What makes the best Ranged Attacker?

[clockworkjoe]

Why are rangers better than fighters when it comes to archery? I never saw an advantage in using a ranger for archery over a fighter

 

[cbatt]

Barring prestige classes, I've always been of the opinion that a Fighter/Rogue would make quite a good archer. The ranged sneak attacks as well as the additional skill points (for hiding and fletching and whatnot) were a good addition to the multitude of feats a fighter received for this sort of thing.

I'm deffinately not an expert on this, but I have to agree with Oni's statement.

I'm currently building an 8th level character. I wanted him to focus on the bow, but also be a capable skirmisher.

I didn't min-max his stats or anything, or go for the best class/race combinations, but I'm pretty happy with the results.

Human Rog 1/ Ftr 7
s-15/+2 d-18/+4 c-14/+2
i-12/+1 w-12/+1 c-10/+0
HP:64
Feats:
Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Shot on the Run, Mobility, Spring Attack (for when he's in melee), Weapon Focus (Longbow), Weapon Specialization (Longbow)

[I'm missing a feat in there, but I don't have my char sheet with me at work, so I'm working from memory. He should have 8 feats anyway; 4 normal + 4 Ftr bonus feats]

He could easily be improved into a pure archer by making him an Elf and replacing spring attack with another range-related feat (think Legolas). A pure fighter would probably make a much better "Archer", especially in a game where encounters occur in wide open spaces (eg. a military-style campaign). However, in cramped quarters, I think my guy has somewhat better odds, especially in light armour.

 

[CRGreathouse]

The rogue, I think - look at "Jack the Knife" in the SmackDown thread.