Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrankTrollman" data-source="post: 1134215" data-attributes="member: 14225">That's a pretty bold claim.In 3 levels, the Ranger gets 2 combat feats - one of which is really good (Rapid Shot) and one of which is fairly good (3.5 Endurance). The Ranger also gets a Favored Enemy Bonus, and many skills which are directly useful in combat and is often more survivable as he trades 4 hit points for 2 points of reflex save. He otherwise has 2 normal feats, which can be spent on anything he wants (and are largely interchangeable for the Fighter's basic feats as the Ranger meets all the BAB limits the Fighter does.In 3 levels the Fighter gets 2 combat feats - which are selectable off of a limited, but larger, list.So in what way is the Fighter &quot;better&quot; at combat? Is it the Tower Shield proficiency? Or the part where he has a lower Reflex Save, no Listen and spot skill, and a lower reflex save?Cause to me that sounds like kind of a wash in combat. The Fighter is going to have a much worse AC against poorly hidden foes, and has the same number of combat bonuses. In exchange, he can carry a larger, more expensive, harder to transport set of armor - which will give him an advantage in some circumstances and a disadvantage in others. That and he has 4 whole hit points.So from a strictly combat standpoint - the Ranger is better on the attack and has 4 less hit points. In what way does that make the Fighter better in Combat? Last time I checked, if people could take &quot;Favored Enemy&quot; or &quot;Toughness&quot; as a feat - people would line up to get the Favored Enemy bonus. And the ranger is strictly better as a scout, diplomat, and assassin.How is that balanced?-Frank</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrankTrollman, post: 1134215, member: 14225"] That's a pretty bold claim. In 3 levels, the Ranger gets 2 combat feats - one of which is really good (Rapid Shot) and one of which is fairly good (3.5 Endurance). The Ranger also gets a Favored Enemy Bonus, and many skills which are directly useful in combat and is often more survivable as he trades 4 hit points for 2 points of reflex save. He otherwise has 2 normal feats, which can be spent on anything he wants (and are largely interchangeable for the Fighter's basic feats as the Ranger meets all the BAB limits the Fighter does. In 3 levels the Fighter gets 2 combat feats - which are selectable off of a limited, but larger, list. So in what way is the Fighter "better" at combat? Is it the Tower Shield proficiency? Or the part where he has a lower Reflex Save, no Listen and spot skill, and a lower reflex save? Cause to me that sounds like kind of a wash in combat. The Fighter is going to have a much worse AC against poorly hidden foes, and has the same number of combat bonuses. In exchange, he can carry a larger, more expensive, harder to transport set of armor - which will give him an advantage in some circumstances and a disadvantage in others. That and he has 4 whole hit points. So from a strictly combat standpoint - the Ranger is better on the attack and has 4 less hit points. In what way does that make the Fighter [i]better[/i] in Combat? Last time I checked, if people could take "Favored Enemy" or "Toughness" as a feat - people would line up to get the Favored Enemy bonus. And the ranger is strictly better as a scout, diplomat, and assassin. How is that balanced? -Frank [/QUOTE]

Verification