Melee Ranger At-Wills?

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

You pose a question, but any person attempting to answer you is wrong. You're just going to have to work with your DM on a solution that's suitable to you - I try to keep abreast of all the cool stuff in sourcebooks, and before I even get to page 2, other commenters have already suggested every option that I know of for your situation.

Errr... what? My original question asked if there were other sources of Ranger at-wills other than the PHB and Martial Power. That question was answered by Deverash in post #19.

The only people I was disagreeing with were those who suggested changes to Careful Attack that changed the expected damage of the power without adding an effect to differentiate it from Twin Strike. That's not me being disagreeable for its own sake; there is a sound mathematical reason why these types of changes don't work, as explained by both Kordeth and I at a few points in this thread.

I know it's easy to toss around invective when posting on an internet forum, but it's good form to do more than skim a few posts before firing off a snotty comment to someone.

You could always ask your DM to just make it like the rogue's precise strike, targeting Reflex.

Rafe and WalterKovacs earlier suggested taking an at-will from another class. I agreed with Rafe that its potentially overpowered to do so, but I'm sure there are powers that mesh well with the Ranger's shtick without breaking him. I can't find Precise Strike in the PHB or Martial Power; is it detailed somewhere else or did you mean one of the other XXX Strike at-wills that the Rogue has? I think Deft Strike is the one most unlike the other Ranger powers (it's similar to Nimble Strike, but applies to melee weapons).

 

[Kordeth]

Rafe and WalterKovacs earlier suggested taking an at-will from another class. I agreed with Rafe that its potentially overpowered to do so, but I'm sure there are powers that mesh well with the Ranger's shtick without breaking him. I can't find Precise Strike in the PHB or Martial Power; is it detailed somewhere else or did you mean one of the other XXX Strike at-wills that the Rogue has? I think Deft Strike is the one most unlike the other Ranger powers (it's similar to Nimble Strike, but applies to melee weapons).

Yeah, he meant Piercing Strike.

The problem with that is that it really just adds another layer of math to the Twin Strike vs. Careful Strike debate (is his Ref sufficiently lower than his AC that Careful Attack is more useful?)--and since most monsters' AC is within a couple of points of their Reflex, I don't think that would accomplish anything more than upping Careful Attack's bonus to +4 or so.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Yeah, he meant Piercing Strike.

The problem with that is that it really just adds another layer of math to the Twin Strike vs. Careful Strike debate (is his Ref sufficiently lower than his AC that Careful Attack is more useful?)--and since most monsters' AC is within a couple of points of their Reflex, I don't think that would accomplish anything more than upping Careful Attack's bonus to +4 or so.

I agree. A fourth at-will has to bring to the table something other than some combination of increased/decreased odds to hit/damage. If the new power doesn't provide an extra effect, it effectively duplicates Twin Strike, but its effect will be either better, worse (as in the current implementation of Careful Attack), or exactly the same as Twin Strike.

 

[Kordeth]

I agree. A fourth at-will has to bring to the table something other than some combination of increased/decreased odds to hit/damage. If the new power doesn't provide an extra effect, it effectively duplicates Twin Strike, but its effect will be either better, worse (as in the current implementation of Careful Attack), or exactly the same as Twin Strike.

Fighters come close to having this problem too--depending on the weapon you wield and your Strength bonus, Reaping Strike might end up being a guaranteed better bet than Sure Strike, but as the fighter picks up feat and item bonuses it can swing back and forth. If fighters had more class abilities that keyed off of a successful hit, Sure Strike would have no problem at all, but as it is the only fighter ability that keys off of a hit is Combat Superiority. So until a heavy blade fighter picks up HBO at the paragon tier, Sure Strike is either plainly better or plainly worse than Reaping Strike.

There aren't nearly as many opportunities to make ranged basic attacks as their are melee base attacks, so I doubt it works as a fix for Careful Attack, but making Sure Strike count as a basic attack provides a good tactical trade-off for fighters, I think.

 

[DracoSuave]

Disuading Strikes
Ranger Attack 1
With a flash of your blades you parry with one blade while thrusting with the other.
At-Will - Martial, Weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons
Attack: Strength vs AC
Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifer damage. The target gets a -1 penalty to attack you until the end of your next turn.
If you are level 21 or higher, it deals 2[W] + Strength modifier damage instead.
Special: If your off-hand weapon does not have the off-hand property, the penalty to attack you is -2 instead.

 

[DracoSuave]

To be fair tho, Fighters do have that Invigorating attack now, and temp hps aren't bad even if you're not a Battlerager.

 

[Kordeth]

Disuading Strikes
Ranger Attack 1
With a flash of your blades you parry with one blade while thrusting with the other.
At-Will - Martial, Weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons
Attack: Strength vs AC
Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifer damage. The target gets a -1 penalty to attack you until the end of your next turn.
If you are level 21 or higher, it deals 2[W] + Strength modifier damage instead.
Special: If your off-hand weapon does not have the off-hand property, the penalty to attack you is -2 instead.

Nice for Two-Blade rangers, but it does kind of hose archery rangers. I'd probably word the Special as simply "if you have the Two Blade Fighting Style class feature," though.

To be fair tho, Fighters do have that Invigorating attack now, and temp hps aren't bad even if you're not a Battlerager.

The issue isn't that they don't have good choices to pick from, it's that one particular power is mathematically worse than the others--and it's worse in ways that aren't immediately obvious, which makes it a "trap," which 4E is supposed to be avoiding. Fighters have plenty of good at-will choices and one that's mathematically iffy (making Sure Strike a basic attack, IMHO, removes any iffyness from it), rangers have one awesome at-will, a couple of good ones, and one that's total crap in comparison to the awesome one.

 

[DracoSuave]

The power actually was worded the way it was so that it is useful for archery and beastmaster rangers without -forcing- anyone to two two-weapon melee style, while rewarding two-weapon melee style.

 

[Kordeth]

The power actually was worded the way it was so that it is useful for archery and beastmaster rangers without -forcing- anyone to two two-weapon melee style, while rewarding two-weapon melee style.

1) Whether you say "your off-hand weapon does not have the off-hand property" or "you have the Two Blade fighting style," it's exactly the same thing mechanically, because only with Two-Blade Fighting Style can you use non-off hand weapons in your off-hand. The latter is just cleaner language.

2) The power is a melee attack that requires you to be wielding two melee weapons in order to use it and uses Strength vs. AC. What archery ranger is going to want this as one of his at-wills?

 

[DracoSuave]

What archery ranger is going to want any melee strike?

This thread is about an extra melee-capable strike for melee rangers, so that is what is provided. It's designed the way it is so that beast-masters can use it if they like while two-weapon melee rangers get the most benefit.