Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 866203" data-attributes="member: 177">Hm.  Lightly armored man with two weapons or with a bow.  A man with no armor restriction with a greatsword, or with a bow, or two weapons, or with a spiked chain, or with any other weapon in the game, on foot or on horseback, or doing whatever else he thinks useful....Seems a pretty stark contrast to me.The rogue is freqently lauded as a highly desireable class because of it's wide array of available skills.  But even with his higher skill points, rogue doesn't get enough to fully utilize the list.  Choice is power.  With choice (even choice spread over time), one can adapt.  The ranger will apparently be stuck with bow, or twf.  That's all he'll do.  A fighter has access to anything and everything available in combat style.  By high level, he's got enough feats to be more than a one-tirck pony in combat, and he can choose his tricks to meet the circumstances he's found in the campaign.  That, again, is a stark contrast.     It appears that the ranger will still be restricted to light armor.  No heavy armor, and a smaller hit die.  Doesn't sound like a flat out superior choice to me.For pure unadulterated fighting ability, the fighter still wins, even if the ranger has a d10 hit die.  Why?  Because the fighter, being what he is, can focus his stats, skills, and feats upon raw fighting capability.  The ranger wears more hats - warrior, scout, and spellcaster - and thus needs to spread his focus about.  Rather similar to multiclassing - the ranger necessarily gives up raw power in fighting to be able to do a few more things.</blockquote>

Verification