I did. It said it replaces it. Not counts as or anything of the sort. Notice other paladin sub levels in that same chapter that reference that you never gain remove disease ( as in no extra uses ). We can also use certain tradings of Turn Undead, but that would prove me correct again.

2. If stuff worked like that, then there wouldn't be confusion for Fist of the forest's AC or stacking of ac from different stats ( think monk ). Or the chief one, turn undead swaps. As for the original saying of 'walks like a duck, talks like a duck, etc.' maybe it's a hunter trying to mimic the duck as much as possible to get a better shot at it.

[Doomboy911]

So I think I just want to put in my two cents on the matter.I'm quite sure a lot of good points have been made. So first I'd like to state the matter of linear fighter vs. quadratic wizard in this case we have the ranger who is forced into a linear progression presuming he doesn't dive into some obscure prestige class.

The ranger has the benefit of being extremely good at what he does while working in some other areas such as having a good animal companion, tracking, stealth, and being able to work some magic. It's well put together about level ten the ranger could pick up the gear he needs like armor and a nasty enough weapon and be done with all that. A bonebow greatbow with the Distance gets him a pretty good distance with range increments he can hit some insane distances. (Math reads out to 3,000 feet at a minus 10 if he took far shot. With some spare cash due to low maintenance the ranger can pick up a few gadgets and charms to help him along some protection from scrying and some healing supplies goes a long way. On top of this the ranger can get himself huge benefits to killing something and if he's been hunting this wizard his whole life he'll just keep going human or whatever it is.

So he'll have a huge bonus to hit the wizard and with his favored terrain he can get past any plane the wizard wants to hop off to. I like the Rangers odd of finding the wizard and taking out his familiar. I like his odds of hurting the wizard but the wizard can flee. The wizard will flee he has no reason to stay. The rangers hope is in that he can make the Wizard flee and loot his lab and such and than find the wizard again. Rinse and repeat until the ranger gives the wizard nowhere to run.

Honestly the wizard can try to stay and fight but the ranger has some of the best saves around and could hold his own for a long while. The wizard can have some high level buffs or try to kill the ranger with high level spells he can't have both. So some eighth level spells the ranger can take, he can kill the wizards familiar as I mentioned and with that the ranger's animal companion can attack the wizard every time he casts a spell and hopefully interrupt.

I'm not going to say the ranger will win if he does it will be a long drawn out fight and it will be a good fight.

[toapat]

So I think I just want to put in my two cents on the matter.I'm quite sure a lot of good points have been made. So first I'd like to state the matter of linear fighter vs. quadratic wizard in this case we have the ranger who is forced into a linear progression presuming he doesn't dive into some obscure prestige class.

The ranger has the benefit of being extremely good at what he does while working in some other areas such as having a good animal companion, tracking, stealth, and being able to work some magic. It's well put together about level ten the ranger could pick up the gear he needs like armor and a nasty enough weapon and be done with all that. A bonebow greatbow with the Distance gets him a pretty good distance with range increments he can hit some insane distances. (Math reads out to 3,000 feet at a minus 10 if he took far shot. With some spare cash due to low maintenance the ranger can pick up a few gadgets and charms to help him along some protection from scrying and some healing supplies goes a long way. On top of this the ranger can get himself huge benefits to killing something and if he's been hunting this wizard his whole life he'll just keep going human or whatever it is.

So he'll have a huge bonus to hit the wizard and with his favored terrain he can get past any plane the wizard wants to hop off to. I like the Rangers odd of finding the wizard and taking out his familiar. I like his odds of hurting the wizard but the wizard can flee. The wizard will flee he has no reason to stay. The rangers hope is in that he can make the Wizard flee and loot his lab and such and than find the wizard again. Rinse and repeat until the ranger gives the wizard nowhere to run.

Honestly the wizard can try to stay and fight but the ranger has some of the best saves around and could hold his own for a long while. The wizard can have some high level buffs or try to kill the ranger with high level spells he can't have both. So some eighth level spells the ranger can take, he can kill the wizards familiar as I mentioned and with that the ranger's animal companion can attack the wizard every time he casts a spell and hopefully interrupt.

I'm not going to say the ranger will win if he does it will be a long drawn out fight and it will be a good fight.

best case scenario a ranger will be dealing about 420 damage/standard action with a bow out to 30'

Best case scenario a Wizard will be dealing about 3600 damage as a standard action from outside Longbow maximum range.


1. I did. It said it replaces it. Not counts as or anything of the sort. Notice other paladin sub levels in that same chapter that reference that you never gain remove disease ( as in no extra uses ). We can also use certain tradings of Turn Undead, but that would prove me correct again.

2. If stuff worked like that, then there wouldn't be confusion for Fist of the forest's AC or stacking of ac from different stats ( think monk ). Or the chief one, turn undead swaps. As for the original saying of 'walks like a duck, talks like a duck, etc.' maybe it's a hunter trying to mimic the duck as much as possible to get a better shot at it.

1: Replaces the Standard Paladin's Remove disease. It does not say that it replaces the Paladin's Remove disease class feature, it specifies that it replaces the Standard paladin's remove disease.

2: a Humanoid can not walk like a duck, and no one is going to spend several hours in a septic tank to smell like a duck. From Smite to Song gives you Bardic Music: Inspire Courage as bound to your smite evil charges. your Counter: Fist of the Forest, would in fact stack with the Monk's AC bonus because they are both untyped bonuses which only share conditions under which they stop functioning. sure RAI they are mutually exclusive, but RAW they are both untyped, and thus stack.

[Killer Angel]

best case scenario a ranger will be dealing about 420 damage/standard action with a bow out to 30'

Best case scenario a Wizard will be dealing about 3600 damage as a standard action from outside Longbow maximum range.

If we're looking mere damage, IMO there's not so much difference between "i killed you" and "I overkilled you". Except, in the second case, there's a waste of resources...

[eggynack]

If we're looking mere damage, IMO there's not so much difference between "i killed you" and "I overkilled you". Except, in the second case, there's a waste of resources...
True enough. The real issue is the other part of it, which is the far more likely worst case scenario. In it, the ranger uses his standard action to try to deal 420 damage from 30 feet out, and the wizard uses friendly fire, and the ranger dies instantly. Really, it's the likelihood of either outcome that is far more important than the damage dealt, though range is a relevant factor for that analysis.

[Sewercop]

Hide life and the wizard ignores damage?

[toapat]

If we're looking mere damage, IMO there's not so much difference between "i killed you" and "I overkilled you". Except, in the second case, there's a waste of resources...

the problem is, the optimal ranger for ranged combat has a number of restrictions. Skirmish's 5d6 is precision damage, its very feat intensive, theres a 3 level splash into Scout, you get -2 damage vs casters because theres only 4 favored enemies. you have to move alot each round. They dont get anything from the farshot subline of archery.

the mailman? throws a scorching ray, aimed by divination, at the ranger and kills them from outside their maximum range because the ranger doesnt have Farshot.

Melee rangers and Wildshapers arent even that lucky.


Hide life and the wizard ignores damage?

i dont think that would actually allow the Wizard to win, because i dont believe that partial action was defined in 3.5

[Snowbluff]

i dont think that would actually allow the Wizard to win, because i dont believe that partial action was defined in 3.5

Partial Action is a 3.0 term, IIRC. I have the 3.0 PHB. I could look it up.

[toapat]

Partial Action is a 3.0 term, IIRC. I have the 3.0 PHB. I could look it up.

IIRC (im not getting it out from my bookshelf) its either move or standard action, but its a discarded mechanic so technically shouldnt be translated over.