Advice for my first character. Thinking ranger.

[Jeivar]

A friend of mine has bought the new D&D books and the starter adventure and intends to DM it soon. He showed me the Player's Handbook the other day and I liked what I saw but didn't have time for a thorough examination.

He says we'll be playing a prequel adventure starting at level one, followed by the adventure proper. The idea is we'll be playing the descendants of the original heroes. I was originally going to go with a human barbarian followed by a human paladin. But people are saying half-elves make the best paladins, so now I'm thinking of playing the prequel as an elf, followed by his half-human child or grandchild. I'll probably give them both the noble background, both for coolness and for the roleplaying fluff of being from two notable families from different societies.

For the paladin I want to do your basic "poops rainbows and glimmer" supernice do-gooder, with a sword and shield. Given that attack bonuses are lower now it really does seem armour and shields have become more valuable.

As for the elf, I'm less sure. I'm fond of rangers but I've seen people criticize it as the least useful class. I WANT to go full Legolas and make a super-archer but battles do tend to end up as melees. I've also always liked barbarians but elves have traditionally not been ideally suited for it.

Advice?

[Shining Wrath]

An wood elf Ranger focused on archery who takes the Hunter type (not Beastmaster) will do just fine. You can move, shoot, and move again in 5e, which makes a mobile character with a bow a fine choice, and wood elf gets 35' base movement.

[MadGrady]

What I say next is dependant on your DM -

My experience in this edition is that optimization is not NEARLY as important as your concept of your character. Mechanics and number crunching has been greatly reduced with the intention of making characters the primary mode of advancing the story. My group has found a lot of fun (and pretty good playability) with race/class combos that are not "optimized."

Bounded accuracy will still keep you within a certain window that can allow non-optimized builds to still flourish. Of course a character only goes so far as as their player/DM will allow, so my advice is to first get a concept of who you want to play, and then allow the system to come support what you want to play. Coordinating your ideas with your DM is also very important - becuase this edition pushes heavily the idea that both of you are telling a story together, so the more you two can be on the same page, the more fun you will have.

[incarnate236]

I played a ranger my first serious 3.5 campaign and it was a lot of fun as an intro class. You have the option to eventually pick up magic but not enough spells to get overwhelmed and maintain some decent skills that other characters don't replicate well until higher levels. The 5e ranger is balanced a bit better than 3.5 and should remain competitive longer so unless you plan on breaking past lvl 10 I wouldnt worry about feeling powerless. In my experience most campaigns in real life tend to break down before that point anyways because people just get busy.

[Phoenix_Kensai]

I don't think rangers are necessarily bad (though I haven't looked over them much), but... if you want to play Legolas the super-archer, you could consider a battle master fighter too. Some of the maneuvers look like they'd be pretty nice to have at range. Menacing Attack could prevent an opponent from closing in to attack you, for instance, or you could use Pushing Attack to snipe enemies off of bridges or into traps.

On the other hand, paladins are looking pretty good in this edition. I've never liked the class myself (I prefer clerics), but... if you go that route, I doubt you'll be disappointed.

[EvilAnagram]

The Ranger will be pretty great for a super-archer. You get spells that modify your archery, an extra attack, the Archery Style class feature, sweet movement and terrain features that really helps it to feel like you're an experienced wanderer, and you can get some nice bonuses to damage (Colossus Slayer!). The downsides are your number of available spells and the need to expend a spell slot for Hunter's Mark.

Fighter Archers are also great. They get extra attacks, the Archery Style class feature, a second Style in case you need it, Action Surge, Second Wind, and the non-magical paths are pretty decent. The downsides are that Champions can't stack on extra damage outside of extra attacks, and Battle Masters have an extremely limited dice pool for their goodies.

Either option with a dip in Rogue for Sneak Attack dice and skills would be great.

And yeah, Paladins are awesome, and Half-Elves make great Paladins. Enjoy.

[Jeivar]

To clarify, I mean my first character in 5th edition proper, not my first ever.



Bounded accuracy will still keep you within a certain window that can allow non-optimized builds to still flourish..

Is bonded accuracy a feat or a class feature?


The Ranger will be pretty great for a super-archer. You get spells that modify your archery, an extra attack, the Archery Style class feature, sweet movement and terrain features that really helps it to feel like you're an experienced wanderer, and you can get some nice bonuses to damage (Colossus Slayer!). The downsides are your number of available spells and the need to expend a spell slot for Hunter's Mark.

Fighter Archers are also great. They get extra attacks, the Archery Style class feature, a second Style in case you need it, Action Surge, Second Wind, and the non-magical paths are pretty decent. The downsides are that Champions can't stack on extra damage outside of extra attacks, and Battle Masters have an extremely limited dice pool for their goodies.

Either option with a dip in Rogue for Sneak Attack dice and skills would be great.

And yeah, Paladins are awesome, and Half-Elves make great Paladins. Enjoy.


An wood elf Ranger focused on archery who takes the Hunter type (not Beastmaster) will do just fine. You can move, shoot, and move again in 5e, which makes a mobile character with a bow a fine choice, and wood elf gets 35' base movement.

Thanks for the tips.

[Shining Wrath]

Bounded accuracy refers to 5e design philosophy of trying to keep the game from getting too big, number wise. It's why you can't raise an ability score above 20.

[BW022]

My general advice is to play what you want. Discussions about power, balanced, etc. shouldn't really be considered. D&D is primarily a social game and an interesting, intelligent, cunning, etc. character is typically more fun to play and more memorable to the other players.

Combat only represents a tiny percentage of game time. Other time is likely split between roleplaying (meeting and interacting with NPCs) and non-combat encounters (travel, cities, skulking, moving through dungeons, etc.). Any of the three can easily be 'balanced' simply through superior play, character concepts, luck, etc. Roleplaying is usually enhanced by not being optimal. Folks will remember you more if your character is say afraid of heights... rather than he was +7 to attacks at first level.

I usually look at literature, movies, media, and/or your campaign setting. Then play off unusual combinations which aren't that wacky. Make yourself from a horse-nomadic kingdom... and see how that would play on your character? Maybe you are a ranger... but from a seafaring culture (say a Viking raider) or maybe gypsy culture (say traveling on river barges)? What would a noble horse-nomad ranger be like? Maybe you collect horses, specialize in horse archery, and don't believe in coins (i.e. trade only)? How would a Viking-like ranger be? Navigation, vehicle (longboat), sailor background, etc.? How do these then affect your family, skills and language choices, armor, weapons, goals, background choices, etc.?

Once you have something, then build your class around it. It then gives you a lot of roleplaying potential.

How good you are in combat will evolve over time -- based on your skills, the roles of the other PCs, the situation, etc. You may find that you need to block a lot -- since no other PC can easily block. You may find yourself having to take the stealth/scouting role -- since no other PC can do it, or your bard is pretty weak. Likewise, other characters may have to evolve to match your style. If you shoot effectively at longer ranges... other party members may have to wait several rounds before closing. Most players (especially on these forums) tend to over analyse numbers as if that means power in D&D. It rarely does. Getting your party safely across a river might be far more important than an extra few points of damage in a combat.

[ChaplainRobb]

Read the reply above, and then read it again. That's some of the best advice I've seen on this forum. It actually was starting to tork me off, always reading number crunching criticisms of people's character choices. There are innumerable topics about what choices are traps in this edition, or who is more powerful, the casters or non casters. Since when has role-playing been primarily about the numbers? I play a wood elf ranger in this edition. I do it because i love the character, and its a rehash of the first character i ever played in ad&d. People keep saying that since i want an archer, i should be playing a fighter, because the numbers are better. Pshaw! This game is about role-playing and enjoying the character you play, having fun with friends, and only then should you worry about how awesome you are at damage. If you want to be a ranger, be one. Heck, you could even be a beast master ranger (although I'm not a fan, it's not because it's a "sub-optimal" choice) even though half the people posting on this board seem to think is the worst class there is. Have fun. If you play a character that kicks butt, yet you don't enjoy it because you'd rather have a halfling fighter with high intelligence, you're only cheating yourself.

[Sir_Leorik]

My general advice is to play what you want. Discussions about power, balanced, etc. shouldn't really be considered. D&D is primarily a social game and an interesting, intelligent, cunning, etc. character is typically more fun to play and more memorable to the other players.

Combat only represents a tiny percentage of game time. Other time is likely split between roleplaying (meeting and interacting with NPCs) and non-combat encounters (travel, cities, skulking, moving through dungeons, etc.). Any of the three can easily be 'balanced' simply through superior play, character concepts, luck, etc. Roleplaying is usually enhanced by not being optimal. Folks will remember you more if your character is say afraid of heights... rather than he was +7 to attacks at first level.

I usually look at literature, movies, media, and/or your campaign setting. Then play off unusual combinations which aren't that wacky. Make yourself from a horse-nomadic kingdom... and see how that would play on your character? Maybe you are a ranger... but from a seafaring culture (say a Viking raider) or maybe gypsy culture (say traveling on river barges)? What would a noble horse-nomad ranger be like? Maybe you collect horses, specialize in horse archery, and don't believe in coins (i.e. trade only)? How would a Viking-like ranger be? Navigation, vehicle (longboat), sailor background, etc.? How do these then affect your family, skills and language choices, armor, weapons, goals, background choices, etc.?

Once you have something, then build your class around it. It then gives you a lot of roleplaying potential.

How good you are in combat will evolve over time -- based on your skills, the roles of the other PCs, the situation, etc. You may find that you need to block a lot -- since no other PC can easily block. You may find yourself having to take the stealth/scouting role -- since no other PC can do it, or your bard is pretty weak. Likewise, other characters may have to evolve to match your style. If you shoot effectively at longer ranges... other party members may have to wait several rounds before closing. Most players (especially on these forums) tend to over analyse numbers as if that means power in D&D. It rarely does. Getting your party safely across a river might be far more important than an extra few points of damage in a combat.


Read the reply above, and then read it again. That's some of the best advice I've seen on this forum. It actually was starting to tork me off, always reading number crunching criticisms of people's character choices. There are innumerable topics about what choices are traps in this edition, or who is more powerful, the casters or non casters. Since when has role-playing been primarily about the numbers? I play a wood elf ranger in this edition. I do it because i love the character, and its a rehash of the first character i ever played in ad&d. People keep saying that since i want an archer, i should be playing a fighter, because the numbers are better. Pshaw! This game is about role-playing and enjoying the character you play, having fun with friends, and only then should you worry about how awesome you are at damage. If you want to be a ranger, be one. Heck, you could even be a beast master ranger (although I'm not a fan, it's not because it's a "sub-optimal" choice) even though half the people posting on this board seem to think is the worst class there is. Have fun. If you play a character that kicks butt, yet you don't enjoy it because you'd rather have a halfling fighter with high intelligence, you're only cheating yourself.

Agreed! Rather than criticize a player for his or her choices, offer advice about how to play the character in a way that's fun. Let the player learn from his or her mistakes. And if the player is having fun and not making mistakes you shouldn't criticize him or her for a "sub-optimal" choice. Instead, why not spend some time chastising the players abusing the Find Steed spell?

To sum up, play what you want. If you want advice, ask for it. And if someone asks for advice on how to build a Ranger, don't respond "Play a Wizard"!

[Jeivar]

My general advice is to play what you want. Discussions about power, balanced, etc. shouldn't really be considered. D&D is primarily a social game and an interesting, intelligent, cunning, etc. character is typically more fun to play and more memorable to the other players.



Read the reply above, and then read it again. That's some of the best advice I've seen on this forum. It actually was starting to tork me off, always reading number crunching criticisms of people's character choices. There are innumerable topics about what choices are traps in this edition, or who is more powerful, the casters or non casters. Since when has role-playing been primarily about the numbers? I play a wood elf ranger in this edition. I do it because i love the character, and its a rehash of the first character i ever played in ad&d. People keep saying that since i want an archer, i should be playing a fighter, because the numbers are better. Pshaw! This game is about role-playing and enjoying the character you play, having fun with friends, and only then should you worry about how awesome you are at damage. If you want to be a ranger, be one..



To sum up, play what you want. If you want advice, ask for it. And if someone asks for advice on how to build a Ranger, don't respond "Play a Wizard"!

Yeah, you're right, all of you. I agonized for a while about all of the character creation options for the upcoming Pillars of Eternity (over 39.000 by my count), but then just decided I'd play the one I found coolest and most interesting. Simple as that. It's all about having fun.

[ChaplainRobb]

Well, don't keep us in suspense! What characters are you going to do???

[Grayson01]

[QUOTE=Sir_Leorik;18190547] Originally Posted by BW022
My general advice is to play what you want. Discussions about power, balanced, etc. shouldn't really be considered. D&D is primarily a social game and an interesting, intelligent, cunning, etc. character is typically more fun to play and more memorable to the other players.

Combat only represents a tiny percentage of game time. Other time is likely split between roleplaying (meeting and interacting with NPCs) and non-combat encounters (travel, cities, skulking, moving through dungeons, etc.). Any of the three can easily be 'balanced' simply through superior play, character concepts, luck, etc. Roleplaying is usually enhanced by not being optimal. Folks will remember you more if your character is say afraid of heights... rather than he was +7 to attacks at first level.

I usually look at literature, movies, media, and/or your campaign setting. Then play off unusual combinations which aren't that wacky. Make yourself from a horse-nomadic kingdom... and see how that would play on your character? Maybe you are a ranger... but from a seafaring culture (say a Viking raider) or maybe gypsy culture (say traveling on river barges)? What would a noble horse-nomad ranger be like? Maybe you collect horses, specialize in horse archery, and don't believe in coins (i.e. trade only)? How would a Viking-like ranger be? Navigation, vehicle (longboat), sailor background, etc.? How do these then affect your family, skills and language choices, armor, weapons, goals, background choices, etc.?

Once you have something, then build your class around it. It then gives you a lot of roleplaying potential.

How good you are in combat will evolve over time -- based on your skills, the roles of the other PCs, the situation, etc. You may find that you need to block a lot -- since no other PC can easily block. You may find yourself having to take the stealth/scouting role -- since no other PC can do it, or your bard is pretty weak. Likewise, other characters may have to evolve to match your style. If you shoot effectively at longer ranges... other party members may have to wait several rounds before closing. Most players (especially on these forums) tend to over analyse numbers as if that means power in D&D. It rarely does. Getting your party safely across a river might be far more important than an extra few points of damage in a combat.
Originally Posted by ChaplainRobb
Read the reply above, and then read it again. That's some of the best advice I've seen on this forum. It actually was starting to tork me off, always reading number crunching criticisms of people's character choices. There are innumerable topics about what choices are traps in this edition, or who is more powerful, the casters or non casters. Since when has role-playing been primarily about the numbers? I play a wood elf ranger in this edition. I do it because i love the character, and its a rehash of the first character i ever played in ad&d. People keep saying that since i want an archer, i should be playing a fighter, because the numbers are better. Pshaw! This game is about role-playing and enjoying the character you play, having fun with friends, and only then should you worry about how awesome you are at damage. If you want to be a ranger, be one. Heck, you could even be a beast master ranger (although I'm not a fan, it's not because it's a "sub-optimal" choice) even though half the people posting on this board seem to think is the worst class there is. Have fun. If you play a character that kicks butt, yet you don't enjoy it because you'd rather have a halfling fighter with high intelligence, you're only cheating yourself.
Agreed! Rather than criticize a player for his or her choices, offer advice about how to play the character in a way that's fun. Let the player learn from his or her mistakes. And if the player is having fun and not making mistakes you shouldn't criticize him or her for a "sub-optimal" choice. Instead, why not spend some time chastising the players abusing the Find Steed spell?

To sum up, play what you want. If you want advice, ask for it. And if someone asks for advice on how to build a Ranger, don't respond "Play a Wizard"!QUOTE]

Thank you all of you in the long list of quotes. These thread has really made me not hate this forum.

[Jeivar]

Well, don't keep us in suspense! What characters are you going to do???

I'm going to go with the elf ranger noble for the prequel and then his half-elf noble paladin child in the adventure proper. A half-breed with one foot in the upper echelons of two very different societies. Should be interesting.