My character - ranger or spell-less ranger?

[CCamfield]

Character concept aside - which I can kind of take either way - how much value do you see in ranger spells? Is it worth getting an item which boosts Wisdom in order to cast them?

My ranger just turned 4th level, and I put his Wisdom up by 1 to a whopping 10. Since he's level 4, I really have to make a final decision on whether I want spells or not. (Sticking with the basic 3.5 ranger, or the alternate ranger in Complete Warrior.)

The specifics of the character are: Str 18, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 12. Level 4, 22 hp. Mw greatsword, mw chain shirt, mighty composite longbow (+2, it's the only one we've found so far).

The only PrC I can foresee taking is a level or maybe two of the (3.0) Windrider, which does get a few relatively minor spells. Barring an item which boosts wisdom (and the first such we come across would more likely go to the party cleric), it'll be level 8 before I can even cast 1st level spells.

I do like the flexibility that the spells would offer. But I might be perfectly happy, for instance, with a ring that granted Speak with Animals on command, which I think would be considerably cheaper than an item to enhance my Wisdom.

10' of extra movement at level 6 would be okay (from the spell-less ranger), but I might only be using it half the time as the character is partly focussed on riding (maxed out ranks in Ride, and the Mounted Combat feat).

Thoughts?

 

[Crothian]

Torc of animal speech is in Masters of the Wild, my Ranger has one.

You obviously whent Wisdom low when you made the character, so I'd go spell less. An item to boost Wisdom is not cheap and it would be better to have one to boost Dex or something else. Plus, you'd be dependant on the item for spells. It would really stink to loose the item and be then loose all the spells.

Rangers spells are good, my Ranger I went high score in Wisdom and took Craft Wondrious Items to take advanatge of all the great spoells a Ranger has. But it doesn't look like your build is this way.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

What crothian said. He doesn't seem like the spellslinging type of ranger, anyway. He's not wise enough.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

By spell-less ranger, do you mean CW? Because if you do, it isn't actually spell-less.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

By spell-less ranger, do you mean CW? Because if you do, it isn't actually spell-less.

The CW-Ranger can't cast divine spells. He only has spell-like abilities, not a spell-list he can choose spells from and prepare them etc.

 

[youspoonybard]

Think VERY CAREFULLY before you want to limit your Wand access.

Very carefully.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

*does his little 3000st post dance*

Think VERY CAREFULLY before you want to limit your Wand access.

Very carefully.

A valid point. But I think that aside from this mechanical reason, there's none to let him go the path of the spell-ranger.

 

[Darklone]

Grats KaeYoss.

Talk to your DM buddy about using these wands, perhaps he might rule 0 it for the spell less ranger.

 

[MadBlue]

Basically, the character only has a Wisdom of 10 and wouldn't really even giving up spells to be a CW Ranger, so IMHO allowing him to use wands seems a bit gratuitous.

If you do want access to wands and other magic items, though, see if you can take the Cosmopolitan Feat (from FRCS) or Versatile Feat (from Rokugan d20) and choose UMD as a class skill.

However, since you just want to speak with animals, see if your DM can arrange for your character to go on a quest for a Druid who will craft a ring for you.

 

[Nail]

I hadn't thought of the "magic item use" loss. Our ranger (used to be) the CLW wand guy. It was a good fit, as his archery kept him in back most of the time.

...Until that skeletal dire boar critically gored him to death. Ouch. That musta hurt. Or wait, maybe it was the skeletal dire lion grappling him that was the problem.

I forget.

Anyway, given the loss of wand use, I'd say the non-spell casting rangers are screwed, and should be given a bit more. After all, our ranger didn't need 10' of extra movment.

He needed to be out from underneath that skeletal dire lion, and not next to that angry skeletal dire boar.

But you know rangers; they like being near animals.