Ranger & TWF vs. Archery Powers

[Kzach]

Forgive me if this has been answered before but I asked in a previous thread and nobody responded. I can't find any thread with an answer either.

Basically, are any of the ranger powers limited by, or given special powers for, the 1st-level choice between TWF or Archery?

By that I mean classes like the rogue and warlord choose a style at 1st-level and that affects the power of their powers they choose.

If there is no effect, then what purpose is there in choosing Archery? It's a really dumb feat for a character who will be doing their level best to stay at range, and TWF gives a massive benefit plus a really good feat.

And if you don't want to be a TWF, then you just choose the powers that favour range over melee.

This just seems really dumb so I thought I must be missing something or have overlooked something really obvious that makes choosing TWF not the no-brainer I'm currently thinking it is.

 

[Sitara]

You are basically correct. Selecting TWF even for a dedicated archer is a no brainer. However, the issue is th eparagon paths which requires the archery style as prequisites. Its stupid design I have to say.

A fix I propose is make Prime Shot class ability usable only by those who select archery AND make it +1 attk/tier.

Whatever you do don't go overboard as longbows are quite powerful in this game.

 

[TimeOut]

You are basically correct. Selecting TWF even for a dedicated archer is a no brainer. However, the issue is th eparagon paths which requires the archery style as prequisites. Its stupid design I have to say.

And so it is not a no-brainer. If you want to use the paragon paths, you must select the archery style.

That TWF is massively overpowered is another point.

 

[Starfox]

I haven't found any such powers, but I haven't looked very carefully.

It seems your analysis is right - the ranged option is pretty dumb.

 

[Zurai]

Battlefield Archer is the reason to pick the Archery style. Seriously, that Paragon Path is made of 100% pure win. Reroll attack roll for an AP? Check. Inherent attack roll bonus? Check. Extra AP just about every fight? Check. Ability to Hunter's Quarry many more targets? Check. Ability to attack every Quarry with a single attack? Check.

Made of win.

 

[Kirnon_Bhale]

I have to admit that I think that the prime shot being seperate to the Ranged Class Feature is actually an error in the book considering how it is only used by Ranged Rangers - I would bet that in the first official errata will make that change. It will certainly be that way in any games I DM.

 

[Xect]

You are basically correct. Selecting TWF even for a dedicated archer is a no brainer. However, the issue is th eparagon paths which requires the archery style as prequisites. Its stupid design I have to say.

So it's a nobrainer, but it's stupid design that it is not a nobrainer?

I dont get it. I get the very clear impression that access to archery paths is SUPPOSED to be one of the major benefits.

 

[Dausuul]

So it's a nobrainer, but it's stupid design that it is not a nobrainer?

I dont get it. I get the very clear impression that access to archery paths is SUPPOSED to be one of the major benefits.

Apparently (and I haven't taken a good look at rangers yet, just going off what people have said in this thread) it's a no-brainer from levels 1 to 10, and then from level 11 onward it ceases to be a no-brainer. Playing an archer ranger is essentially gambling that the campaign will hit Paragon tier.

Which is, I have to agree, stupid design. It's like the old school of thought on wizards--make them suck at low levels and then dominate the game at high levels, because nothing makes for a fun game like ensuring that at least one character is outclassed and superfluous at every level. I thought we were done with that.

Although I also suspect a simple mistake, with errata to come. Or that people are overlooking something. Maybe Defensive Mobility is better than it looks...?

 

[Destil]

Battlefield Archer is the reason to pick the Archery style. Seriously, that Paragon Path is made of 100% pure win. Reroll attack roll for an AP? Check. Inherent attack roll bonus? Check. Extra AP just about every fight? Check. Ability to Hunter's Quarry many more targets? Check. Ability to attack every Quarry with a single attack? Check.

Made of win.

Eh, reroll a attack doesn't impress me that much with the ranger. Because they can really machine gun off arrows.

Now beast stalker, on the other hand... Spend an action point, get an extra action and[/]b +4 to ALL attacks vs. your quarry for the entire turn? Sign me up for that. Dropping 5-9 attacks off two dailies and an immediate reaction like Lightning Shot with a 20% to hit bonus.

 

[Kaldaen]

I have to admit that I think that the prime shot being seperate to the Ranged Class Feature is actually an error in the book considering how it is only used by Ranged Rangers - I would bet that in the first official errata will make that change. It will certainly be that way in any games I DM.

Two-Weapon Fighting Rangers get two distinct benefits for their choice of fighting style: a bonus feat that anyone can take (Toughness), and a feature that only they can get (make two attacks while dual wielding).

The problem that has been pointed out with the Archery style is that its only benefit is a bonus feat that anyone can take (Defensive Mobility). To make it as beneficial as TWF, it needs to have a benefit that is only available to Archery-style Rangers.

A simple +1 to attack with ranged weapons would satisfy that need. It prevents Archery Rangers from being bested at their own game in the Heroic tier, and IMO it makes sense for an archery-focused character to be more accurate with bows and crossbows than Fighters or TWF Rangers.

I'll probably be applying this as a house rule if there is no errata to address it by the time my group starts playing.