Ranger: Scout Preview up!

[Pickles JG]

It's backward.

Primal? Sounds like an attempt to reintroduce magic.

Enforced dual-wielding? *Sigh.*

Or play another class this is the melee light/heavy dual wielding build....

I like the look of it. I really hope this is not better than the PHB ranger as they are over the top of the damage curve. Since a fair bit of that comes from huge dailies & big encounter powers with AP spikes I expect Scouts are more balanced. I am inclined to ban PHB rangers next campaign I run (2012 ), maybe make a bow version of this guy, who is a resaonable archer anyway being a dex class.

 

[Someone]

A doubt. Both Dual Weapon Attack and the shift ganted by the aspect of the fox stance are free actions. So, making the dual attack and then moving is allowed, right? And does the Dual Weapon attack count as a melee attack for triggering the aspect of the fox free shift again, so you can potentially shift 4 squares after you attack?

 

[Klaus]

It's kinda weird to see a Dex-based melee ranger, after so many editions of rangers being Strength-based.

I like the new version of Twin Strike. You have to hit with your main weapon (so it pays to have a +3 proficiency weapon), and the second attack can be against any creatures you can reach.

Still, if I were to play a two-weapon warrior, I'd go Slayer.

 

[Lord Ernie]

It's kinda weird to see a Dex-based melee ranger, after so many editions of rangers being Strength-based.

I like the new version of Twin Strike. You have to hit with your main weapon (so it pays to have a +3 proficiency weapon), and the second attack can be against any creatures you can reach.

Rangers were always more about skill than brute strength to me, so for me that works perfectly.

Still, if I were to play a two-weapon warrior, I'd go Slayer.

How is a slayer good at two-weapon fighting in any way? They get bonuses for two-handed weapons, and none of their powers or abilities require or enhance dual-wielding.

Unless you're gonna half-elf in Twin Strike, which is possible but a bit cheesy, I don't see how they make good two-weapon warriors.

 

[Reaper Steve]

Problem (Feature?): per RAW you cannot use Power Strike & Dual Weapon Attack in the same turn.

Why not?

 

[Scribble]

It's backward.

Primal? Sounds like an attempt to reintroduce magic.

Enforced dual-wielding? *Sigh.*

YEs... Says so right in the class description: ": Rangers such as the scout mix a singular two-weapon combat style with a mastery of primal magic to overwhelm their foes."

 

[Styracosaurus]

Enforced dual-wielding? *Sigh.*

Why do they insist that a ranger is a dual wielding attacker? I hate having them in the campaign just because of the two weapon fighting requirement.

The structure of 4E removes any mechanical need for the two weapon requirement. Designers could just write powers and stances without involving two weapons.

It drives me up the wall.

 

[Klaus]

Rangers were always more about skill than brute strength to me, so for me that works perfectly.


How is a slayer good at two-weapon fighting in any way? They get bonuses for two-handed weapons, and none of their powers or abilities require or enhance dual-wielding.

Unless you're gonna half-elf in Twin Strike, which is possible but a bit cheesy, I don't see how they make good two-weapon warriors.

The class doesn't *need* to attack with both weapons to be a good dual-wielding class. The slayer will have the Dex required to qualify for the Two-Weapon feats, and that's good enough for me. When Essential multiclassing is introduced in Heroes of Sword and Spell, multiclassing into core Ranger can offer some good powers, anyway.

The only Slayer class feature that relates to two-handed weapons is Weapon Specialization, and those can work just as well with versatile weapons, adding another combat option.

 

[Zaran]

That's alot more damage than Twin Strike! Without any feats a scout with an axe in their offhand can do 1d8+1d6+12 if both attacks hit. Even if one hits, it's +6 damage That's way better than what Hunter's Quarry can do. This is assuming they don't have the ability to hold a one-hand weapon as an offhand weapon. The average would be 20 damage. Say the scout only hits with their offhand weapon. that's 1d6+6 or 9.5 damage average. A cRanger would do 1d10+1d6 or 9 damage with one hit.

A cRanger with two broadwords can do 2d10+1d6 damage. The average damage for them would be 14.5. Why would anyone ever want to play a core ranger? Even if we went with a light blade the scout will out damage the cRanger because of the extra +1 to hit with BOTH weapons.

This is total power creep. I have to ask why, are they removing all the flavor of daily and encounter powers for massive damage? I have to say that I hope the class compendium that has the ranger in it will give cRangers the same boost.

 

[TerraDave]

Actually, I think that Scouts who go with a light blade in the off-hand may end up going with a Rapier as the main weapon.

Light Blade Expertise is a really nice feat, after all.

As I was reading I was thinking, what a great swashbuckler...