D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Making a Scout a better archer?

[radmod]

I'd prefer Boots of Sidestepping or Anklets of Translocation, actually.

Hmm, I don't know if I would allow the Anklets for the skirmish.

The annoying part is if the DM uses the RAW multiclassing rules, it's basically impossible to combine Cleric 1 ith Swift Hunter and not suffer an xp penalty.

That's why humans are the best! That is, if you don't mind only one and two level dips.

EDIT: Didn't notice rad mentioned Travel Devotion before me. Oops.

Then were even. I'm pretty sure I've done that to you already.

Hmm. Boots of the Skirmisher, you say? I really, really need to sit down and look at all the magic items (comes from ignoring them as a DM, I make my own). Before this thread I hadn't heard of them and no one has mentioned them to me before (even though they know I've been looking for things like that). However, the chances of getting them? Probably unlikely.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Hmm, I don't know if I would allow the Anklets for the skirmish.

By strict RAW teleportation should count as having moved x distance, some DMs may balk at it. Myself? Scout's weak and I like the mental image of short hop teleporting around catching foes offguard for skirmish damage, so I'm fine with it.

That's why humans are the best! That is, if you don't mind only one and two level dips.

Human won't help if you're a Swift Hunter and have more than 2 levels in both scout and ranger (as you should, IMO). Human still makes the highest level class your favorite, which doesn't help when it's the 1 level cleric dip that's the albatross. Even if you find a race to make ANY of your classes favored, you'd still be limited to levelling up scout and ranger evenly, roughly. Which is a major pain, and prevents you from doing something like Scout 4 / Ranger 15 / Cleric 1, for example.

I like Wood Elf Swift Hunter archers. High str and dex, ranger as favored class covers you, access to Bow of the Wintermoon from MIC (elf only) for a cheap str-adjustable bow, and access to the RotW Elf ranger sub level, to get a +3 against undead (which is common and crit immune, so a good first choice for you already) and some other favored enemy types instead of +2 (and +6 instead of +4, etc... as you improve it). Then again, 75% of all PCs I ever see are humans and it annoys me, so I go out of my way to find viable builds not using human.

Hmm. Boots of the Skirmisher, you say? I really, really need to sit down and look at all the magic items (comes from ignoring them as a DM, I make my own). Before this thread I hadn't heard of them and no one has mentioned them to me before (even though they know I've been looking for things like that). However, the chances of getting them? Probably unlikely.

Boots of Sidestepping. And why unlikely? If the DM uses MIC, they're right in there. Sidestepping's 3 or 6k, I forget. Anklets are even cheaper. Chronocharms as I said are 500 each, or 1000 for nonbody slot. These are not obscure, high priced items. By the core rules of the DMG, many of those items could actually be bought from large enough cities. And IME, most DMs let you buy even more in towns than the core guidelines, not less.

 

[DumbPaladin]

After the Cleric I'll pretty much be sticking with Scout for awhile (though I've been kidding around about adding single levels of all the other classes). Also because our healing sucks so a few CLWs is better than nothing.
BTW, I've also taken Telling Blow even though my DM rules that I only get the basic Skirmish on a crit and not the Improved Skirmish. Quite frankly, he's tired of me being better than the other characters.

Haha ... I think it'd be pretty interesting to see what you could come up in terms of a useful character with adding even more 1-or-2-level base class add-ons, Radmod.

 

[pawsplay]

Dodge is a bad feat, Mobility is a godawful feat (especially since you can usually just 5 ft step out of melee and have Tumble), and Shot on the Run I'm not sure is worth it even if it didn't have those grisly pre-reqs.

"Hi, I have full cover. Hi, take an arrow +5d6 skirmish damage. Oh, and there I have cover again. Oh, look, next round you're coming around to get me. I guess I'll have to shoot you for skirmish damage and get cover again." Seriously worth it.

Like I said, you can't even Manyshot with it, and the uses for it are very very situational.

Manyshot is mainly useful as a prereq for Greater Manyshot. The damage is nothing compared to Rapid Shot, and if you skirmish, you are reducing accuracy, which by the numbers usually means lower damage, on average.

Basically when you have various places for cover (can't move back to your original position with eratta), those locations are within 30 ft of enemies (you do like using your class features, right?), and the enemies have no way of closing to melee with you. If they lack ranged weapons in that specific scenario, you basically win without cover anyway. If they have ranged weapons, they just ready to shoot when you pop out and instead of full attack shoot outs, you trade single attacks. So even in the best possible case scenario, I don't see it being that useful.

If they trade single attacks, you win. It's really as simple as that; you have a +AC and extra damage due to skirmish, they don't.

As for your sample feat progression, it's ok. I don't like Manyshot, the penalties are pretty high and you don't get a lot of attacks for it. I think you underestimate how important it is to get Imp. Precise Shot ASAP, also.

I don't underestimate that at all. I think you just underestimate the prereqs, which includes BAB +11. Level 15 is the absolute soonest you can take it, and at that precise moment, I'd rather have Greater Manyshot.

Why is it a mistake to assume skirmish all the time? It gets half the damage of SA, is MUCH harder to full attack with, and gets much less rules support (ie, sexy new options like the Craven feat and Sniper's Shot spell). About the only advantage it has is that, yes, in fact, you can baically get it all the time if you want. Range limit might be an issue for one round or two while you enjoy shooting against enemies with likely weak or no ranged options as they close with you, not a huge problem. Crit immunity is a pain, but Swift Hunter mostly removes that headache.

Ranges longer than 30 feet, disadvantageous battlefields, crit immunity, concealment, opponents who are grappling, and opponents you don't want to be within 30 feet of. Also, by the numbers, Rapid Shot can sometimes outperform Skirmish by a good margin, for instance, if you are using holy arrows or something like that.

I'm glad your player's happy, but his feat selection was far from optimal, and I'm just trying to advise the OP on what's best to do. Again, I don't get Far Shot did for him. Doesn't help skirmish at all, and if you're an archer fighting at 500+ ft, even with large penalties on your shots you basically win the encounter unless the other guy's a better archer than you. And how is he completely ignoring cover? That's what Imp. Precise Shot is for (well, not total cover) and why I consider it a critical archer feat.

It is a critical feat. Both builds I mentioned got it at 18th level, the second-soonest feat you can can get it. Take it at 15th if you want, particularly if you use Rapid Shot and Fell Shot.

Far Shot is very useful for killing dragons. It's not critical, but I think it's a good thing to throw in there at some point. It's great, when combined with Improved Precise Shot, for ensuring there are NO survivors.

 

[Dandu]

Expeditious Dodge would be great for a Scout, since it gives +2 to AC if you move at least 40 feet in a round and counts as Dodge for prerequisite purposes.

 

[radmod]

By strict RAW teleportation should count as having moved x distance, some DMs may balk at it. Myself? Scout's weak and I like the mental image of short hop teleporting around catching foes offguard for skirmish damage, so I'm fine with it.

Oh, I agree by RAW it works. But as you implied it's in how one views skirmish. We tend to view the skirmisher as the juke and jive combatant whose moves are so chaotic and quick that it gives him an extra oomph. Plus the 'force' of the movement gives him more. Our current DM hates the idea that I can skirmish when flying (via the Animal Devotion feat) but is resigned to it.

I'm not entirely convinced that it's necessary to have multiple Ranger levels because with Swift Hunter it's all about the skirmish. Otherwise, unless you're being silly like me, I wouldn't advise adding single levels.
In my case, though, I walked into a well-established world (from 2e) with the full understanding I probably wouldn't be playing it that long. In fact, after the next session I may never see the character again (we have 4 potential DMs). So when I created my character I did so by thinking what advantage I would gain in the short term. As such, I added Monk 1, completely forgetting I could never level up in Monk again. This meant I could only max to level 2 in other base classes. Then it turned out we were going to be playing these characters longer than originally mentioned.
So I decided to take my error and run by adding Fighter and Ranger. I may add another Fighter (for the feat) and probably Ranger 2 (allowing me to retrain 2WF). Cleric I've already mentioned and probably a Rogue level (I forgot why though).
So I'm pretty sure if we continued I would wind up as
Scout x/Monk 1/ Fighter 2/ Ranger 2/ Cleric 1/ Rogue 1
and just for S&G's Barbarian and Bard.
Of course, if I started straight off at level 1, things would've been different.

And why unlikely?

Two reasons.
1) I've gained two (three?) levels and haven't made a dime. Even though I'm basically part of a criminal organization that is constantly making money. (One of the reasons I'm moving to take control of it.)
2) I've pretty much determined that if something isn't your basic plus- weapon, or magic item (like bracers), then finding them to purchase is unlikely. Even though the DM uses MIC (for items we find and other characters in the world have found). Yet, when I added a second character (the DM wanted to merge two groups) I was able to buy anything I wanted when rolling it up.
I'm already better* than anyone in the original party and I think the DM is reluctant to allow me to get even better.

*The DM wanted me to play a were-rat so I did. I rolled really well (16, 4x15, 11) so I have the second highest number of hp, DR 10, and an AC when skirmishing 10 pts better than anyone else. My saves are roughly 4 or more better than anyone else. And I have the least magic items: low versions of a single magical melee weapon, ranged weapon, bracers, and a ring of protection. Oh, and I snuck in gloves of Dex +4. In my "are you any good" trial I literally beat the crap out of their big fighter and took a grand total of 14 pts. of damage (mostly from a single crit).

 

[Dandu]

Plus the 'force' of the movement gives him more.

Damage?

You add Skirmish dice when you move backwards, don't you?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Oh, I agree by RAW it works. But as you implied it's in how one views skirmish. We tend to view the skirmisher as the juke and jive combatant whose moves are so chaotic and quick that it gives him an extra oomph. Plus the 'force' of the movement gives him more. Our current DM hates the idea that I can skirmish when flying (via the Animal Devotion feat) but is resigned to it.

Interestingly, the eratta made it so you can't really juke and jive skirmish -- you have to move 10 ft from where you started, not forward and back or whatnot like the RAW originally allowed. Eratta also said you can't make a Mongol horse archer scout. I hate the eratta. But I have no problem seeing skirmish being different things to different characters at different times, it doesn't need ot be pigeonholed as being a specific set up scenario.

I'm not entirely convinced that it's necessary to have multiple Ranger levels because with Swift Hunter it's all about the skirmish.

Swift Hunter stacks Ranger and Scout levels for skirmish. You can go almost full ranger and still lose no skirmish damage.

Of course, if I started straight off at level 1, things would've been different.


Two reasons.
1) I've gained two (three?) levels and haven't made a dime. Even though I'm basically part of a criminal organization that is constantly making money. (One of the reasons I'm moving to take control of it.)
2) I've pretty much determined that if something isn't your basic plus- weapon, or magic item (like bracers), then finding them to purchase is unlikely. Even though the DM uses MIC (for items we find and other characters in the world have found). Yet, when I added a second character (the DM wanted to merge two groups) I was able to buy anything I wanted when rolling it up.
I'm already better* than anyone in the original party and I think the DM is reluctant to allow me to get even better.

*The DM wanted me to play a were-rat so I did. I rolled really well (16, 4x15, 11) so I have the second highest number of hp, DR 10, and an AC when skirmishing 10 pts better than anyone else. My saves are roughly 4 or more better than anyone else. And I have the least magic items: low versions of a single magical melee weapon, ranged weapon, bracers, and a ring of protection. Oh, and I snuck in gloves of Dex +4. In my "are you any good" trial I literally beat the crap out of their big fighter and took a grand total of 14 pts. of damage (mostly from a single crit).

It sounds like a lot of the DM's problems are self-inflicted. He doesn't give you guys any ability to get appropriate items for your level, then lets your new PC follow RAW for it. Of course that's going to cause problems. I'd be making a new PC each level up! The game assumes you're close to the wealth by level table and can actually GET magic items some way or another with that wealth. If you don't, the game will be vastly affected. Likewise, the items I mentioned are cheap, the only reason they wouldn't be available and more expensive things would be is pure DM fiat.

I was advising for a run of the mill, mostly follows the RAW and RAI type game in general, not your specific scenario.

 

[BENINHB]

Ranged Skirmisher increases the skirmish damage out to 60ft.

Acrobatic Skirmisher give a bonus d6 when you tumble away from an AoO

Ranger/Skirmisher w/ Swift Hunter is the best way to make an archer Scout IMO

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

"Hi, I have full cover. Hi, take an arrow +5d6 skirmish damage. Oh, and there I have cover again. Oh, look, next round you're coming around to get me. I guess I'll have to shoot you for skirmish damage and get cover again." Seriously worth it.

If they trade single attacks, you win. It's really as simple as that; you have a +AC and extra damage due to skirmish, they don't.

Again, it's not just that it's situational, it's that any situation I can imagine for it, you pretty much win anyway just by virtue of being an archery-focused character in a shootout. Sure, it helps you pwn just a bit harder...but I'm not sure that's worth a stand-alone feat, and I'm quite sure it's not worth the three feats it actually costs.

Manyshot is mainly useful as a prereq for Greater Manyshot. The damage is nothing compared to Rapid Shot, and if you skirmish, you are reducing accuracy, which by the numbers usually means lower damage, on average.

I don't like the mathematical attack equates ot damage stuff... At a certain point, your highest BAB attack is so high that it will hit many monsters most of the time anyway. So at that point, Manyshot may not be much more damage, but it's practically a free boon. Other than the feat cost. I assume a swift hunter, so he's getting manyshot from ranger 6. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother spending a feat on it anyway. Nice fall back option, but I'd rather find ways to move and full attack with Rapid Shot. And in rounds I can't, Rapid Shotting is probably better damage than a single skirmish still. Manyshot is there for versatility.

I don't underestimate that at all. I think you just underestimate the prereqs, which includes BAB +11. Level 15 is the absolute soonest you can take it, and at that precise moment, I'd rather have Greater Manyshot.

And I'd want IPS first, but I also don't like building around the Manyshot tree in general, so we'll have to agree to disagree. If you're a Swift Hunter with 4 or less Scout levels, you can have IPS at level 12, which isn't too bad.

Ranges longer than 30 feet, disadvantageous battlefields, crit immunity, concealment, opponents who are grappling, and opponents you don't want to be within 30 feet of. Also, by the numbers, Rapid Shot can sometimes outperform Skirmish by a good margin, for instance, if you are using holy arrows or something like that.

Like I said, if they're far away, just think of it as free attacks as they close into skirmish range, not so bad.
Swift Hunter helps with crit immunity. The various means of SAing crit immunes might work with a kind DM's houserules.
Skirmish fails against concealment? Just makes IPS even more important. And you can use a Seeking bow till you pick up IPS, at which point you of course trade it in for a Force Splitting Bow.
Skirmish works on grappling foes, it's just dangerous to try. Once again, IPS FTW!
As for Rapid Shot...ideally you're using both. And the fact that it's inferior to use Skirmish doesn't negate the claim that you can still use it, which is what I was arguing.

Far Shot is very useful for killing dragons. It's not critical, but I think it's a good thing to throw in there at some point. It's great, when combined with Improved Precise Shot, for ensuring there are NO survivors.

Heh, my groups usually use Magic Missile / Chain Missile to get rid of fleeing enemies. I wouldn't mind having Far Shot, definitely. I just wouldn't want to spend a feat on it, even a class bonus feat.