Sick of the ranger

[Kzach]

No, truly, I'm over it.

This isn't a thread about whether or not the ranger is overpowered, so please don't make it one.

The question I'm asking is, if one does away with the Archer Fighting Style and Two-weapon Fighting Styles completely, and simply makes a ranger player choose between gaining Prime Shot or Beast Mastery, just how much of an impact will that ultimately have on the ranger's ability to do damage?

I figure the archer ranger doesn't really lose anything since Defensive Mobility is close to useless for them anyway, so I guess the real question is about the TWF ranger.

TWF rangers could still take up the TWF feats and since there's no rule about wielding two weapons, a 1st-level ranger isn't really penalised in a sense since they can still grab a longsword and a dagger and roll their TWF attacks as if using the longsword for the damage.

There are very few powers which actually state which weapon you use for the damage, most just state that you have to be wielding two weapons.

 

[mkill]

Ok, I'm trying to follow you here.

You state "this thread is not about whether the Ranger is overpowered". Then you suggest a nerf to the Ranger. Just to be clear: You assume that the Ranger is overpowered and you try to fix it?

Well, just to be clear where I stand, I think you are wrong. I've seen the Ranger in play, I've seen other strikers like Warlocks, Sorcerers and Barbarians in play, and the Ranger is not overpowered. Ok, you don't want to discuss that, and so I don't want to change your opinion, but at least you should state clearly why you try to change the ranger and what the perceived problems are. Don't say "his damage output", because that is his job as a striker.

So, what do you change by removing the TWF and Archer abilities? For the archer, well, he loses a mediocre feat. Defensive mobility is not useless, but if I would build an archery ranger I wouldn't bother to pick it up, there are too many good alternatives now.

As for the melee ranger: Well, guess what, the real power source of the ranger, Twin Strike, is still there. At higher levels, your damage output comes from the bonuses you pile on your Twin Strike damage, not the damage itself. It really doesn't matter that much which damage die your off-hand weapon has. Actually, as a player I'd be tempted to rub it in and go for Daggermaster as Prestige Class (ah, damn, Paragon Path / Whatever). And watch the DM cry as I pile 3 extra attacks on every crit.

Or, I just spend a feat on a Double Sword. Solves the off-hand weapon problem nicely too, and helps with my always low AC. And I'll need it, because the real nerf that you did is by removing Toughness from the TWF Ranger. That hurts hurts hurts.

Basicly, you removed all other options for TWF Rangers and forced 3 feats as first picks: Toughness, Weapon Proficiency: Double Sword and probably Armor Proficiency: Chain Mail. Well, it's harder to survive at low level with the changes, but at Paragon at the latest you wouldn't feel much change and DPR should be at 95 to 100%.

Still, why did you try to fix something that's not broken? Yes, there are a few stupidly good ranger builds, but they are broken not because of the base class, but because of the stuff you pile on. Better fix Stormwarden, or Two-Weapon-Rend, that's where the brokenness is. And to be fair, many of the things that break the Ranger can be used to break the Avenger and the Tempest Fighter too, and even the Sorcerer if you want.

 

[Kzach]

This isn't a thread about whether or not the ranger is overpowered, so please don't make it one.

Well, just to be clear where I stand, I think you are wrong.

I really hate people like you.

 

[Madred]

seriously, the game is mostly about heroic and paragon level. and i think other strikers do just fine in comparison with the rangers.

in my group there is a ranger, an avenger, and a barbarian.
and they are all as much useful.
ranger do slightly more dmg (nothing crazy btw), but he gets less funky options as the 2 others.

 

[Mentat55]

There are very few powers which actually state which weapon you use for the damage, most just state that you have to be wielding two weapons.

This is not true. A quick search of the Compendium for ranger powers that include the search term "off hand" turns up 32 hits. Among these are Twin Strike, Thundertusk Boar Strike, Jaws of the Wolf, Two-Fanged Strike, Two Wolf Pounce, Claws of the Griffon, Blade Cascade...many bread-and-butter TWF ranger powers specify attacks with main and off-hand weapons.

Now, I am not sure wielding a short sword in the off-hand vs. a longsword or bastard sword will matter much, because multiple attack powers are strong because of the static damage bonuses, not the x[W] damage dice. But it will reduce a TWF ranger's damage by some small amount.

Re: your proposed change, it might be nice to add an option for a melee ranger that doesn't want an animal companion. Something like the Prime Strike feat, where they get a bonus on melee attacks against isolated targets, or you could give them the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.

 

[CapnZapp]

I really hate people like you.

Don't.

There seems to be an unwritten law that any time you start up a thread about disliking feature X, wanting discussion on removing/replacing/changing it, there always pops up half a dozen threadcrappers essentially saying "you are wrong in disliking X; X is great; this thread should not exist".

So don't or you'll have to hate a large proportion of ENWorld posters...

 

[Kzach]

So don't or you'll have to hate a large proportion of ENWorld posters...

I'm OK with that.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Well, you'd reduce the average damage a little without the two-weapon fighting extra trick.

I am honestly not sure the Beastmaster ability is all that awesome...

My biggest "complaint" with removing the two-weapon fighting benefit - the Ranger has to use two different damage dice using the same power, and has to carefully make sure he's using the right weapon.
The Tempest Fighter avoids this problem simply by giving benefits to wielding light weapons, so there is no reason to use two different weapons.

I might suggest giving him the Two-Weapon Fighting Feat or Two-Weapon Defense feat for free.

 

[mkill]

I really hate people like you.

And I don't care about what people on the Internet think about me, so please feel welcome.

The point is, you failed to explain WHY it is necessary to nerf the ranger and WHAT needs to be nerfed about the class. If you can't explain what you're trying to achieve, we're left with saying "I like the idea" or "that's stupid". We can't say "this helps to improve the game as you want" or "this doesn't" because we don't know what you want.

 

[Kzach]

And I don't care about what people on the Internet think about me, so please feel welcome.

The point is, you failed to explain WHY it is necessary to nerf the ranger and WHAT needs to be nerfed about the class. If you can't explain what you're trying to achieve, we're left with saying "I like the idea" or "that's stupid". We can't say "this helps to improve the game as you want" or "this doesn't" because we don't know what you want.

It's not necessary to explain anything to you.

I made a very simple request, and you ignored it and blathered on for half a dozen large paragraphs about something that has nothing to do with the topic I started.

If you wanted to argue your point, then make your own goddamned thread, stop shitting in mine.