PDA

View Full Version : Ranger Dilemma



Morty
2007-03-09, 08:18 AM
Alright, so Ranger can choose between two combat styles. But which one is better? I've been thinking about it, and I think that Archery is slightly more optimal, even though some Ranger class features work well with TWF(fav. enemy, some spells)- TWF isn't vey good choice after all, and archery ranger doesn't require high STR, while TWF ranger still needs some DEX due to using only light armor. What do you think?
And yeah, I know that some people consider ranger sucky class. But I'm not asking wheter Ranger is good class, but which Combat Style is better.

Hunter_Rose
2007-03-09, 08:21 AM
You know you can do both. Choose the dual weapon combat style and then pick point blank shot, multi-shot, and many-shot as your regular feats. By the time, I think, you're around 10th level you can start to choose feats that you want just for feats.

serow
2007-03-09, 08:23 AM
Archery. Take Power Attack as your backup melee feat, and you should be all set.
Both styles need Str though, especially archery, becoz every bit of damage counts when trying to punch through DR.

Ranis
2007-03-09, 08:37 AM
It's a matter of preference toward your playstyle, really. Ranger is a fun class as long as you're in it for the character type and not min-maxing, which is already not happening because if you were min-maxing, you'd be playing a fighter archer.

That said, I think that the 3.5 Ranger definitely god a boost in the melee style. When I play a ranger, I pick the melee style and grab a composite longbow to stick 'em when they're too far, and move in to slice n' dice when they're not. Plus, you could always use your regular feats to balance out the two to maximize your versatility; that's what a ranger in my group has done.

Orzel
2007-03-09, 08:50 AM
They both are good but it depends of the setting, DM style, and books allowed.

Choosing the archery style and grabbing Power Attack is usually the better choice. Especially if you get good stat rolls. You can shoot at spellcasters from bushes and wreck havoc on those weaker in melee. I usually choose this way.

If you are allowed to go crazy with items and spells, TWF and a bow is nice too. There are many ways to jack up one handed melee damage and AC for a close up build that rivals a fighter.

pestilenceawaits
2007-03-09, 09:40 AM
There was a dragon magazine that had alternate weapon combat styles a while back also if you would like more variety one of them was a 2 handed style where you got power attack and cleave etc. sorry I don't remember the issue.

Hunter_Rose
2007-03-09, 09:59 AM
Personally I really enjoy playing rangers. You have a sneaky character that can snipe from afar, and then close to fight pretty well in melee. Plus I have to admit the animal companion is pretty important to the class. Especially if you get an item of talk with animal. Even if you DM only allows you yes/no questions with your companion you can convey alot of information between the two of you. Plus an animal companion is good for a flanker in melee, and if you get one with scent as a feat they can detect invisible assailants.

Darrin
2007-03-09, 10:07 AM
But I'm not asking wheter Ranger is good class, but which Combat Style is better.

TWF is slightly better, because you have more control over your base weapon damage and crit multiplier (You can also go two-handed and still TWF with armor spikes). If you go archery, you're pretty much stuck with arrows. There are some PrCs to fix that a bit, but there are a lot more melee-related feats that work well with TWF.

Dragon #326 had a list of alternate combat styles. Crystalkeep has the details if you look up the base classes PDF.

Hunter_Rose
2007-03-09, 10:13 AM
It can be also interesting to take TWF, fight with scimitars, and then take improved critical scimitar to boost your crit range. You have a pretty good possibility to do 4 crits in a round once you get two weapon fighting mastery I think (when you get the second off hand attack).

Thiel
2007-03-09, 10:23 AM
You could play a Tri-Kreen and do both... at the same time.

Person_Man
2007-03-09, 10:28 AM
They are both weak.

Unlike melee damage, which benefits from Power Attack/Leap Attack/Shock Trooper/ToB maneuvers, archery damage doesn't scale with levels. This can be solved with buff spells, but Rangers don't get enough high level spells to pull this off.

And because you can't use light weapons with Power Attack, TWF tends to be equally cruddy, unless you have some outside source of damage (usually Sneak Attack, which Rangers don't get). This can be fixed somewhat by taking Improved Unarmed Strike or Oversized Two Weapon Fighting, but even then the Ranger lacks the bonus feats or abilities or AC he needs to be a serviceable melee combatant.

I suggest the Wildshape Ranger (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/unearthedCoreClass.html#simple-ranger) instead. You lose your weapon styles, but gain fast movement and Wild Shape, one of the most powerful abilities in D&D.

But if you have to choose between archery and TWF, I would go with archery. Rangers are too fragile to be front line combatants. Enjoy being a wilderness themed Skill Monkey, and you'll be fine.

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-09, 10:34 AM
They are both weak.

Unlike melee damage, which benefits from Power Attack/Leap Attack/Shock Trooper/ToB maneuvers, archery damage doesn't scale with levels. This can be solved with buff spells, but Rangers don't get enough high level spells to pull this off.
On the other hand, archery neatly gets around the huge Mobility Problem that kicks the ass of most high-level non-casters.


And because you can't use light weapons with Power Attack, TWF tends to be equally cruddy, unless you have some outside source of damage (usually Sneak Attack, which Rangers don't get). This can be fixed somewhat by taking Improved Unarmed Strike or Oversized Two Weapon Fighting, but even then the Ranger lacks the bonus feats or abilities or AC he needs to be a serviceable melee combatant. He can be passable, if he picks his favored enemies right. He's generally a little too squishy to be comfortable trading full attacks, though, which is a point in archery's favor.


I suggest the Wildshape Ranger (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/unearthedCoreClass.html#simple-ranger) instead. You lose your weapon styles, but gain fast movement and Wild Shape, one of the most powerful abilities in D&D.

But if you have to choose between archery and TWF, I would go with archery. Rangers are too fragile to be front line combatants. Enjoy being a wilderness themed Skill Monkey, and you'll be fine.Wild Shape Ranger is pretty sharply limited by the fact that you only get Small or Medium animals--the Medium animals don't make good combat forms at higher levels. Low stats for the level, etc.
Additionally, you have the "can't take your stuff with" you problem of the Druid's wild shape, but can't invest your cash-money into spellcasting boosters to make the best use of it.

Leon
2007-03-09, 11:32 AM
It's a matter of preference toward your playstyle, really. Ranger is a fun class as long as you're in it for the character type and not min-maxing, which is already not happening because if you were min-maxing, you'd be playing a fighter archer.


Covered what i was going to add

Person_Man
2007-03-09, 12:25 PM
Wild Shape Ranger is pretty sharply limited by the fact that you only get Small or Medium animals--the Medium animals don't make good combat forms at higher levels. Low stats for the level, etc.
Additionally, you have the "can't take your stuff with" you problem of the Druid's wild shape, but can't invest your cash-money into spellcasting boosters to make the best use of it.

The deinonychus is a pretty impressive medium animal that he could have access to early. After that, he should invest in Exhalted Wild Shape (BoED), Frozen Wildshape (Frostburn), or Dragon Wild Shape (Draconimicon) to gain access to new and much more powerful forms. And/or he can enter the Master of Many Forms PrC, which even requires Endurance and gives you access to all sorts of forms, so it has pretty excellent Wildshape Ranger synergy.

I concede the "can't take your stuff with" you problem. But I think its a pretty good trade-off. Invest in the world's greatest suite of Wild armor, and spend the rest of your money on Manuals to improve your mental stats.

But I doubt he wants to play a Wildshape PC. I'm guessing he wants to play a traditional Ranger, and so I suggested he play an archer. I agree with you that the mobility factor makes it superior to TWF.

LotharBot
2007-03-09, 02:52 PM
Depends on the rest of your party.

Misat
2007-03-09, 03:13 PM
I like the fact that you didn't want to know how to break the ranger, but instead wanted to know which ranger was the less weak of the two. I hope that you don't go with one of the crazy shapechanging ideas, we all know shapechanging just leads to crazy, but instead go for one of the mediums recommended. I think that, for flavor solely, you should go with two weapon fighting and dabble in archery. This way you can still hold your own in a melee fight, which is most DnD fights pre level 15, but not be useless if someone takes to the air or just tries to run.

Stevenson
2007-03-09, 03:29 PM
Eh, I like archery, because chances are melee can be covered by something that isn't quite so smashable.

That being said, just pick the one you think is better. You don't need to get the absolute 100% destruction out of your character to have it be fun.

Person_Man
2007-03-09, 03:38 PM
I like the fact that you didn't want to know how to break the ranger, but instead wanted to know which ranger was the less weak of the two. I hope that you don't go with one of the crazy shapechanging ideas, we all know shapechanging just leads to crazy, but instead go for one of the mediums recommended.

I agree with your basic take on the situation.

But I'd say that a lot depends on the makeup of his party. If the rest of his party consists of Beguiler, a Cleric, and a Wizard, all played by intelligent and somewhat experienced players, he'll be far behind them on the power scale by playing a normal Ranger. In that case, some sort of variant or PrC is called for. If the party is a Rogue, a Fighter, and a Favored Soul, a normal Ranger with the right feat selection would be on par with the other players.

So like everything in D&D, the "best" thing to do depends on the context of the game.

its_all_ogre
2007-03-09, 04:19 PM
personally i prefer archer and take a back up melee weapon and power attack. this way you are better off using your bow, but if pressed you can pull out nasty hefty swings with a melee weapon in two hands.
could even use a greatsword.

Druid
2007-03-09, 06:40 PM
I prefer archery over two weapon fighting for rangers. Favored enemy isn't good enough to warrent twf over thf inthe first place.

Matthew
2007-03-09, 07:27 PM
Yeah, the Archery Combat Style and Power Attack is really your best bet with the Ranger. I *hate* the 3.x Ranger, especially his Combat Style Straight Jacket...

Leon
2007-03-09, 07:35 PM
I agree with your basic take on the situation.

But I'd say that a lot depends on the makeup of his party. If the rest of his party consists of Beguiler, a Cleric, and a Wizard, all played by intelligent and somewhat experienced players, he'll be far behind them on the power scale by playing a normal Ranger.

Having played in a party that included a Cleric and Wizard (both of whom were played by experianced players) i wasnt far behind anything - was playing the Archer with the non magic variant from CW. when i joined the campaign at lvl 12 i had NO magic items, just some quality grade items (mithral, darkwood, Obdurium etc), that did not hinder me one bit.

At the end of the campagin id been out fitted a bit more with a nice Longbow (mostly - the halfling bane was a bit odd), 10 Squillion arrows of various types, a Animated buckler and a few small defensive items.

During the BBEG Fight my damage was about 120 a round (of note the wizard did squat all in that fight as he wasnt able to defeat the Dragons resistances 90% of the time)