Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 6927197" data-attributes="member: 6704184">lol even if we accept your "supposed to power swap" rather than the more accurate "those are feat taxes they put out after being told the vampire was mechanically terrible", the vampire still has to take multiple feats in order to stand next to a non optimized ranger. Or even a normal rogue, barbarian, etc, even the warlock pre-fix. Rangers, on the other hand, are doing more at-will damage to a single target than anyone else, with twin strike and class features, as long as their feats and gear add static damage. No feat tax, just any damage bonuses of different, and thus stacking, types. No one else gets high damage at as low an investment. Ranger unoptimized in any way is in line with other strikers. ANY optimization puts them ahead. Minor and off action attacks give the ranger brutal nova round potential. The vampire has to take at least two very specific feats and a specific paragon path just to compete with a mildly optimized ranger. It is a drastic difference. All of which is a tangent. I don't care about an unhelpful nitpick of the example. This is the last I'll say on it. If you've nothing to say about the actual point, find someone else to argue with.edit: wording made the last paragraph much more aggro than it was intended.</blockquote>