PDA

View Full Version : Ranger advice



FireFox
2008-03-20, 07:57 PM
Hello, I decided to play a Human Ranger because I liked the... "fluff"?

Anyways, I plan on playing him TWF and wondered if there were any good prestige classes I could take (keeping in mind the "fluff"), could someone please point me towards one? From any of the official books. Thank you!

Some information:
STR 15; DEX 17; CON 12; INT 14; WIS 16; CHA 10

I used one of his feats for proficiency in the bastard sword and might use the other for self-sufficency.

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 07:59 PM
Eek. Good luck with that.

Best advice is to toss in some Tome of Battle levels, either Warblade or Swordsage. The Dervish PrC might work out too.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 08:05 PM
To clarify a little more, I guess I want a melee prestige class that is nature related/themed. And easy for Rangers to get into, so the Bear Warrior and Nature's Warrior are out.

I've looked at those, but they don't exactly... feel right.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-03-20, 08:11 PM
There's not too much support in terms of PrCs for TWF. You'll probably want to switch int and con, and maybe drop dex. EWP Bastard Sword is sub-par, too, EWP rarely is good enough to justify spending a feat on. Self-sufficient falls into the same trap as all of the skill-boosting feats, namely that it becomes less useful at higher levels. I don't recommend ToB, if only because you seem new to the game and that's rather complex.
Fix:
Take a one-level dip in monk for wis-to-ac and flurry
Short sword/longsword fighting
Take the various riding combat feats and kill stuff from the back of a wolf(I highly recommend this)

Do as many of these as you want to and listen to the others who post here and you'll be fine.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 08:28 PM
I have decided that I value Roleplaying more than actually living through the game and have taken that (partly) into account with my abilities: DEX and WIS get the highest because they are main to Rangers, STR comes next (really for the bastard sword though), and I put INT over Con solely because of the backstory/Roleplaying concept.

What feats would you suggest in place of them? mounted combat (from what I've seen) seems rather complex as well. And don't youlose monk specials if you are chaotic?

Would my backstory help, seeing as how I am formating my build to it?

Oh, what about King ofthe Wild?

tyckspoon
2008-03-20, 08:36 PM
You don't lose the Monk abilities, just the ability take more levels in Monk. But don't take Monk anyway; it does just about nothing for you. You can't flurry with normal weapons, and being a Ranger gives you the ability to wear light armor, so wear a chain shirt. In the event that you survive long enough for your Dex + Wis to beat +8 (4 shirt, 4 Dex limit of shirt) you can get the AC ability from buying a Monk's Belt.

Nermy
2008-03-20, 08:46 PM
For two-weapon fighting you could consider the Bloodclaw Master from Tome of Battle. It has a feral theme to it, so it would meet your "natural" fluff requirement while giving you some neat two-weapon fighting maneuvers to use. You'd either need a level of swordsage/warblade to get in, or you can just take the Martial Study feat a few times.

Chronos
2008-03-20, 08:53 PM
A druid can be just as much of a nature-oriented warrior as a ranger is. More so, actually, once you get Wildshape. But it sounds like you want to be Chaotic Good, which isn't allowed for druids (you'd have to settle for NG or CN).

Another option, there's a variant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#ranger) of the ranger that gives up the Combat Style feats to instead gain fast movement like a barbarian and Wildshape like a druid. This is already a stronger choice than either of the two standard combat styles, but it also qualifies you for several prestige classes (the Nature's Warrior and Bear Warrior you mentioned, and also Master of Many Forms).

Frosty
2008-03-20, 08:56 PM
You want a class compatible with a nature setting? I don't have a prestige class for you, but please multiclass into Scout for anywhere from 3 to 5 levels and take Swift Hunter. This will give you actual damage (and even more skill points) along with trapfinding.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 08:58 PM
I specifically prefer Rangers to Druids like I prefer Paladins to LG Clerics. So anything Druid related is out. Is King of the Wild a good choice for a prestige class?

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 08:59 PM
There's also the Wildrunner from Races of the Wild, which is a decent enough PrC if you want a continuation of the Ranger.

The problem is, TWF as a Ranger is asking to suck. Especially with a bastard sword (weapon damage is unimportant after a few levels).

FireFox
2008-03-20, 09:00 PM
You want a class compatible with a nature setting? I don't have a prestige class for you, but please multiclass into Scout for anywhere from 3 to 5 levels and take Swift Hunter. This will give you actual damage (and even more skill points) along with trapfinding.

What book is scout in? And this actually sounds good, because our party has no rogue...

and to ^: My party has a bow-armed cleric and a sorceror so melee damage and fighting are actually good. I don't know much about DnD, so how is TWF bad? I am not playing to be a "powerful" character. I am playing to have fun. If I wanted to be the best, I'd have picked another class. So what are some fun PrCs to play that are compatible with my build?

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 09:04 PM
What book is scout in? And this actually sounds good, because our party has no rogue...

Complete Adventurer. Here's a link to a thread about the Swift Hunter (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=854152).

And for good measure, here's one for the Scout (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=584572), and one for the Ranger (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=892470).

Skjaldbakka
2008-03-20, 09:08 PM
My favorite ranger to play is to take the two weapon fighting style, and then take archery feats, and quickdraw. I then go the bane route. A quiver with 10 each of 5 different banes is 8K, and then a bane on each shortsword. Not uber, but having either bane or favored enemy against whatever you fight is fun.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 09:14 PM
Oh, I like Scout, seems great... The swift hunter seems, okay to me.

that "bane route" also appeals to me...

Yvian
2008-03-20, 09:14 PM
O.K. Ranger is long on fluff [good] and short on optimization [bad]. Such is life. I am not going to dissuade you. The campaign that I run puts a emphasize on fluff.

TWF is sub-par. Are you a front line fighter? I hope not. There are a few things that can spice up TWF. Levels of rouge help to get the sneak attack. Scout can also work. I would choose Thug because that keeps my base attack high. Maybe dip into levels of barbarian. This works better at lower levels than higher levels.

Chronos is on the right track by suggesting that you dump TWF completely for something else.

Something that is fluffy and maybe sub optional would be to pick up some luck feats and/or skill tricks from Complete Scoundrel. It sounds like you are going to have a lot of skill points to play around with. Not exactly nature in fluff, but then again, not exactly anti-nature also.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 09:19 PM
Chronos is on the right track by suggesting that you dump TWF completely for something else.

Myfirst level will be in Ranger, why not the second level? I like the class. At second level Rangers either get TWF or the archery stuff. My party does not need two ranged attackers whenwe only have an NPC Fighter the DM provided doing the tanking and melee-ing. As a supporting combatent, I think a TWF Ranger is good. Why am I wrong?

Yvian
2008-03-20, 09:21 PM
I don't know much about DnD, so how is TWF bad? I am not playing to be a "powerful" character. I am playing to have fun.

Good for you for wanting to role play and have fun. Too often D&D is not.

Which takes us to why TWF is sub par and why meta gaming is fun. For characters that have a high base attack bonus, a great feat is Power Attack. If you are going to hit every time, you might as well shave a few plus off of your attack roll and add them to your damage roll. With THF, your power attack is doubled. With TWF, you get the bonus damage with your primary hand and not your off hand, but you get the penalties with both hands. So, when you do the math TWF gets you more attacks but THF gets you more damage. Hence TWF is sub par. Plus you need more magic - 2 good weapons instead of one.

Edit: Um, I am not suggesting you dump being a ranger. I see the attraction of playing a "nature " character. I had great fun with a halfing druid whose animal companion was a ridding dog. Lots of fun. But I am currently playing a game with a 12 ranger TWF and a barbarian 2/cleric 10 with a great axe. The cleric routinely does more damage than the ranger.

Which takes us back to Chronos. The variant ranger - where you lose TWF and other goodies for Wild Shape and Fast movement can be great fun.

Or, to put it another way, why do you like TWF? The idea of springing into battle and rolling lots of dice? Then TWf is the way to go. If you idea is to jump into battle and do lots of damage, alas the D20 system is stack against you. It can be done but it is hard.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 09:28 PM
At last, I finally know why people dislike TWF so much! Another thing: my group is all new, but one has a brother who played. I don't want their first expierience of DnD to be of someone overshadowing them up the whazoo. So this is good information tokeep in mind when I play to win though, so thanks!

Chronos
2008-03-20, 09:30 PM
I don't know much about DnD, so how is TWF bad?The basic problem is that a single two-handed weapon does approximately twice as much damage as two one-handed weapons. But you don't get twice as many attacks with two weapons as you do with a two-handed weapon. To even get close, you have to take several feats (or get them as a bonus from ranger, but it's still a lost opportunity to get something else instead), and even then, you've got at least a -2 penalty to hit (more, if your weapons aren't light). If your weapons are light, meanwhile, they don't benefit from Power Attack, which is the single most important thing for increasing melee damage. Further, you can only benefit from TWF at all if you can make a full attack, which means that if the enemy starts off more than five feet away from you, you lose a big chunk of your damage.

If you're going to go for a ranger combat style, archery is much better. The damage is low (D&D doesn't support archery very well, in general), but at least you don't need to take any penalties to use it, and you still get to make full attacks when your enemy isn't right next to you. If you go the Scout route, make sure to take Greater Manyshot, which will allow you to make multiple attacks as a standard action (and thus, can be used in the same round as a move action, to get Skirmish damage).

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 09:35 PM
Using Power Attack and a two-handed weapon is hardly overshadowing.

Playing a druid, no matter what, is overshadowing. Seriously, you don't even have to try, and you end up doing more than anyone else. Even if you don't take the "required" druid feat (Natural Spell).

If it's the fluff you're after, a barbarian can use the ranger fluff without difficulty--lightly armored defender of the wild, at home with nature? Sounds like a barbarian to me!

MeklorIlavator
2008-03-20, 09:41 PM
Myfirst level will be in Ranger, why not the second level? I like the class. At second level Rangers either get TWF or the archery stuff. My party does not need two ranged attackers whenwe only have an NPC Fighter the DM provided doing the tanking and melee-ing. As a supporting combatent, I think a TWF Ranger is good. Why am I wrong?

Because the main way to do damage in melee is to use Two handed fighting+Power Attack, but TWF automatically stops one from doing that. Its weak amount of damage plus its lower chance of hitting means that its usually only really viable when used with a way to get large amounts of reliable extra damage, such as sneak attack(rogue), skirmish(scout), insightful strike(swashbuckler), etc. Unfortunately, the bonus from Favored enemy is usually not reliable enough for this.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 09:43 PM
Well, then the two ranger combat styles are uselss to me, right? What should I do?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-03-20, 09:47 PM
1: Not useless. You can (much to the shock of some of the posters here) play an unoptimal character and still enjoy it. I recommend everyone do it at least once.

2: Re-fluff another class(barbarian, rogue, or fighter), play a scout, or play a variant ranger. All 3 of these are viable options and I can recommend any of them as good.

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 09:49 PM
There is an alternative ranger fighting style that gets Power Attack and the like. I'll dig it up for you.

Zincorium
2008-03-20, 09:49 PM
Well, then the two ranger combat styles are uselss to me, right? What should I do?

Two handed weapon and TWF. Yes, I know what you're thinking, "but Zincy, you can't do that!". Okay, you probably weren't using that exact phrase.

Anyway, the key here is to take one of the very large, sharp martial weapons you have proficiency with, and either put some spikes on your leather (kinky!) and use them as your off hand weapon, or take improved unarmed strike and kick people while you're swinging your greatsword/stabbing with your ranseur, depending on whether you want damage dice or reach.

The armor spikes thing is explicitly allowed by the FAQ last I checked, download a copy and show it to your DM. The unarmed strikes thing is kind of shaky, and might only be acceptable if you're a monk.

Remember that you can get masterwork and magical armor spikes, and that it's actually fairly rare for someone to insist you hand over your armor when disarming you.

MeklorIlavator
2008-03-20, 09:49 PM
Well, then the two ranger combat styles are uselss to me, right? What should I do?
I'd play a barbarian, but with the fluff of a ranger. I believe that there is even a feat on the wizards website that gives one an animal companion as a cohort. Pick up a great ax/greatsword(or a bastard sword two handed so its only a martial weapon), and go to town.

Edit: Of course, playing an unoptimal character is always a possibility. Heck, one of my more enjoyable characters was a halfling warlock whose only invocation(at this point) let him use animal empath as a druid. Plus, I've played twf rangers, and while they don't do to much(depends on the game), if your mainly roleplaying, then just have fun.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 09:50 PM
I know, I can probably have fun with my Ranger that way too.

Where can I find a Ranger varient? Actually, my DM might let me homebrew up something...

Thanks everyone for helping me!

Edit: triple-ninja'ed?!? I don't like the idea of barbarians doing their damage through rage...

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-03-20, 09:53 PM
The online SRD. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#ranger)
That content was originally published in Unearthed Arcana.

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 09:55 PM
If you look on CrystalKeep.com, in their D20 section is a .pdf called "Base Classes." It lists all the variants of the base classes that have been printed. At the end of the Ranger section is a list of the alternative fighting styles, one of which includes Power Attack and other helpful combat feats.

Here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a)'s the feat that gives any character an animal companion. Perfect for a barbarian with ranger fluff.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 09:56 PM
Hm, wildshape... That is an option...

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 10:01 PM
I don't like the idea of barbarians doing their damage through rage...

So don't call it rage. Call it "Combat Focus," or "Nature's Blessing," or "Wild Rhythm," or "Wind Form," or another name you think of (we can help with ideas if you so desire). What it gives you is a boost to Str, Con, and Will saves, while decreasing your AC (unless you use a variant). Couldn't a ranger go into a combat trance 1/day, increasing their effectiveness and drive?

Fluff is infinitely malleable.

[Edit] Also: *Hat tip to fellow Browncoat.*

Skjaldbakka
2008-03-20, 10:04 PM
Stop bad mouthing the ranger, people. It is one of very few classes that got done right.

My (actually functional, as opposed to merely entertaining) build for ranger is to take Quickdraw, and the archery style. . . Then take power attack and a two-handed weapon. This gives you a great deal of versatility. You can melee effectively, and have some (free) archery feats to use when you can't get in melee. If you are doing the archery thing, and someone slips past the frontline to beat up on the caster- you are likely right next to the caster ready to lay a beating on him by Qdrawing your falchion.

On top of that, you have good skills, limited spellcasting, and very few dead levels.

Of course, I played a L20 Ranger in 3.0, so maybe I'm a tad biased.

FireFox
2008-03-20, 10:05 PM
Edit: for clarification, this is about renaming Rage.

..."head, meet palm. palm, meet head." Of course I could do that, duh/doh! Thanks!

"Which one do you figure tracked us down?"
"The ugly one, sir."
"...could you be more specific?"

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 10:06 PM
Stop bad mouthing the ranger, people. It is one of very few classes that got done right.

My (actually functional, as opposed to merely entertaining) build for ranger is to take Quickdraw, and the archery style. . . Then take power attack and a two-handed weapon. This gives you a great deal of versatility. You can melee effectively, and have some (free) archery feats to use when you can't get in melee. If you are doing the archery thing, and someone slips past the frontline to beat up on the caster- you are likely right next to the caster ready to lay a beating on him by Qdrawing your falchion.

On top of that, you have good skills, limited spellcasting, and very few dead levels.

Of course, I played a L20 Ranger in 3.0, so maybe I'm a tad biased.

That sounds like it'd work pretty well.

Tam_OConnor
2008-03-20, 10:35 PM
Actually, while we're on that whole reflavoring kick, the whirling frenzy rage variant from Unearthed Arcane is shiny. Here. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/classFeatureVariants.htm#rageVariantWhirlingFrenzy )

Alternately, if you decide that rage isn't so shiny, this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#otherClassVariants) might fit better, especially if you ask your DM if you can substitute TWF for archery. Overall, I'm a ranger-lover too (NG m he Ranger!), but a Barbarian/Scout works quite well too.

Also, Self-Sufficient isn't a bad feat, but it's not a fantastic optimization tool either. Heck, Aragorn probably had it. But the Dodge tree, going to Two Weapon Pounce from PHB2, isn't bad either.

"Seven percent! That's standard!"

FireFox
2008-03-20, 10:46 PM
Cool stuff, but I have to be melee, can't let the NPC do it all. And if I do away with the bastard sword and instad take power attack, what shall I get with the other feat?

:smallsmile: "Okay. Zoe, I'm paying you too much."

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 10:51 PM
Probably take Power Attack and Quick Draw.

"Why? What does she get?!"

FireFox
2008-03-20, 10:56 PM
Yeah, that would be useful... I guess I wanted the Bastard sword because I really like them as a weapon irl, that and my character was the, uh, "lovechild" of an unknown noble...

"Looks can be deceiving."

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 10:59 PM
Yeah, that would be useful... I guess I wanted the Bastard sword because I really like them as a weapon irl, that and my character was the, uh, "lovechild" of an unknown noble...

"Looks can be deceiving."

A greatsword = about a claymore. The drawing in the Player's Handbook is of a ceremonial sword (and they list it at 15 lbs, which is heavy for a ceremonial sword! What the heck!?). If you're using it two-handed, you can describe exactly how it looks.

"You paid money for this, sir? On purpose?"

FireFox
2008-03-20, 11:02 PM
A greatsword = about a claymore. The drawing in the Player's Handbook is of a ceremonial sword (and they list it at 15 lbs, which is heavy for a ceremonial sword! What the heck!?). If you're using it two-handed, you can describe exactly how it looks.

"You paid money for this, sir? On purpose?"

I mean that I like how the hand-and-a-half sword can be used with one hand, or plus a few fingers of the other to give it extra leverage.

"What? Come on, seriously, Zoe. Whaddya think?"

Bierhoff
2008-03-20, 11:27 PM
If you decide to go with a high dex, high int fighter swashbuckler (complete warrior) might have some useful stuff. They get weapon finesse off the bat and later they have an ability which adds you int bonus to your damage, on top of your str bonus.

Another thought for TWF would be to optimize your crits. If you can only hit on a high roll you might as well make it count.

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 11:27 PM
Well, if you don't plan to use it in combat 1-handed (which is a bad idea), then it's only 1.5 average damage less (but no to-hit penalty) than the greatsword if you're constantly 2-handing it.

"Well, here I am."

Chronos
2008-03-20, 11:36 PM
I mean that I like how the hand-and-a-half sword can be used with one hand, or plus a few fingers of the other to give it extra leverage.You can also use a longsword this way, you know, and you don't even have to spend a feat to do it.

"*Sniff* You guys had a riot for me?"

Chronicled
2008-03-20, 11:46 PM
It's true. The longsword would be what you want here if you're not going for pure damage.

"Are you Alliance?"
"Am I a lion? I don't think of myself as a lion. You might as well though, I have a mighty roar."
"I said, 'Alliance.'"
"Oh, I thought..."
"No-"
"That's strange."
*Awkward silence*

Yvian
2008-03-21, 08:10 AM
It's true. The longsword would be what you want here if you're not going for pure damage.


I will second that. I too have a great fondness for Bastard Swords, but there are better things to do with your feats. Moving from a d10 to a d8 is not going to make much of a differance.

If you take TWF you can have a Long Sword in one hand and a mailed gauntlet in the other. This would let you shift from TWF to THF each round depending on the situation. Yes, there are better weapons, like armor spikes and spiked chain, but that involves cheese. Or you could chose a two headed weapon, like a quarterstaff. Add the quick draw feat and you open yourself up to some other interesting weapons.

Telonius
2008-03-21, 09:36 AM
For Prestige Class possibilities ... I don't own the book, but you might want to look into Dread Commando (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20050407b&page=6) from Heroes of Battle.

FireFox
2008-03-21, 10:09 AM
You can also use a longsword this way, you know, and you don't even have to spend a feat to do it.

"*Sniff* You guys had a riot for me?"

I meant how that is/was how the bastard sword is used. like when it was a new innovation. not in
DnD. As a DnD newbie, I am less concerned with what "works" "well" than I am with what appeals to me. :smallwink:

Also, the HoB deals with army-sized campaigns...

"Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."

Draz74
2008-03-21, 11:07 AM
One idea, if you want to keep things simple and use the TWF bonus feats from Ranger, is to use the "lowly" quarterstaff as your main weapon. Get Power Attack.

With a quarterstaff, you can switch back and forth as often as you like between TWF and THF, without dropping and drawing weapons. Fighting a favored enemy with low AC, and have a chance to use a full attack? Use TWF. Fighting something you don't get bonus damage against, or only able to make one attack? Power Attack with the quarterstaff in both hands.

A Scout 3 / Ranger 17 / Swift Hunter will certainly be more powerful if he goes for archery rather than TWF. (Get Greater Manyshot if you go this route.) But I think, if you want to keep things relatively simple and you're not in an especially high-powered game, you'll be fine with a TWF Ranger with Swift Hunter.

A note, though: Start with a level in Scout rather than in Ranger. Gets you 6 more skill points than you would otherwise have.

TheThan
2008-03-21, 11:19 AM
The PHBII has a lot of weapon style feats. Most of them are based off of two weapon fighting. Maybe that’ll help you out.

edit

I made a homebrewed ranger that gives the ranger two handed weapon fighting and sword and shield (well one handed weapons really), along with the standard two weapon fighting and archery.

i also dumped favored enemy in favor of skirmish, and gave him some spell like abilities in place of his lackluster spells.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-03-21, 11:26 AM
I'm probably going to get shooed by this, but if you really, really wanted to play a two weapon fighter, this here thing is good for you:

The Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/953787200)

The tiger claw discipline was, is, and will be described as "What TWF should have been from the frickin' start". I can see three problems with you using it:

A) "It's stupid! Look at the names!": ToB is only stupid if you play it as if you were the main character of Yu-Gi-Oh! or DBZ. You don't have to act in an over the top, retarded fashion and call your attacks.

B) "It's too magical! I don't wanna be a wizard!": This is a false assumption. Yes, three disciplines and a few maneuvers on the other schools ARE supernatural, but most are simply great martial skill. You can always rework the supernatural maneuvers or ignore them.

C) "It's too powerful! I'll eclipse my group!": Something to consider, indeed. For example, does your group's sorcerer plan to take mostly evocation spells (Bad idea, they're mostly useless. Someone here can link you to The Logic Ninja's guide to arcane magic to explain WHY)? If so, yes, ToB is going to seem extremely, brutally more powerful, particularly at lower levels. At higher levels, though, when a normal warrior needs to full attack or do piddly damage, ToB starts to shine, giving you a wide variety of things to do. And at lower level, it even make some things useful for a change. For example, TWF. Usually, you can't use the offhand weapon unless you full attack or spend a feat to ge the privilege. A level 1 maneuver, Wolf Fang Strike, however, allows you to do that, without forcing you to do gross overspecialization.

Chronos
2008-03-21, 12:07 PM
Fourth problem with Tome of Battle: It's too complicated for some folks. Some people prefer warrior-types because they like the simplicity of "I hit it with my sword. If it's still standing, I hit it with my sword again", and don't want the bookkeeping of keeping track of what abilities they have available at the moment, and what they all do, and which ones they can use when. In that sense, at least, Tome of Battle is a lot like spellcasting. Of course, this is largely a matter of personal preference.


For Prestige Class possibilities ... I don't own the book, but you might want to look into Dread Commando from Heroes of Battle.Man, that except leaves out a lot of important information... How many levels is the class? What's its BAB? What are its saving throws? I'm guessing five levels, full BAB, and good Fort and Ref, but it doesn't say.

LibraryOgre
2008-03-22, 11:26 PM
I'm having fun with a Goblin Ranger. He's concentrating on mounted combat (with his wolf mount), and he's improving his two-weapon fighting with Improved Shield Bash. It also helps my AC.

Now, if you're not going to be a mounted type, you can still play that game. Get your longsword, and use a shield, either light or heavy (I prefer light, since you can use your hand for things). Since you won't be spending feats on mounted combat, throw them into Power Attack (which you can use on a charge) and Quick Draw. Charge with your longsword in two hands, power attacking for 2 (giving you the superior PA ratio for using a two-handed weapon), attack, then use a free action to pull out your shield, partially negating the decrement for charging AND putting you in the position for TWF next round.

Unfortunately, D&D sucks at the shield-wall tactics that makes the tactic really shine... essentially using your shield to get rid of his, so you can stab him.

Choose your favored enemies carefully, BTW. I inquired a bit about who would be good favored enemies for a person in this campaign, and got some very useful ones.

Chronos
2008-03-23, 12:36 AM
Choose your favored enemies carefully, BTW. I inquired a bit about who would be good favored enemies for a person in this campaign, and got some very useful ones.I'm fond of Undead for a first favored enemy, since you're likely to be encountering them for your entire career. At first level, you'll see skeletons and zombies, and at twentieth level, you'll see liches, vampires, and nightshades. Plus there are a lot of dungeons etc. populated almost entirely by undead, and I think there's a feat that lets you apply Sneak Attack, Skirmish, and the like to favored enemies, even if they're normally immune.

By the time you're choosing your second favorite enemy, it's probably becoming clear what the main or recurring enemies of the campaign will be, so you can use that to guide your choice.

cupkeyk
2008-03-23, 12:37 AM
Uhm if you are a ranger with twf as your route, you can place your 17 on str and get optimum damage. the class allows the ranger to take the feat when they do not meet the prereqs. That being said, the best weapons to twf is a falchion and unarmed strikes; you get 3x of your bab in damage output

Racial IUS
1 PA
2 TWF
3 Snapkick
6
6 ITWF
9
11
12 GTWF

LibraryOgre
2008-03-23, 12:50 AM
I'm fond of Undead for a first favored enemy, since you're likely to be encountering them for your entire career. At first level, you'll see skeletons and zombies, and at twentieth level, you'll see liches, vampires, and nightshades. Plus there are a lot of dungeons etc. populated almost entirely by undead, and I think there's a feat that lets you apply Sneak Attack, Skirmish, and the like to favored enemies, even if they're normally immune.

By the time you're choosing your second favorite enemy, it's probably becoming clear what the main or recurring enemies of the campaign will be, so you can use that to guide your choice.

Undead are a good general choice, but in my case, they would've been completely wasted; we've met no undead that I can recall. That's why I suggest DM complicity.

Ascension
2008-03-23, 12:54 AM
Rangers are fun in PVP because you can metagame the heck out of favored enemies. It's evil, but you can do it. Hey, at least I wasn't as bad as the paladin who took a humanbane lance... :smallsigh:

That being said, I think most DMs would be willing to hint about favored enemies. Ultimately it's something you can only learn through experience, though... a DM who was feeling particularly evil could recommend that you favor enemies that he knows you'll never face.

Chronos
2008-03-23, 01:05 AM
Oh, sure, if your DM gives you a hint, by all means, take it. But it's a poor policy, in general, to rely upon DM help. Some DMs won't want to spoil the surprise, some won't want to upset balance by helping some players but not others, and some like to play by the seat of their pants and may not even know what sort of enemies will be most common. In those cases, you have to hedge your bets.

LibraryOgre
2008-03-23, 01:13 AM
Oh, sure, if your DM gives you a hint, by all means, take it. But it's a poor policy, in general, to rely upon DM help. Some DMs won't want to spoil the surprise, some won't want to upset balance by helping some players but not others, and some like to play by the seat of their pants and may not even know what sort of enemies will be most common. In those cases, you have to hedge your bets.

Perhaps, but IMO I think it's somewhat anti-fun of a DM to completely invalidate a class feature, either by intention ("Yeah, it would be great to focus on dragons in 'Vecna's Tomb of Undead Horror'; don't let the name fool you.") or unintention ("Hey, I didn't realize that we hadn't fought your favored enemy yet! What was it again?"). I've accidentally crippled my own characters before (my Bard/Rogue/Cloistered Cleric in a heavy undead game... I mostly told other people what to do... these days I would've made the same character as an Archivist, as it was precisely what I wanted out of him), but a DM doing it is just spoiling the group's fun.

But, hey, I let people pretty much change their entire builds at level up. "Crap, I didn't realize that I barred myself from X prestige class!"

Eldariel
2008-03-23, 04:36 AM
C) "It's too powerful! I'll eclipse my group!": Something to consider, indeed. For example, does your group's sorcerer plan to take mostly evocation spells (Bad idea, they're mostly useless. Someone here can link you to The Logic Ninja's guide to arcane magic to explain WHY)? If so, yes, ToB is going to seem extremely, brutally more powerful, particularly at lower levels. At higher levels, though, when a normal warrior needs to full attack or do piddly damage, ToB starts to shine, giving you a wide variety of things to do. And at lower level, it even make some things useful for a change. For example, TWF. Usually, you can't use the offhand weapon unless you full attack or spend a feat to ge the privilege. A level 1 maneuver, Wolf Fang Strike, however, allows you to do that, without forcing you to do gross overspecialization.

I assume you refer to this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18500)? Being Batman.


Man, that except leaves out a lot of important information... How many levels is the class? What's its BAB? What are its saving throws? I'm guessing five levels, full BAB, and good Fort and Ref, but it doesn't say.

Almost right, five levels, full BAB, good Ref. Poor Will and Fort.