Hunter is a pretty great class

[JPL]

Just had my first game in over a year, with my young nephews, DMd by by brother-in-law. "Keep on the Shadowfell", 2nd level characters. I played a hengeyokai hunter. Inspired by Hawkeye from the Avengers movie, I sought out high ground (with help from my sparrow form) and ran interference for the melee types. Turns out that I could dish out striker-level damage --- 20 Dex and some good equipment and feats = 1d10 + 7 on a ranged basic attack, and that's pretty much all I used, with various hunter add-ons to immobilize, slow, push, or knock prone.

The last fight was in close quarters . . . made very good use of the 7 movement rate and kept as far away from the bad guys as possible. Nothing but hit-and-run tactics, but I was doing great damage and hindering the baddies so the boys could take them out.

Only took two hits the whole game, both from opportunity attacks from running away when a bad guy got within striking distance. So there's where I need to tweak the build . . .

 

[Obryn]

FWIW, I agree. I am very impressed with the Hunter in my paragon-tier Dark Sun game.

He blinds and immobilizes my monsters to annoying degrees. Damage is at least respectable for him, too.

-O

 

[Quickleaf]

Agreed about the hunter being a good class. My namesake character eventually was converted to a hunter, and at 11th level had a static damage bonus on ranged basic attacks of anywhere from +20 to +32, and a guarantee of at least 6 damage on a miss thanks to Grazing Shot. I multi-classed into seeker for the Primal Eye feat which is a bit cheesy but within the rules.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but the hunter, while powerful enough to get by, is a little lacking in the controller role. It belts out damage and single-target conditions well enough, but it's AE capacity is mechanically gimped by being a series of RBAs instead of a true Burst. Not an issue vs minions (except for the -2, necessary because RBAs can be so high-damage), but it misses out on bursts' advantages vs concealment, swarms, and even cover when used carefully, and that's part of the controller package.

Stalker's Mist is really something, though. Feels "this class isn't really cutting it, lets give it one broken thing to hang it's hat on."

 

[Unwise]

I have never really found the hunters RBA "Area Effect" to be anything but great. There seem to be just as many advantages to it being a series of separate attacks as there are disadvantages. Apart from anything else it makes a lot more sense not being able to shoot arrows around corners.

Some items can proc off it when they could not otherwise do so and some feats like Primal Eye rely upon RBAs. Crossbow mastery also makes it ignore cover.

A human hunter with Twin-Strike is pretty nasty damage-wise. As is any hunter who is happy to cheese out and get Primal Eye.

What I really like about hunters though is that they can do pretty much everything to a single target. I hate being a controller and having to choose 2 at-wills, so I can only slide or clear minions or slow etc. There is nothing more frustrating that not having all the tools needed to do your job. Even a wizard who is a great controller, is high level before he gets all the control options that a hunter starts with.

In addition, the range of controller abilities is rather important. A slow that can only be cast from 10 squares away is very different from one that can be cast 55 squares away. Once on the open plains, our hunter completely demoralised and neutered inbound enemies before they could even reach the group.

Slowing or immobilising an enemy far off, then having the entire group (almost all with good dex) take out their bows and nail it for a many turns before it closes is amazingly effective when the DM does not manufacture reasons for it not to work. Our group has destroyed some very significant enemies like that. The most humorous of which was a particularly tough mutant wyvern who could never fly thanks to either being immobilised or knocked prone every turn.

 

[Al'Kelhar]

I have never really found the hunters RBA "Area Effect" to be anything but great...

Provided the bad guys are nice enough to gather 'round within 2 squares of each other. A hunter's battlefield control borders on the negligible. Most leaders have better battlefield control, and they're not even supposed to be controllers. A real controller should be bursting 2 or 3 squares (Enlarge Spell anyone?), and stacking condition on condition on everything within range.

In addition, the range of controller abilities is rather important. A slow that can only be cast from 10 squares away is very different from one that can be cast 55 squares away. Once on the open plains, our hunter completely demoralised and neutered inbound enemies before they could even reach the group.

Slowing or immobilising an enemy far off, then having the entire group (almost all with good dex) take out their bows and nail it for a many turns before it closes is amazingly effective when the DM does not manufacture reasons for it not to work. Our group has destroyed some very significant enemies like that. The most humorous of which was a particularly tough mutant wyvern who could never fly thanks to either being immobilised or knocked prone every turn.

My emphasis

The difference between range 55 and range 10 is immaterial unless the DM makes it so. That is, the design of 4E assumes the vast majority of combat occurs within areas that are no more than about 20 squares across - otherwise the majority of PCs have nothing to do for the bulk of the time. Sure, the other PCs can get out their longbows and make ranged basic attacks at the slowed wyvern in the hope they hit and do some trivial amount of damage, but how fun is that for the players? So unless your DM creates an encounter in which the range difference is actually significant, the range benefit the hunter has over an arcane or divine controller is meaningless. In other words, the above example is atypical, and good on your DM for doing something that caters to the interests and powers of the party.

IMC that wyvern would've got within 10 squares of the PCs then found itself not just slowed and knocked prone on the ground, but dazed, blinded and taking ongoing damage, all from the wizard in the party. Then the melee striker, defender and leader all have a bit of fun stabbing, chopping and bludgeoning it into a squishy mess. Horses for courses - just makin' the point the range difference doesn't mean the hunter is better at controlling than anyone else.

Hunters are try-hard controllers, but real controller classes, and most leader classes, just do it better.

NB I like hunters, just like I like archer rangers. They're a fun, simple class that plays to a key fantasy archetype, and really, who does't like shooting things full of arrows? It's just that I think they're poor controllers.

Cheers, Al'Kelhar

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A great single target controller. Beeing able to let someone fall prone with an at-will is very effective.

 

[Al'Kelhar]

A great single target controller. Beeing able to let someone fall prone with an at-will is very effective.

... but being able to knock everything in a burst 2 prone with an at-will is even better.

[Stone Blood + Enlarge Spell + World Serpent's Grasp]

 

[Obryn]

... but being able to knock everything in a burst 2 prone with an at-will is even better.

[Stone Blood + Enlarge Spell + World Serpent's Grasp]

You're not wrong, but adding most conditions (obviously excluding stuff that takes an enemy completely out of the fight) to multiple enemies at once has diminishing returns if your group is focus-firing to any extent.

-O

 

[Baumi]

... but being able to knock everything in a burst 2 prone with an at-will is even better.

[Stone Blood + Enlarge Spell + World Serpent's Grasp]

WSG only works on already slowed enemies ... so if you need to know one down NOW it's no help at all. Also the Hunter does more damage and has much better range (which is quite important if you want to stop someone with knock down). But I agree that this is a great combo