Rangers and 2 diff [w] - martial power confusion

[bert1000]

With Martial Power's Beast Ranger class feature, you lose out on 2 weapon or archery features. Now, given that there are still a lot of good 2-weapon powers, it is likely that a Beast Ranger will still fight with 2 weapons.

How does a power like Dire Wolverine Stike work when wielding a long sword [1d8] and short sword [1d6]?

Actully, this isn't a new problem. How would this work if a 2-weapon Ranger is wielding a long sword and battle axe?

 

[James McMurray]

Each two-weapon power tells you which weapon goes with each attack. The ranger decides which weapon is in which hand.

 

[Kordeth]

With Martial Power's Beast Ranger class feature, you lose out on 2 weapon or archery features. Now, given that there are still a lot of good 2-weapon powers, it is likely that a Beast Ranger will still fight with 2 weapons.

How does a power like Dire Wolverine Stike work when wielding a long sword [1d8] and short sword [1d6]?

The requirement that you wield two weapons does not mean you use the stats of both weapons in the attack unless the power specifically says you make one attack with each weapon. You just have to be holding and able to attack with both weapons.

Actully, this isn't a new problem. How would this work if a 2-weapon Ranger is wielding a long sword and battle axe?

The ranger chooses whether he wants to use the longsword or the battleaxe to make the attack with. Remember, there's no conception of "off-hand penalty" in 4th Edition.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

The ranger chooses whether he wants to use the longsword or the battleaxe to make the attack with. Remember, there's no conception of "off-hand penalty" in 4th Edition.

Yes and no... If the Ranger was going Beastmaster, wouldn't he be giving up the ability to use Two Weapons of equal size? He would need a one-handed weapon and another one-handed weapon with the off-hand property. Alternatively, I suppose he could use two normal weapons, but he would be wielding one, and "holding" the other. This means it wouldn't work with powers that require you to be wielding two melee weapons, nor would it work with the two-weapon feats.

So basically, you would want to wield a normal one-handed weapon and an off-hand weapon. When a power specifies "Melee" and doesn't list a separate main hand and off hand attack, then you would use your main weapon. In the case of other powers that specify separate attacks, you would just follow those rules and apply the weapon dice and proficiency bonuses to match the weapon being used in that part of the attack.

 

[bert1000]

The requirement that you wield two weapons does not mean you use the stats of both weapons in the attack unless the power specifically says you make one attack with each weapon. You just have to be holding and able to attack with both weapons.

The ranger chooses whether he wants to use the longsword or the battleaxe to make the attack with. Remember, there's no conception of "off-hand penalty" in 4th Edition.

This is pretty interesting then. The Beast Ranger is equal to the 2-Weapon Ranger when using burst type powers that require wielding 2 weapons but not main and off-hand explicitly (don't know how many those are).

 

[James McMurray]

When a power specifies "Melee" and doesn't list a separate main hand and off hand attack, then you would use your main weapon.

You can use either weapon with these powers. Usuallly you'll want to use your main one, but it might matter. For instance, if your dagger is flaming and you're fighting something that's vulnerable to fire.

 

[Kordeth]

This is pretty interesting then. The Beast Ranger is equal to the 2-Weapon Ranger when using burst type powers that require wielding 2 weapons but not main and off-hand explicitly (don't know how many those are).

There are quite a lot. Including, of course, twin strike, which is the primary source of the advantage.

 

[James McMurray]

Twin Strike is one attack with each weapon.

 

[77IM]

How does a power like Dire Wolverine Stike work when wielding a long sword [1d8] and short sword [1d6]?

Since Dire Wolverine Strike doesn't say which weapon you are using, I would rule that you can use either to make the attack. To make the example more interesting let's say you had a battleaxe (+2, 1d10) in your main hand and a short sword (+3, 1d6) in your off hand. You're level 1 with a Strength of 18. You could do either one of the following:

Dire Wolverine Strike (standard; encounter) * Martial, Weapon
Targets enemies; +6 vs. AC; 1d10 + 4 damage

Dire Wolverine Strike (standard; encounter) * Martial, Weapon
Targets enemies; +7 vs. AC; 1d6 + 4 damage

You would have to pick before you attack and can't mix-n-match magic item properties (like, if it's a +1 flaming battleaxe you can't apply those properties to the attack with the short sword). That's how I'd rule it.

-- 77IM

 

[bert1000]

Thanks for the clarification. Beast Master looks pretty good then for a melee Ranger.

You lose:
1 pt of damage per [W] for off-hand for certain 2 weapon powers
toughness
prime shot

You gain/keep:
Equal damage for all "2 weapon required" burst type powers
Access to all 2-weapon feats and powers
Acesss to all Beast powers
A Beast (potentially good for flanking, scouting, blocking, etc.)