Hunter and Marauder builds, seem cool, but confused

[Arlough]

<snip> I was really excited for the Hunter because I always felt Rangers should be a full Dex-based class. I mean, TWF would take a lot more coordination than it would brute strength.

Then the Dex-based melee build comes out and its... using 2h weapons?!

I am missing something. I don't see the 2h connection. What makes the build a 2h weapon build? It seems equally useful to use 2 weapons.

 

[mneme]

The hunter tends to use two melee weapons because -if- she's dumping Str (which isn't a requirement), she's got powers that give her good hit bonuses with a single weapon in melee, but not a lot of powers that give her good hit bonuses when attacking with two weapons.

Of course, she still has Twin Strike, and she has powers like Commanding Confrontation that give her crazy damage bonuses. So even in melee, she may be better pulling two melee weapons and Twin Striking for all she's worth, particularly with a huge damage bonus, rather than making one attack that's somewhat (say, +5) more likely to hit.

OTOH, one nice thing about the Hunter build is that it gives you flexiblity. Against a brute who you hit on a 2? Switch to two weapons and hit on a 7 instead. Against a soldier who you hit on a 13? Get a ranged attack in or two, then switch to single-weapon melee, where it's easier to get combat advantage. If you pick a good weapon group (heavy blade, probably), you can have even get focus and expertise for two-handed weapons, thrown weapons, and off-hand weapons with the same feat if you want.

 

[Hawkeye]

Where are these builds located?

Hawkeye

 

[Nifft]

Where are these builds located?

Martial Power 2, I assume... they're also in the Compendium and the Character Builder.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Arlough]

The hunter tends to use two melee weapons because -if- she's dumping Str (which isn't a requirement), she's got powers that give her good hit bonuses with a single weapon in melee, but not a lot of powers that give her good hit bonuses when attacking with two weapons.

Of course, she still has Twin Strike, and she has powers like Commanding Confrontation that give her crazy damage bonuses. So even in melee, she may be better pulling two melee weapons and Twin Striking for all she's worth, particularly with a huge damage bonus, rather than making one attack that's somewhat (say, +5) more likely to hit.

OTOH, one nice thing about the Hunter build is that it gives you flexiblity. Against a brute who you hit on a 2? Switch to two weapons and hit on a 7 instead. Against a soldier who you hit on a 13? Get a ranged attack in or two, then switch to single-weapon melee, where it's easier to get combat advantage. If you pick a good weapon group (heavy blade, probably), you can have even get focus and expertise for two-handed weapons, thrown weapons, and off-hand weapons with the same feat if you want.

Okay, I followed on the Commanding Confrontation, which I had overlooked because our DM rarely flings solos at us, preferring an elite and a bunch of lower level support staff.

The part where I am lost is the "more likely to hit."
Is there a feat or paragon path that gives that +5 or so bonus to hit if you use a 2h weapon? If so, I can see how that would be a great draw.
But in that case, wouldn't a Long-sword and Short-sword combo work pretty well? You could use the Longsword as a 2h if you need the extra oopf, or the two in tandem if you need the extra attack.
Then again, maintaining an enchanted bow and two enchanted swords increases the equipment cost of the character by quite a bit, so...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

extra +5 to hit comes from higher dex than strength. Since twin strike does not allow no strength bonus to damage, you don´t lose anything in that department...

But hitting on a 2 is rather unlikely...

 

[Neonchameleon]

The differences: Think of four lines.

In the back line are the archers. They carry bows and are lethal with them. But just say "Meep!" a lot if they ever get pinned in combat.

In the second line are the Hunters. Almost as lethal with bows as the Archer. But when they can't see somewhere to jump back to they use their left hand to sheathe their bow, their right to draw their sword, and put up a decent fight, always looking to disengage so they can get back to what they do best. The reason they use two handed weapons is because they have two hands - one primary on the sword and one on the bow. If they tried to TWF they'd need a bit more scrabbling around as the left hand sheathed the bow then drew a weapon or vise-versa rather than simply having to join the right hand on sword.

On the flanks just behind the front line are the Marauders. Trying to find soft targets on the edge of a battle and turn them into sushi. Strong, agile skirmishers looking for weaknesses to rush in and exploit and who adapt to situations and create them.

On the front lines are the two weapon fighters, trying to go toe to toe with the big boys and kill them before they get killed.

 

[mneme]

As said --a Wis/Dex hunter is much more likely to hit with Fading Strike than any individual attack from a melee Twin Strike, due to having at first level, as much as a 5 point difference between them (which could widen to as much as a 9 point difference in high epic). And the same is true with encounter and daily powers that let you use Dex for melee attacks--no second weapon. Of course, you could use these powers with one of two weapons -- but because you're a Hunter and can switch weapons at will, you get no particular benefit from doing so unless you don't have appropriate gear, and might as well use a two handed weapon for your attacks with Fading Strike and the like.

Sure, hitting on a 2 is uncommon--but it's going to happen in paragon with optimized parties. When you're getting a +6 from to hit the Artificer or Warlord, and the monster's taking a -7 to its defenses due to the Psion's Disenhearten, it's probably safe to open up with the melee twin strike even when Strength is your tertiary stat, particulalry if you have a big damage bonus that this would let you double.

 

[tbarrie]

The differences: Think of four lines.

In the back line are the archers. They carry bows and are lethal with them. But just say "Meep!" a lot if they ever get pinned in combat.

In the second line are the Hunters. Almost as lethal with bows as the Archer. But when they can't see somewhere to jump back to they use their left hand to sheathe their bow, their right to draw their sword, and put up a decent fight, always looking to disengage so they can get back to what they do best.

I like the description, but note that if you're talking about the actual 4E class features, a Hunter Ranger isn't "almost" as lethal with bows as an Archer Ranger, they're exactly as lethal. There's really very little upside to the Archer Ranger. (They get +2 vs all Opportunity Attacks, as opposed to the +4 vs the sort of Opportunity Attack an archer is most likely to draw that the Hunter gets along with some other stuff.)

 

[Arlough]

Okay, I see what you are talking about. It isn't that the 2h weapon is giving a +5 as much as the powers that would use two 1h weapons rely on the wrong stat, so you may as well use a 2h weapon.

And, if they are not banned in your campaign, it might be wise to use a double weapon, like the Urgrosh, so you also get the boost to AC.