Ranger & TWF vs. Archery Powers

[Torchlyte]

Toughness alone is probably more useful than the archery feature.

I disagree. I don't think Prime Shot is useful enough to Archery Rangers to be their "unique class feature." It requires that you be closer to your target than any of your allies, which likely won't be the case after the first round or so. For a true archer, who hangs back and deals artillery damage while the defenders jump into the fray, this ability will be useless for most of the encounter.

A better ability would be a +1 bonus to ranged attacks with any weapon with which the Ranger is proficient. This way, Archery-focused Rangers are getting an overall +3 on attacks with bows and crossbows, demonstrating that they can fire their favored weapons with greater accuracy than a Fighter or a Rogue.

There's nothing wrong with a feature being situational as long as it's balanced accordingly.

 

[Zurai]

His point is that it wouldn't be balanced accordingly.

Toughness + improved dual wield

vs

Defensive Mobility + rarely-used attack bonus

... I'd still probably take the Toughness path as an archer ranger, if it didn't close off Battlefield Archer.

 

[Dausuul]

No, I'm not. Re-read your italicized bit. Now tell me why you care what your offhand weapon is. And if you don't care, how is the TWF path superior for your character?

Because it gives me Toughness instead of Defensive Mobility. The dual-wielding bit is just an extra.

 

[Kaffis]

So ask your DM to let you swap toughness for defensive mobility.

Also, I disagree, for the record. Defensive mobility, by my reading, ought to be awesome for an archery spec ranger.

 

[Styracosaurus]

Defensive Mobility is not a bad choice for a ranged attack based character, but it is a super cheap feat. I would compare it to Toughness.

The enhanced two weapon fighting though, would be a paragon tier feat if it were a feat. And the archer ranger recieves nothing for the trade-off.

I do not see the design sense in that decision. I'm not decided on what goody the archer ranger should get, but a flat +1 to hit is too much. He just needs something to be cool as an archer.

 

[Halma]

Archer VS "Drizzit like ranger"

I agree with all of you that the Archer is a little weak compared to the TWFing drow Ranger. I was playing around with making a Ranger to look at its skills, and noticed this glaring problem that why take archery, when I can take TWF, and still be just as good an archer, but have the access to TWF.

I was thinking that the Archer; being the archer after all, would get "Prime shot" but also a +1 to damage (Kind of like 3e's Precise shot, within 30 feet) and for the archery ranger to get Far-shot (+5 spaces to ranged with a bow on both the short end and long end).

 

[Dausuul]

So ask your DM to let you swap toughness for defensive mobility.

First of all, Oberoni fallacy. Second, this still doesn't give me a reason to take the archery style, unless I expect to reach Paragon tier. I have a choice between "Toughness" and "Toughness-plus-the-option-to-dual-wield-longswords." The option to dual wield longswords isn't worth much to an archer, but when the choice is "have the option" or "don't have the option," why would I choose not to have the option?

Also, I disagree, for the record. Defensive mobility, by my reading, ought to be awesome for an archery spec ranger.

If the defender is doing his job, the ranger won't be in melee that often. Ranged opponents are a bigger threat, and Defensive Mobility doesn't help against them. Toughness does.

 

[SableWyvern]

I agree with all of you that the Archer is a little weak compared to the TWFing drow Ranger. I was playing around with making a Ranger to look at its skills, and noticed this glaring problem that why take archery, when I can take TWF, and still be just as good an archer, but have the access to TWF.

I was thinking that the Archer; being the archer after all, would get "Prime shot" but also a +1 to damage (Kind of like 3e's Precise shot, within 30 feet) and for the archery ranger to get Far-shot (+5 spaces to ranged with a bow on both the short end and long end).

Hmm ... increased range is a nice option. I think +3/+5, bundled with Prime Shot makes for a reasonable incentive without being at all overpowered. Guess it depends how often targets are going to be over 100' away.

 

[Lord Sessadore]

I think some people are missing a point here: the TWF bonus feature is to balance against the archers.

Think about it - without that bonus, archery rangers get to deal 1d10/1d10 with powers that give two attacks, while the TWF ranger would only get 1d10/1d6 at the very best. They get to wield two one-handers so they can keep up with the archer.

Not saying that Toughness isn't a good feat for the archer, just that the two swords for the archer doesn't really matter.

Also: Toughness and Defensive Mobility are both great feats for the archer ranger. Why not just get Def Mobility from your class, and take Toughness? That would be better than either of them

 

[Styracosaurus]

and if you take the dual sword wielding Ranger, you are one feat away from doing d10/d10 in melee or in ranged. This is necessary for the Melee Ranger, I get that. I'm not saying that the Archer ranger is weaker, I'm saying that he needs something to make him special before eleventh level.

As it stands, you may as well select the TWF ranger even if you want to be an archer.