Are ranged rangers better than melee ones?

[Shadeus]

Maybe if you're an eladrin (+2 damage per short sword). But otherwise the ranged ranger is usually a better bet.

And, of course, there's no support for a spear ranger

The Eladrin Soldier feat grants a bonus to damage for longswords, not short swords.

Melee weapon rangers get the cool scimitar dance plus power attack. Bows get Sly Hunter, but even that's not very reliable (they target has to be isolated to get the damage bonus). Melee rangers will generally do more damage, but the archer ranger will survive longer staying out of ranger of many attacks and sliding away from potential attackers.

 

[Shadeus]

I'd have to say the Ranger paths are about equal.

(And this is my first post, I felt compelled to sign up here for it!)

And it was a good one! Welcome to the boards!

 

[Agrias Oaks]

The Eladrin Soldier feat grants a bonus to damage for longswords, not short swords.

Melee weapon rangers get the cool scimitar dance plus power attack. Bows get Sly Hunter, but even that's not very reliable (they target has to be isolated to get the damage bonus). Melee rangers will generally do more damage, but the archer ranger will survive longer staying out of ranger of many attacks and sliding away from potential attackers.

I should say that I don't see the benefit for a ranger using power attack. You get more damage, sure. But Melee rangers probably don't have a huge str, so they don't get a decent +hit score for melee. Though with Scimitar dance, I imagine that it does become more effect, since every miss your still doing damage. I would reccomend against PA+TWF unless you do have a scimitar, in which case, go nuts!

 

[James McMurray]

I should say that I don't see the benefit for a ranger using power attack. You get more damage, sure. But Melee rangers probably don't have a huge str, so they don't get a decent +hit score for melee. Though with Scimitar dance, I imagine that it does become more effect, since every miss your still doing damage. I would reccomend against PA+TWF unless you do have a scimitar, in which case, go nuts!

Why wouldn't you have a high strength if you're a melee ranger?

 

[Agrias Oaks]

Why wouldn't you have a high strength if you're a melee ranger?

Hrm, I suppose it depends. Most of the time i'm stuck with a standard array (Our DM prefers it over random generation or point buy). So I was stuck wtih 16 str, since I wanted higher dex, a +2 into dex was the only way to get it high. So I suppose it just depends on how you make stats. With random rolling/point buy, theres no reason NOT to have a high strength.

 

[vigormortis]

Depending on the party, A melee ranger will often be the only one flanking an enemy with the defender to get CA, something that a ranged ranger cannot and probably shouldn't try to either. a +2 to hit is pretty big, especially in tandem with abilities like armor splinter. Even with 14 strength, a flanking melee ranger automatically has equal to an 18 dex ranged ranger to hit.

As well, consider that a target that has a defender on it is generally marked and will incur a -2 penalty to hitting other targets like the ranger. A melee ranger can afford to be a bit more daring thanks to the defender, who will either get a chance to strike at your target if he tries to move or attack you if he is a fighter, or automatically deals damage to him if he is a paladin.

I'd say also that if the defender happens to fall, a melee ranger will be able to afford leaders to heal the defender then a ranged ranger can. He will be in the front line and with an AC built around being in melee more then a ranged ranger would. True, the ranged ranger can pull out a melee weapon and start attacking, but the threat would be negliable.

 

[fba827]

I, personally, prefer the ranged-ranger because it suits my style of play more than melee.

But, having said that, you will not be able to fully enjoy being a ranged-ranger if there aren't a couple defenders/tanks/melee oriented in the party to hold people off of you. 'Cause otherwise you'll just be drawn in to melee far too often (or else taking OAs from your ranged weapon attacks).

 

[Kitsune]

Proponents of the bow rangers seem to be overlooking one important detail: Ammo. With enough targets in some of the rangers' area powers, a ranger could easily blow ten arrows in a round. Unless you propose to have a Tenser's Floating Disk full of quivers floating behind your ranger, eventually you're gonna have to conserve ammo and draw steel.

Honestly, though, I can see no reason that I'd ever take the archer ranger path. All it gives you is one feat, compared to a feat plus a unique ability for the two-blade ranger. Unless I had specific designs on an archer ranger paragon path, I'd pick two-blade every time.

I'd take the two-blade ranger, plus the quick draw feat, and aim for powers that worked with both bows and blades. That way I'd be able to quickly adapt to make the most of any situation. I'd try to maximize strength and dexterity and keep investing the free stat boosts in them, with only occasional bumps to constitution and wisdom as needed by any feats or powers. If a ranged-only power was especially good, I'd take it, but since you never know what kind of conditions you'll be fighting in, neglecting the melee powers is foolhardy.

 

[AtomicPope]

The lack of support for ranged Rangers (redundant, I know) is because of Blade Cascade. It is a TWF daily exploit that allows a ranger to alternate attacks until they miss (so you could score 15-20 hits!). Unless DM's cap the total it remains the trump card for TWF builds. However, any DM worth his salt would house rule that power immediately.

Removing Blade Cascade brokeness from the mix, it's fairly even. Prime shot allows shooty builds to be a bit more accurate (or as accurate). And while they lack the opportunity attack bonuses from TWF, they avoid melee and get hit less often. It's a fair trade. Shooty builds can stay out of combat and pick off strays but must get close* to use their Quarry ability. TWF builds get a lot of exploits that allow them to shift giving them added maneuverability.

Your assumption that shooty rangers are powerful builds is not unfounded. They're easier to build for a number of reasons:
1) Dex is used for attack, defense, and initiative. You won't have to worry about upgrading armor.
2) Wisdom is the "modifier" stat for virtually every ranger exploit.
3) Con isn't as necessary since you stay out of HtH and away from the Party to avoid AoE's. This essentially allows you to focus on two stats, Dex and Wis, while ignoring the rest. You'll have better exploit bonuses/penalties from a high Wis and not suffer from a lower Con.
4) One weapon means single feat enhancements. With the TWF build you have to be concious of two weapons needing feats to upgrade damage, etc. Shooty builds only have to worry about their bow.

They're both very good. In my campaign I now have two rangers (one player got killed and made a TWF ranger). Both builds are good at what they do. Interestingly enough, a TWF ranger can take some hvy armor prof's and go with a low/mediocre Dex just fine. Gotta luv the new Scale Armor.

 

[AtomicPope]

Proponents of the bow rangers seem to be overlooking one important detail: Ammo. With enough targets in some of the rangers' area powers, a ranger could easily blow ten arrows in a round. Unless you propose to have a Tenser's Floating Disk full of quivers floating behind your ranger, eventually you're gonna have to conserve ammo and draw steel.

The ranger in my game uses a Bag of Holding to carry most his 1000 arrows. Then he has a quiver constantly stocked with 20 arrows for rapid attacks. No big deal. It just takes a little ingenuity to be a bow ranger.

Honestly, though, I can see no reason that I'd ever take the archer ranger path. All it gives you is one feat, compared to a feat plus a unique ability for the two-blade ranger. Unless I had specific designs on an archer ranger paragon path, I'd pick two-blade every time.

Agree. Which is why I house ruled Prime shot as a Archer Fighting Style feature to even it out. Just one of the things that slipped through the cracks *shrug*

I'd take the two-blade ranger, plus the quick draw feat, and aim for powers that worked with both bows and blades. That way I'd be able to quickly adapt to make the most of any situation. I'd try to maximize strength and dexterity and keep investing the free stat boosts in them, with only occasional bumps to constitution and wisdom as needed by any feats or powers. If a ranged-only power was especially good, I'd take it, but since you never know what kind of conditions you'll be fighting in, neglecting the melee powers is foolhardy.

That's the problem. You'll fall behind the purist. If you go Str/Dex your Wis isn't going to be optimal meaning you'll miss out on high exploit modifiers. Don't pretend like it won't add up quickly. At 1st level you'll be straggling next to the purist (Fox's Cunning and Two-Fanged Strike).