Pros and Cons of going mainstream

[Hussar]

Yes, you would get different results:

1) almost nobody uses Con as a dump stat for 3.5Ed Rangers (I have never seen that in person)

2) 3.5Ed warlocks are not built with Con as their primary stat

If I were to tell you that there were 2 ranged "strikers" in a pre-4E D&D game, one Ranger & one arcane caster/Warlock, which would you guess would be the one with the most HP? I'm talking statistically speaking, not outliers.

Taking the same question in 4Ed, there are at least 2 Warlock types- and possibly other arcane casters as well- that will beat the Ranger on HP every time because they are built to be Con first. There simply are not ranged classes in 3.5Ed designed to prioritize Con.

But, you can't have it both ways. If ranged classes in 3.5E don't prioritize Con, then it stands to reason that a Warlock might very well beat out a ranger. After all, Con for an archer ranger doesn't help him very much. Warlocks, OTOH, specifically are told in the class writeup that stats go Cha-Dex-Con.

Now, if you want to compare, say, sorcerer to ranger, sure. The ranger should have more HP. Then again, in 4e, they do. Or, at least it should be pretty close. But, there's no reason not to have a pretty high Con warlock. Str isn't doing the warlock any good, so, where do you put your third highest score? The 3e ranger has to have Dex and Str (after all, a strength bow is par for the course - no Str means your damage will be pitiful) and and above average Wis. Con is probably 4th.

Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean anything. In this thread people talked about seeing warlocks with higher HP than rangers in their 3e games. Are their experiences somehow less valid than yours?

 

[Manbearcat]

Just made a level 10 Human Ranger (no Theme) with inherent bonuses (+ 2 weapon, neck, armor by level 9 instead of magic items) with standard array as follows:

HP = 70
HS = 7 @ 20 per
AC = 25
Fort = 24
Ref = 21
Wis = 21
Init = 6

20 STR
12 DEX
13 CON
16 WIS
11 INT
10 CHA

Feats = Bravo Multiclass, Impending Doom Style, Chainmail Armor Proficiency, Scale Armor Proficiency, Swift Recovery, Skill Power (Reactive Surge - Encounter; IR Healing Surge on Bloodied), Two Weapon Defense (class)

At Wills = (Twin Strike with - 2 hit effect, Marauder's Rush)

Encounters = Heroic Effort (No Action; + 4 Hit on missed attack), Bravo (Minor; + 2 Hit/Damage UEOYNT), Fox's Cunning (+ 3 hit and MBA as IR), Disruptive Strike (- 6 hit and MBA is II), Twofold Flinch (- 2/4 hit as Minor)

Dailies = Skirmishing Stance (+ 2 AC/Ref, + 1d8 extra damage), Snarling Wolf Stance (IR MBA when hit and shift 3), Ranger's Recovery (big damage attack and refresh Disruptive Strike)

Utilities = Invigorating Stride (Encounter; Shift 3 and Second Wind as Move), Oak Skin (Daily; damage resistance 3 for encounter), Blood of the Fallen (Daily; Free Action on quarry kill - regain 25 HPs)

We just ran through 2 quick fights in succession at 1250 XP and 1500 XP (50 % and 60 % the XP for an of-level encounter for a 5 man group respectively) with MM3/MV math enemies. Level 10 enemies with + 15 vs AC and + 13 vs NADs. Fight one with 1 Standard Ogre Brute, 1 Manticore Skirmisher, and 2 Minion Soldiers. Fight two with 1 Elite Ettin Soldier and 1 Manticore Skirmisher. Only needed Skirmisher's Stance on 1st Fight. SWS Stance, Oak Skin, Blood of the Fallen, Ranger's Recovery (* 2 DS), Action Point on Ettin Fight. All Encounter Power's used on both with DS * 2 on ettin fight due to RR. Bonuses to AC and Reflex galore with - 2 or more to hit on enemies all over the place. Neither fight was an issue. Had enough healing surges to manage them in succession; spent 2 in each fight with IS (Second Wind) and Reactive Surge, 1 after first fight to get to full. Second fight was even easier than the first with DR from Oak Skin, 2 * DS, and BotF Heal.

All told, the mitigation/damage avoided by the Ranger in the second fight from its suite of powers (including At-Will - 2 to hit) was 176. 2 Surges + 25 HP BotF Heal = 65 HP. Total of 311 effective HP pool for the fight and only 2 surges spent during the fight and 1 spent afterward. Not sure on the first but it was probably around 240.

Conclusion: A Ranger can easily be built as a front-line, "tanky" melee combatant with lots of survivability and still bring the control effect "dead".

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But, you can't have it both ways. If ranged classes in 3.5E don't prioritize Con, then it stands to reason that a Warlock might very well beat out a ranger. After all, Con for an archer ranger doesn't help him very much. Warlocks, OTOH, specifically are told in the class writeup that stats go Cha-Dex-Con.

Now, if you want to compare, say, sorcerer to ranger, sure. The ranger should have more HP. Then again, in 4e, they do. Or, at least it should be pretty close. But, there's no reason not to have a pretty high Con warlock. Str isn't doing the warlock any good, so, where do you put your third highest score? The 3e ranger has to have Dex and Str (after all, a strength bow is par for the course - no Str means your damage will be pitiful) and and above average Wis. Con is probably 4th.

Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean anything. In this thread people talked about seeing warlocks with higher HP than rangers in their 3e games. Are their experiences somehow less valid than yours?

Last question first: no, there is no difference in validity of experiences.

However, my recollection was that person said it was a Wizard, not a Warlock and specifically said the HP disparity was due to random dice rolling and stat boosting items created by the Wizard himself. It was not that the caster prioritized Con, or that the class priortized Con, it was that he used his ability to create items to make his actual choice of stat prioritization irrelevant.

While the 3.5Ed Warlock may indeed be told to build Cha-Dex-Con, that is entirely different from the 4Ed warlock being built Con first. Add in Int or Cha for his rider effects or certain key powers and the rest of the stats mostly doesn't matter. Nearly everything else can be ignored. The HP differential is hard-coded into the class. That is alien to pre-4Ed D&D arcanists.

Con is no less useful for an archer ranger than any other ranged attacker. HP always matter. An archer ranger in 3.5Ed can be quite effective as a Dex-Con-Wis build: use ranged weapons as per usual and fitnessable weapons for melee. Then there's the issue of things like Endurance. Using Con as your dump stat on a 3.5Ed ranger, regardless of build, pretty much negates the value of this free Feat. Strength bows are very nice, but not essential. (Personally, I favor accuracy and durability over accuracy and damage dealing.)