Which class helps a Ranger or a fighter the most?

[Sasori]

My friend is playing either a Fighter or a ranger and im looking at a few classes so i was wondering which class compliments ranger or fighter the most or what class would combo well with ethier of these

[Laserlight]

My friend is playing either a Fighter or a ranger and im looking at a few classes so i was wondering which class compliments ranger or fighter the most or what class would combo well with ethier of these

I retired my tactical warlord character and for months afterward, the party ranger was wistful about him.

However, depends on your total party. Is it just you two? What other classes are in the party? For a couple of weeks we had a party of six with three defenders, two leaders and one striker. We were tough but we also took a couple of hours per encounter.

[Kurald Galain]

Compliments? The bard.

Complements? Either a warlord as Laser says, or (assuming it's a melee ranger) any ranged area attacker such as a wizard or invoker, but then either or both characters should spend a feat to obtain some kind of healing power.

[Sasori]

Its just the two of us and he is ether going striker melee ranger striker fighter or defender fighter :p

[VeliciaL]

Warlord would complement any of those rather nicely.

[Sasori]

Nice is that it or is there other classes also there might be a chance that he picks wizard so add that to the list when considering ur answer
thanks :D

[Sartharina]

Ranger or Fighter.(Whichever he's not). Or Warlord.

[Dimers]

Warlord is the best complement to melee Ranger or Fighter in a two-person group, because warlord gives out the most extra attacks while still having good healing. In a normal-sized party that makes five attacks per round, adding one more increases the number of attacks by twenty percent. In a party that makes two attacks per round, adding one more is a fifty percent increase. Sure, playing a ranger would also increase attacks-per-round, but rangers don't heal others well.

The answer is very different if you're trying to complement a wizard, for lots of reasons. I'm inclined to say "something that adds bodies to the group" because a wizard's control matters the most when she has the most variables to work with on the friendly side. Four such options:

Sentinel druid. It comes with a pet, and it's a healer. Not very good and with a relatively low optimization ceiling, but ... eh, I've done worse.
Beastmaster ranger. Beast powers themselves are bad, but you can take a beast and still focus on archery or melee while giving the wizard more to play with.
Any class with the fey beast tamer theme. Warden is a decent choice for class because that increases the pet's hit points and wardens are okay themselves. Warlords can be great fey beast tamers too, because the pet is guaranteed to have a level-appropriate melee basic attack.
Shaman. Comes with something like a pet and is a healer. You can get more value out of shaman than you can out of sentinel druid, but it'd be a more appropriate choice for a larger and more varied party.

If you're using themes, I'd say fey beast tamer warlord is the best way to complement a typical wizard in combat.

[Inevitability]

Warlord. Fighters can mark on every hit. A warlord grants fighters a lot more hits. 1 + 1 = 2

[Blackfang108]

Warlord. Fighters can mark on every hit. A warlord grants fighters a lot more hits. 1 + 1 = 2

Fighters mark on every ATTACK. Even if they miss.

[Epinephrine]

If you're using themes, I'd say fey beast tamer warlord is the best way to complement a typical wizard in combat.

What about artificer? You could pick up a pet on an artificer as well, and they help accuracy and hand out bonuses.

[Leewei]

In combat, the Warlord is good.

If it's just the two of you, Bard offers an enormous amount of versatility outside of combat, and is only a bit less useful than Warlord.

[Inevitability]

Fighters mark on every ATTACK. Even if they miss.

Mixed the two up. Attacks it is.

[Sasori]

Couldnt you also do Psion he has a lot of summons on top of going thrallherd
BTW what you guys think is the most op or best class mostly iv heard Ranger cus of multishot.

[VeliciaL]

BTW what you guys think is the most op or best class mostly iv heard Ranger cus of multishot.

This is a big question with lots of answers, because of the role system. Ranger is definitely one of the best strikers in the game though.

[Sasori]

Yeah unforchantly i found out that my friend is joining in late. So for a while im going solo with the DM so yeah i was wondering what solos best beacuse i know that not all classes can solo if not then at least they dont do well yeah...
:D Thanks guys

[Tegu8788]

You don't rally solo 4E. It's meant to be a team game, 4-6 is ideal. 2 is already gonna be tricky. 1, well, that's really tough.

[Sasori]

You don't rally solo 4E. It's meant to be a team game, 4-6 is ideal. 2 is already gonna be tricky. 1, well, that's really tough.

Yeah i know but eh i want to try it out so what class would solo best?

[Tegu8788]

A Cleric|Ranger hybrid may do it. Str primary, Twin Striking with big blades, using Cleric for AC and a heal. Alternately, Bow Ranger MC Shaman for a heal and pet, kite everything. A Conlock may have the HP and defenses, combined with damage and status to survive.


I'm also gonna say, from a DM's side, balancing a fight against 1 guy is no fun. The XP budget is so tiny, you can't pull out anything fun. It's either a single guy, or a couple minions. Really, it would be best to wait. I very rarely say "no, don't." But to this, I gotta say.


No.



Don't.

[Inevitability]

A Cleric|Ranger hybrid may do it. Str primary, Twin Striking with big blades, using Cleric for AC and a heal. Alternately, Bow Ranger MC Shaman for a heal and pet, kite everything. A Conlock may have the HP and defenses, combined with damage and status to survive.


I'm also gonna say, from a DM's side, balancing a fight against 1 guy is no fun. The XP budget is so tiny, you can't pull out anything fun. It's either a single guy, or a couple minions. Really, it would be best to wait. I very rarely say "no, don't." But to this, I gotta say.


No.



Don't.


I'd probably play a Staladin who neglects Cha and focuses on Wisdom and Strength. You are tough, can heal yourself and hit hard. Still, D&D is a team game.

[MeeposFire]

If you only have one player it is much better to have a companion character with you. I would say either use the companion rules (where are they DMG2?) or if not that you might be able to get the DM to play a character.

Best way to do that is to have them play a lazy type leader build. That way in combat he spends actions to make you do things thus allowing you to keep the spotlight in combat while making you more effective (and allowing the DM to have a bigger monster budget). Being a leader class also means you can recoup during a fight as well.

[tcrudisi]

Don't make a Warlord. Yes, in combat it'll be better off, but you guys will struggle out of combat. No matter if he goes Fighter or melee Ranger, he will be Str-primary. As a Warlord, you'll be Str-primary. Sure you guys can Athletics until the cow comes home, but you'll suck with every other skill.

Artificer is a good suggestion. Int primary so you'll have some knowledge skills. Nice buffing ability. Go Half-Elf and pick up Dilettante so that you can get Direct the Strike or something else. Half-Elf will also give you a pretend chance at some Charisma skills. /snicker.

Or - go Cunning Bard. Int/Cha covers the skills you'll need. You can MC to pick up the other Cha/Int skills. You /will/ need them out of combat. The Bards a solid enough buffer and can keep the other guy up. Half-Elf once again works brilliantly so that you can use Direct the Strike.

I think Bards the top choice here. In combat its a little bit weaker than Warlord, but you also must consider out of combat utility as well. Warlord is a redundant and terrible choice for that reason. Bard is the top choice for out of combat and good enough in combat. The Artificer is good in combat and okay out of combat.

[tcrudisi]

And you apparently asked about soloing as well.

Yeah, solo in 4e really doesn't work. If you insist, then do a Cleric|Barbarian hybrid. Cleric|Ranger hybrid works as well, though its boring.

[GPuzzle]

Actually, I think that Artificer|Warlord can work, and Bard, no matter how, can work (just don't go Half-Elf Cunning Bard - be a Valorous Bard with Staggering Note and Magic Weapon! - or you can go Int+Cha), especially if you MC Warlord for the proto-presences.

[Dimers]

Not that I think these replies are incorrect, but ... geez, it's hard to see so many people actually recommending hybridization for a newcomer to the system. :smalltongue:

[GPuzzle]

It's |Warlord and |Cleric.

That's basically the key behind it. Lose little, gain loads in what can keep you upright, and perhaps even what can make you better at your job.

[Tegu8788]

If you have all the sourcebooks and drag mag, then |Cleric is good. But without Battle Cleric's Lore, it loses a lot of it's umph. |Warlord is great because it can be tacked Lazystyle onto any class, regardless of stat. But a Lazy build is useless in a solo game. Unless you have a companion that does more damage than you do, in which case, you've done a real bad job.


Though if we are suggesting a hybrid, I've got one in mind that could work. Wall of Fur. Sentinel|Ranger picking up Beastmaster pet, but no powers, use Fey Beast Tamer, and MC Shaman twice. Two heals per fight, you control 4 characters on the board, and you can a lot of damage soaking with the pets, and healing yourself heals all of them. Twin Strike for days, and let your pets make OAs for you. It's not best, but it could solo decently.