Why be an archer ranger?

[Turtlejay]

Toughness for free is better than Defensive mobility for free, that should be enough for you.

The other thing is just the cherry on top. I don't understand the logic in saying that hitting with two hands will never happen or be impossible. Every Ranger should have twin strike. No exceptions. Even with a cruddy Strength mod, that is giving you two chances to hit with +3 weapon (I hope!).

But still, go with beastmaster.

Jay

 

[Alabast]

Toughness is a good feat. But for a primarily archer character, I would say Defensive mobility is better.

If you wanted to play a ranger that switched freely between the two fighting styles without overtly favoring one or the other, then TWF is the stronger choice.

However, radical though it may seem, I thing it might be possible to create a playable character that didn't have the Toughness feat at all!

 

[Klaus]

Why is it that you feel that the Ranger should be the one to fix this problem? He's not the only choice.

Because he's supposed to be the best ranged attacker in the game, and yet, if your party goes dragonslaying, you'd better have a rogue instead of a ranger, or else it's gonna be 1 PC vs. Flying Monster.

Since flying opponents are pretty common even at Heroic level, characters should have a decent chance of bringing the foes down.

 

[Cadfan]

Because he's supposed to be the best ranged attacker in the game, and yet, if your party goes dragonslaying, you'd better have a rogue instead of a ranger, or else it's gonna be 1 PC vs. Flying Monster.

Since flying opponents are pretty common even at Heroic level, characters should have a decent chance of bringing the foes down.

I guess I don't see why its the responsibility of the one character who isn't bothered by flying enemies to have an ability available to make flying enemies stop flying.

Honestly, it really sounds like a wizard's job.

And for the record, there are a LOT of ways to bring the dragon down for a round or two. The rogue is just unique in that he can bring the dragon down for the whole encounter.

 

[bganon]

Because he's supposed to be the best ranged attacker in the game, and yet, if your party goes dragonslaying, you'd better have a rogue instead of a ranger, or else it's gonna be 1 PC vs. Flying Monster.

Since flying opponents are pretty common even at Heroic level, characters should have a decent chance of bringing the foes down.

My point is that any flying monster is stupid to swap ranged attacks with even a single ranger. The ranger simply out-"artilleries" any monster. Add a wizard or even warlock into the party and it's even worse - an artillery creature is going to need some friends to keep ranger/wizard fire away, or if a solo monster, some decent melee options to help neutralize the threat. The ranger pulls the monster out of the air not with attacks that knock prone or whatever, but simply by dealing so much damage that trying to fight at range just isn't a good option for the monster anymore - a flying foe is better off trying to neutralize the ranger's advantage (in the blue dragon's case, by closing to melee, which gives the rest of the party a chance to be involved).

It's much the same as how a rogue can "control" where monsters move just by providing the threat of flanking - intelligent monsters aren't going to move between a rogue and a fighter, not because the rogue has hit them with some movement-limiting status effect, but because they're smart enough to know that they're risking huge damage if they do.

 

[Ibixat]

It's much the same as how a rogue can "control" where monsters move just by providing the threat of flanking - intelligent monsters aren't going to move between a rogue and a fighter, not because the rogue has hit them with some movement-limiting status effect, but because they're smart enough to know that they're risking huge damage if they do.

BAH that monster had better roll a Dungeoneering check against DC 15 to know that I'm a striker, DC 20 to know I can sneak attack him =P

 

[DracoSuave]

Blanket statements like X is better than Y that are based on math need math to back them up.

Toughness is extra hps/combat = 5 X the tier X (1 + Healing Surges used per combat/4) If you use two healing surges, that comes out to about 7 hps in heroic tier. Let's assume you tend to get into very bloody combats and you have to use four surges, that means the value of Toughness is 10 hps of damage mitigated.

If Defensive Mobility prevents even one attack per combat that does 10 hps or more per damage, then it is better than Toughness, by any mathematical account. If it does multiple attacks prevented that add up to 10 hps or more.. then it is better than Toughness.

Bear in mind, the 10hps thing is pretty much worst case scenario. The real number is between 5-10 depending on your party makeup.

 

[DracoSuave]

BAH that monster had better roll a Dungeoneering check against DC 15 to know that I'm a striker, DC 20 to know I can sneak attack him =P

It's Nature against humanoids.

 

[Minigiant]

By level 15 you'll have both feats anyway. Unless you're some sort of crazy person who likes dying (or you paragon multiclassed which doesn't say much about your sanity).

 

[Zelc]

This might belong in houserules. Feel free to fork if you want to talk about this more. I was thinking of doing the following to Rangers:

• Prime Shot works if you're within 2 squares of the target, and you don't need to be the closest target.
• Hunter's Quarry only triggers if you're within 3 squares of the target when you attack, and has a range of 3 for the application.
• Archery path increases Prime Shot range to 3 and Hunter's Quarry range to 5 as well as giving you Defensive Mobility.
• The Sly Hunter feat should ignore you (you can be within 3 squares of the target as long as no one else is).

No more just standing there plinking away 20' or 40' from the action. The option is still there, but now there's a nerf for being more than 5 squares away and an incentive to be 3 squares or less away and being in some sort of danger. Plus this doesn't affect melee Rangers much. They're going to be close to the enemy anyway to attack, and your Hunter's Quarry doesn't end if you go out of range (you just have to be close to apply it and trigger it) so there's extra action requirement.

Same things happen to the Warlock's Prime Shot and Warlock's Curse (might need to put Warlock's Curse range at 5 but that really belongs in Houserules), except there's no boosted range option. They have better defenses so it's probably ok, and most of their powers have low range anyway.