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="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 4730045" data-attributes="member: 71571">I don't understand why archery-style rangers are suboptimal.  A lot of optimization theory looks at the attributes, defenses, and then shuts their ears and goes 'LA LA LA I DO NOT NEED TO LISTEN BECAUSE I HAVE IT ALL FIGURE OUT.'Here's a simple fact:  Sometimes a bonus to AC that gets you out of danger is worth more than 5 extra hitpoints.  If you have a build that centers around the concept of DGH (Don't Get Hit) then Toughness is a far less optimal feat than a feat that actually contributes to DGH, like, say, Defensive Mobility.As well, the two-weapon fighting style isn't necessary for a bow user, because your mainhand weapon is your bow, and your off-hand weapon is the arrow you notch in it.  And your damage is more without spending feats on Weapon Proficiency.  You use your powers to avoid damage on their turn, and Defensive Mobility helps you avoid damage on -your- turn.So, going along with that mentality, if you have a DGH build, then you're not going to want to go Shifter.  Shifters are all about getting hit, going cah-razeh, and then kicking arse and taking names.Longtooth Shifters are for Avengers.  Elves are for Archery Rangers.And Dwarves are great primal characters, and that fits with their origin.  Primal is the magic of the world (read: Prime Material Plane for oldschoolers).  Dwarves are products of the magic of the world.  Elves are alien outsiders who decided to settle down once they decided they liked it here.Backstory says:  Dwarves are more likely to be primal than Elves.</blockquote>

Verification