PDA

View Full Version : 3.5 Core Dwarven Rgr



Ent
2008-08-19, 09:48 PM
How do I make a 3.5 Core Dwarven Ranger optimal? It should be starting at lvl 5 with 28 point-buy.

I was thinking of cross-classing with Fighter, trying to go with two-weapon combat (two Dwarven Waraxes with the extra -2 penalty, the Dwarven Urgosh or even two light weapons to make use of Weapon Focus and Specialty feats, or a normal one-hand/light off-hand combination).

Do I just forgo Dex since I'm getting the two-weapon combat feats via Combat Style, or does it just come too slow? Is Weapon Focus/Specialty a trap better avoided?

Frownbear
2008-08-19, 09:50 PM
How do I make a 3.5 Core Dwarven Ranger optimal?

Frankly (but unfortunately), you pretty much don't...

RTGoodman
2008-08-19, 09:56 PM
I don't have access to all my books right now, but off the top of my head I think the alternative class features from Dungeonscape (maybe?) could be appropriate and/or good. Also, I think the Deepwarden PrC (RoS, probably) is designed for Dwarf Rangers and gives Con to AC. Races of Stone is probably the place to look for more info.

@\/: Oops. Didn't see the Core part. Nevermind... :smallsigh:

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-08-19, 10:01 PM
Core. So he's taking one of the worst classes in core and asking us to help it out. It's doable, but hard. Sorry.

Frosty
2008-08-19, 10:03 PM
Take a few levels in Ranger and Barbarian as well, then go into Horizon Walker

Collin152
2008-08-19, 10:11 PM
Play a druid, and take Track.

serow
2008-08-19, 10:34 PM
You could take 2 levels of Fighter and also Barbarian, then finish it up with full Ranger, or mix it up with Horizon Walker or Rogue.

Otherwise, if you're going Dwarf melee Ranger 20, you might want to consider taking the archery path (yes archery, use a bow as a secondary to get off quick surprise attacks using Manyshot) with your Improved Initiative and then Quick Drawing your primary weapon to Power Attack. Extend Spell might or might not be useful, depend on your spell selection. Buff and utility spells are preferred.

In general, the archery Ranger is more useful.

CASTLEMIKE
2008-08-19, 10:38 PM
Depends on how long the game is expected to last. One of the strengths of a Dwarf is they can wear heavy armor without being slowed down since they already move slow at 20 feet. (Ranger kind of works against that heavy armor special normally except as a dip)

Maybe Ranger -1, Dwarf Paragon -3, Ranger +1.

Barbarian -1, Ranger -2, F-2 (Mix up Dwarf Paragon as desired) probably better.

F-2 Dwarf Paragon -3 could be fun.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/racialParagonClasses.htm

Prestige Ranger might be an option with a feat heavy Cleric with the Animal Domain or a Druid using the Flaw variant.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/prestigiousCharacterClasses.htm#prestigeRanger

Chronos
2008-08-19, 11:13 PM
Dipping a bit into fighter isn't a bad idea for any warrior-type class. Just make sure to take an even number of levels, since the odd levels don't get you anything that your other class wouldn't. Likewise, barbarian or paladin (depending on alignment) aren't bad dips, either.

The archery combat style is much more useful for a ranger, mostly because two-weapon fighting in general sucks. Basically, if you get all of the feats for two-weapon fighting, you put out about as much damage as someone with a big two-handed weapon who didn't bother with any feats, and that only if you're getting off full attacks. Even if you're primarily melee, though, situations will come up where ranged attacks are handy, and it doesn't hurt to carry a bow.

Finally, you may be tempted to take the Dwarven Defender prestige class. Before you do, though, ask yourself: How many fights are you likely to get into, where the enemy won't be able to just walk away and ignore you (or worse, attack you from a distance)? Sacrificing mobility is almost never a good trade.

Darrin
2008-08-20, 07:34 AM
How do I make a 3.5 Core Dwarven Ranger optimal? It should be starting at lvl 5 with 28 point-buy.

I was thinking of cross-classing with Fighter, trying to go with two-weapon combat (two Dwarven Waraxes with the extra -2 penalty, the Dwarven Urgosh or even two light weapons to make use of Weapon Focus and Specialty feats, or a normal one-hand/light off-hand combination).


Hmmm. Is the SRD considered Core? There may be problems with either Ranged or TWF. To be effective with ranged, you may need Greater Manyshot or Improved Rapid Shot. The first one is in the Psionic section of the SRD, so that might be considered core, but the second is in Complete Warrior. For TWF, double dwarven waraxes would be ideal, but Oversize TWF (which gives you Power Attack on both waraxes) is in Complete Adventurer.

Either way, there's no easy way to boost your damage all that much. Optimal is probably going to be Power Attack with greataxe and TWF with armor spikes.

bosssmiley
2008-08-20, 08:03 AM
Play a druid, and take Track.

But...

He...

No, because...

Aw heck, Collin152 has a point there.

Let's be honest, the Core Ranger is horribly gimped in the class features to compensate for the zomgmassive overpowaaaaah!!1!! inherent in his having full BAB.

Much like the Monk, the only way to save a Ranger from irrelevance in Core is actually to multi-class out of the class (Fighter2/Barb4/RangerX + PrC to taste as a Core-only basic build). :smallconfused:

You might want to ask the DM if you can use a modded Ranger class that actually does level-appropriate stuff instead (I prefer either Paizo's slightly de-nerfed "Pathfinder" Ranger - still flawed, but usable - or one of the several Gaming Den versions doing the rounds). :smallamused:

Leon
2008-08-20, 08:18 AM
I First read the title as being Core Dwarven Bar, then i saw the word Optimal.

No help here

Chronos
2008-08-20, 11:09 AM
Let's be honest, the Core Ranger is horribly gimped in the class features to compensate for the zomgmassive overpowaaaaah!!1!! inherent in his having full BAB. Well, they also get Hide and Move Silently, which the druid doesn't, and the skill points to use them. So there's two things that the ranger has over the druid. Which still probably doesn't address the balance.

Then again, it's rather praising with faint damnation, to say that something is weak compared to the druid. Everything's weak compared to the druid.

Trouvere
2008-08-20, 11:37 AM
Well, this is the point, isn't it?

Innocent Poster: I'd like to make a Mystic Theurge. I'm thinking Wizard 5 / Cleric 5 / Mystic Theurge 10.
Response: No, better to go Wizard 3 / Cleric 3 / MT 10, Wizard PrC 3.
Response: Maybe go with Cloistered Cleric first, for extra skill points. Kobold domain for trapfinding and disable device. Maybe Travel domain and Track feat. Your spellcasting will be weak, so you need to carve out several supporting roles.
'Optimizer': Good, but drop the Wizard and Cleric levels for Druid, and the Theurge levels for Planar Shepherd.

It's just not helpful. Of course a druid is stronger. But there are two types of optimization. The useful one actually tries to maximise the effectiveness of, oh, I don't know, the character archetype that was actually suggested.

/rant.

DeathQuaker
2008-08-20, 12:16 PM
Disclaimer: I am not a build optimizer, by far. I tend to build characters according to theme. At the same time, I can build characters that are still more than effective in a typical D&D game. Take or leave of this post as you will.

I hear "Dwarven Ranger" and I think, "Master Mountaineer," a really hardy fellow. Skills along the lines of climbing and digging and navigating. May not be the toughest damage dealer depending on who's in the party, but will even out damage by outlasting his opponent if he doesn't drop him.

My primary focus in stats would be Str and Con--let him dish it out and take it--followed by Wis (13; he'll be able to cast most spells and you can opt to boost it to 4 at level 16 if you're really wanting your 4th level spells). Cha's a good dump stat for this guy--if you're really minmaxing, leave it at 6. He'll be the kind of guy with all the common sense (decent wis) but no one listens to him because he's so gruff.

Dex? Up to you. He's going to be sticking to Light Armor, where a good dex bonus helps. On the other hand, if you're maxing out Con, he should be able to take it even if he gets hit (d8 hit die's not the best, but pretty good). You might leave it low-ish but then buy him some items of Dex boosting later if it becomes an issue at higher levels. Int? You can probably bump to an average of 10 and be ok. Rangers get a lot of skill points and I'd focus on stuff like survival, know:nature, heal, and climb--no need to spread out too thin. A little spot and listen never hurts, especially for a ranger. I don't see a dwarven ranger being particularly stealthy though. Take Ride if you want to have your animal companion as a mount.

Classes: if you want to do Ranger, I'd be inclined stick with the class for the most part and get your combat masteries built up as fast as you can. After he gets his bonus Endurance Feat, take Diehard to emphasize his toughness--he's just damned hard to kill.

That said, if your GM's being RAW with favored classes, if you do choose multiclass, stick with favored class of Fighter. Take it a little later on, after you get your combat masteries. I'd take one bonus feat in Two Weapon Defense, if you're sticking with Low Dex--that shield bonus will help. The rest I might put into something fairly "typical" but effective like the power attack trees. If you've gone low Dex but given yourself a decent Int of 13, then maybe take Combat Expertise as another way of boosting your AC when you need to.

For core PrCs, a good dip would be into Dwarven Defender--the d12 hit die will make your HP that more awesome, and some of the Dwarven Defense abilities would suit well--and Uncanny Dodge is always helpful, and fits Ranger flavor as much as DD flavor. Taking it up to the point of getting Trap Sense may help your Ranger be that much better a scout if your party uses him as such. The only problem with this is that the Dwarven Defender includes two stinky pre-reqs: Dodge, which requires a Dex of 13 (so maybe you should boost Dex a bit after all), and Toughness, which is IMO a waste of a feat. If you really wanted the class but the prereqs didn't suit your build, maybe talk to your DM about alternate prereqs.

Horizon Walker can be cool, but only if the Terrain Mastery is really going to be of benefit. If you ARE going the route of "mountain ranger" than dipping to just get Terrain Mastery of Mountains could be good. Otherwise I'd stick with your main class with maybe a little Fighter or DD mixed in and get those Ranger Class abilities built up.

Weapons: I would do Dwarven Waraxe in one hand and Handaxe in the other. Don't take the penalty to do two Waraxes; take the improvement to hit--1d10/1d6 +Strength damage is good--excellent, really.

You could also twoweapon with a spiked shield and Improved Shield Bash if you wanted to Boost your AC a little more, esp. if you went low dex. I've seen a ranger go that route and it's pretty cool.

If you like the mountaineer idea and choose flavor over regular damage, a heavy pick/light pick combo could be fun. If that's the case, take Improved Crit for your weapons so you have a better chance to get that x4 damage more often.

Other class features: unless you think you won't be encountering them much, I'd make the most of your racial features and take your Favored Enemy in either Orc, Goblin, or Giant (or all of them eventually). For the first two you'll get your Dwarven bonus to hit and then Ranger bonus to damage--nice. For the latter you can go toe to to with these guys and knock them over fast while they won't hit you because of your bonus to AC.

My four cents. (Seemed a little more than two.)

Telonius
2008-08-20, 12:48 PM
Ranger/Dwarf will qualify you for Stonelord pretty early. I'm away from my books, so I don't know how much of a dip would be worth it; but a free Cure Light per day plus some other interesting gimmicks at 2nd level would at least make for a decent 2 levels.

CASTLEMIKE
2008-08-20, 01:43 PM
One type of Stonelord:

http://www.geocities.com/evan_dnd/prestige/official/stonelord.html

Telonius
2008-08-20, 01:46 PM
Ah. So, make that, only take two levels of this.

ocato
2008-08-20, 02:53 PM
What I was thinking sounds like a combination of a few of the ideas already suggested, with a little bit of zest thrown in. I'd take some mounted combat feats (for riding your animal companion, see if your DM will let you ride a bear or something), some basic two-handed weapon feats (power attack, maybe cleave if you want), and the 'archery' specialization (which, hopefully, your DM will allow you to apply to throwing weapons). Here's the zinger, take a few levels in rogue. Maybe 3. You trade 1 BaB for evasion, 2d6 sneak attack, trapfinding, and trapsense.

What I envision is a dwarf riding into battle on the back of his snarling bear. He does a ride-by spirited charge with his Dwarven Waraxe, hopping off the back of the bear at the opposite side of the opponent. He then begins whipping dwarven arrows (throwing axes or hammers) at his enemy as his bear charges in and starts to maul him. He then charges in with his trusty waraxe for the flank with his bear and starts sneak attack power attacking the hell out of the guy's back.

The rogue levels give you some much needed damage (your animal companion acting as an all-time flanking partner), and some added bonus for scouting (skill points for stealth, trapsense/finding, etc). Otherwise, I'd probably stick with the super STR/CON idea (though with a little more Dex for throwing/sneaking).

This isn't uber or perfect, but the flavor is pretty neat. I'd follow deathquaker mostly, with those changes.

Tormsskull
2008-08-20, 03:06 PM
It's just not helpful. Of course a druid is stronger. But there are two types of optimization. The useful one actually tries to maximise the effectiveness of, oh, I don't know, the character archetype that was actually suggested.


This is true, and I agree with you, but he basically set himself up for it. When someone says "I want to make xclass optimal" the automatic assumption is that the person wants to have a powerful character. So of course people will provide powerful "builds" that at lease loosely reference xclass.

And since, once again, character power is the preconceived goal here, and the stated objective of optimizing, many will use the argument "take levels in this other class and just call yourself an xclass".