Are Archer Rangers getting the Shaft?

[granfalloon]

I'm just looking at what the Archer style gets vs. the Two-Blade style. Defensive Mobility (which doesn't seem very good to me, since an Archer will likely have Nimble Strike), vs Toughness and a feature that you can't gain through feats or anything. Personally, even if I were building an archer, I would just take two-weapon style. I'd still have high Dexterity and powers that focused on ranged attacks, but I'd be quite confident about going toe-to-toe if necessary.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to adjust this? My experience with 4e is limited so I'm not sure i should be beefing up archers much more than they are (I hear stories about how deadly they can be), but I don't like having one build be simply better than another.

 

[Mr. Teapot]

My experience with 4e is limited so I'm not sure i should be beefing up archers much more than they are (I hear stories about how deadly they can be), but I don't like having one build be simply better than another.

Archery Rangers are indeed already doing fine. They don't need any boost in power.


Really, an Archery Ranger could do fine picking the Two Weapon Fighting feature - or the Beastmaster feature from martial Power - and sitting back to keep plinking away with their bow. The main thing that would change is qualifying for some Paragon Paths: some require the Archer Ranger feature itself (eg, both the ranged PPs in the PHB). But after Martial Power added some more PPs, the Archer without the feature can pick one of those PPs instead.

 

[ricardo440]

I thought it wouldn't be that useful to get mobility, but having played a ranger from 1st to 10th level I have to say it was definitely worth it.

There are numerous occasions when you want to get up close or have to. Shooting in a flank for combat advantage might mean you take an AoO, but often it is worth it, especially if the enemy is marked. The -2 for a mark and +2 cos of your mobility means that any monster is on a net -4 to hit you and they take the defenders pain if they try.

 

[Nifft]

Rangers generally are teh awesome already.

While I agree that the Archery special ability is lame compared to the TWF guy's special bonus, the answer might be to nerf the TWF guy a tiny bit.

For example, remove Prime Shot from the TWF Ranger. It won't matter if he's being played as a pure melee character, but it will convincingly make the Archery path better at archery.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Don Incognito]

hur hur, shaft.

i get it.

 

[granfalloon]

Rangers generally are teh awesome already.

While I agree that the Archery special ability is lame compared to the TWF guy's special bonus, the answer might be to nerf the TWF guy a tiny bit.

For example, remove Prime Shot from the TWF Ranger. It won't matter if he's being played as a pure melee character, but it will convincingly make the Archery path better at archery.

Cheers, -- N

That's a good idea. I think I'm going to use that.
I hadn't thought of the ranger deliberately provoking opportunity attacks. That makes Defensive Mobility a bit better. Really, my main gripe was that a TWF Ranger could take the Defensive Mobility feat and have both bases covered. An archer could take toughness and, well that's it. "Opportunity Cost," as they told me in Econ.

The main thing that would change is qualifying for some Paragon Paths: some require the Archer Ranger feature itself

I really don't consider a feature to be strengthened by being a prerequisite. 3E had a lot of crappy feats that were supposedly balanced because they were prerequisites to better feats and prestige classes. If I had a player who took TWF, but played him as an archer, I wouldn't hesitate to let him take one of the archery focused Paragon Paths (heck, even if he was a drizzt clone, he could take one, but he'd be kinda shooting himself in the foot).

 

[Klaus]

Rangers generally are teh awesome already.

While I agree that the Archery special ability is lame compared to the TWF guy's special bonus, the answer might be to nerf the TWF guy a tiny bit.

For example, remove Prime Shot from the TWF Ranger. It won't matter if he's being played as a pure melee character, but it will convincingly make the Archery path better at archery.

Cheers, -- N

What the Penguin said. Take away Prime Shot from the other rangers and make an Archery exclusive.

 

[corwyn77]

What the Penguin said. Take away Prime Shot from the other rangers and make an Archery exclusive.

Not really a factor since the melee ranger will never notice - heck, the 2 archers i've played with would never notice the lack since I could count on one hand the number of times it's come up in about 2 dozen sessions. Mostlly due to the fact that the safety of range is more important than +1 to hit, especially if it comes with triggering OAs. The archer who is still being played immediately changed builds as soon as MP came out (by which I mean he kept his character exactly the same except for replacing ranged feature with beastmaster. He has a far superior archer now. Both individually as well as contributing to the group - bears make great flanking pylons for my rogue.

Prime shot, what prime shot? Who needs it. It needs to be alot better if it's going to influence players to take the ranged feature.

Beastmaster with a triple digit meat shield bear makes a much better archer than archery does AND he can use it to quarry mobs in the back lines. And their are several archer PPs in MP which do not require the archery feature.

I'm experimenting with extending prime shot to 10 squares, closest or not, ranged exclusive, to encourage both ranged rangers and keeping them closer to the fight. We'll see how it goes.

In response to the OP, ranged get over the melee ranger:

range, duh
better ac since they only need dex and wisdom
only need one enchanted weapon

These alone more than make up for the melee feature.

 

[Klaus]

The thing is, any archer ranger can pick up another fighting style and benefit of range, better ac and one enchanted weapon. The archer ranger in my group has the two-weapon fighting style, even though she has never used her scimitars yet (and we're on the verge of 4th level).

The archer ranger needs something on par with Toughness + One-handed as off-hand, or Beast Companion.

Maybe an ability similar to the 3e Shot on the Run (take a standard action at any point during a move action)?

 

[CapnZapp]

In 4E, healing has been distributed roughly equally over all characters.

Compare to 3E, where it was stored centrally (inside the Cleric) to be used only on those who need it (front-line fighters).

This is a huge shift that some of you might not be aware of. This makes it the duty of every character to take their share of the damage dished out by the enemy.

That is, by actively avoiding damage you waste an important resource and hurt your team. Your party's ability to soak damage greatly improves if all characters take at least a few points of damage now and then. And since there aren't any long-lasting penalties of taking a moderate amount of damage in D&D (no broken legs etc) there is no good reason not to put your healing surges to work.

This is a fundamental difference between 4E and all earlier editions (and most other fantasy games).

Even if you are an archer, you need to get close to the enemy so that at least some attacks are directed at you (and not someone already burdened by a lot of incoming attacks).

The conclusion is that the old "truth" that archers do well to avoid melee no longer holds true.

You possess approximately one fifth of the group's healing surges - you must make it so you take a corresponding amount of damage.

None of this means you should play stupid. If there is a hard-hitting foe that easily overcomes your AC, of course you should leave that foe to the group's defender. But don't expect to keep to the rear just because you play an archer!

Think of the action-hero Legolas fighting the orcs in the LOTR movies, getting in close and personal. That is the kind of archer supported by the 4E rules. If you don't like that - don't play an archer and weigh down your team!

If you want to play an archer that keeps his distance and avoids getting attacked, you need to play another game, where you don't sit on such a big share of the available healing!

All of this to say: melee is king in 4E. Even if you want to be able to use a bow, choose two-weapon fighting.

The Archery option is a trap. If you play a proper archer, your team will suffer. And if you play your archer the way you need to in 4E, the other options are better.