Why play a Ranger?

[ConcreteBuddha]

My favorite combo I've seen? Ranger/Rogue/Fighter/Barbarian. Now that makes an interesting character.

This is the most twinkish combo ever. I see so many of these that they make me want to puke.

(In a good way, of course...)


Little Bobby Munchy says: "I want to play my dual-rapier wielding, L4 Fighter / L1 Ranger / LX (an odd number, usually 3) Rogue / LX Barbarian!"

ARRRGGGHHHHHHHH!!!



P.S. Then I slap him with a Will save...mwahahahahaha...

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

I have always been one of the few people who think the Ranger is fine as is. He's not "underpowered" in any way, shape or form. I've seen Rangers do just fine in a party with Fighters, Barbarians, Rogues and the other various classes.

The spell list they have is good and works just fine (it's fantastic if you allow supplement spells for Rangers, though it's hardly neccessary) and the extra skills they have are a huge benefit.

Also, why is it people always think that because Rangers have the Ambidexterity and Two Weapon Fighting feats they _have_ to use two weapons? Rangers work great using a two handed weapon or a sword and shield. The TWF and Ambidexterity feats are just a nice extra, they're not an integral part of the class and I don't think they ever meant to be.

But, like Hong said, this has been done to death quite a few times, and I doubt I'll change anyones mind. If you're not satisfied with the Ranger, go ahead and change it. It is, after all, your game.

 

[Gromm]

I'm glad to hear some people stand up for the Ranger. Personally my next character I make (which will likely be long off) will be a Ranger, but I just wanted to know I wasn't screwing myself by doing it. My DM is pretty convinced they suck, but I want to prove him wrong, basically my first post was his reasons for not liking the class and my own misgivings. The BAB does make a difference, not to mention hide/sneak/spot/listen as class skills.
I think the class has merit, but not neccessarily as a straight fighting type (like the other high BAB classes), but more along the lines of a rogue without sneak attack (and better fighting ability).

Thanks for the input, its good to hear some people like the class.

 

[Li Shenron]

Well, it's not a very objective method but...

Compare Fighter vs Ranger on their 20 levels lifespan:

They have the same BAB, ST and HD.

Fighter gets 11 bonus feats and Heavy Armor Prof. for free; he CAN take Weapon Specialization (but not for free).

Ranger has a bonus feat (Track), 2 bonus feats but with restricted use (Ambidexterity, 2 Weapon Fighting), 5 Favored Enemies (each of which is at least a couple of bonus, but also from +1 to +5), at least 12 spells per day (divine = perfectly integrating with combat since no armor miss chance), and possibly animal companions. Moreover, he has +2 skill points/level (+40 in total) and very many class skill, with possible saving of more points.

It is a very imperfect way to compare them, but try to evaluate if the Ranger benefits can sum up to an equivalent of 12 feats and then decide.

 

[the Jester]

Well, I'm playing a long-running ranger/rogue dwarf in a game, and he's lots of fun.

I'm 12th level. I took my first 6 levels as straight ranger, then decided to take the 20% xp penalty for five levels of rogue. Not because I don't like rangers, but because:
A) the party needed a rogue
B) the things I always failed at seemed to be because of a lack of skill points
C) I have a relatively low wisdom.

If I'd put a higher stat in wisdom I'd have kept going as a straight ranger, but no bonus 2nd-level spell made me decide to multiclass.

Now, in our party the fighter hits a little more often per strike and does a little more damage on average, especially against tougher creatures. But I strike more often, and with just one ally to flank with my damage increases by 3d6 per hit; this could be (at this point) an extra 9d6 per round from my sneak attack. I could have another attack, too, if I took improved two-weapon fighting; but I am working towards the tempest prestige class and I'll get I2WF when I take my first level of it, so I've decided to let that one ride for a while. Overall, though, I've never felt that my character was underpowered. My stats are spread out more than a fighter's would be and I lost all my magic items a couple of months ago; even so I contribute to my party in many ways.

I keep us from getting lost when we travel. I find our enemies by their tracks. I find the traps in the dungeons we delve and I lay the alarm spell that protects us at night. I scout ahead, unafraid of running into a tough monster; I can handle it or survive a round of terrible damage. And besides, odds are good it won't see or hear me.

Granted, the six levels of rogue play into all of that; but other than finding traps I was doing all that stuff before I took any rogue levels.

I like rangers. The four skill points (and all the best skills except tumble as class skills) are great combined with a d10 for hp.

Think of rangers as being akin to the psychic warrior, but instead of a fighter/psion hybrid it blends a cup of fighter with half a cup each of druid and rogue.

 

[med stud]

Just in defense of the ranger spell list; it doesnt take more than one good spell per spell level for a spell list to be usable. For Ranger, I would say:

Spell level 1
Entangle (One of the best lvl 1 spells in the game outdoors)
Animal friendship (Get scouts and (granted weak) combat helpers

Spell level 2
Cure light wounds
Protection from elements (This one is great in almost any adventure)
Snare (actually usable in many encounters; maybe not that great, though)

Spell level 3
This level is not so great. But two utility spells is there, which might be good from time to time:
Neutralize poison
Remove disease

Spell level 4
Polymorph self (the be all end all of ranger spells; this one makes the ranger a killer)
Freedom of movement (good vs hold and webs and stuff)
Tree stride (Poor man's teleport; a high level ranger with this spell can transverse huge distances in less then an hour).
Cure serious wounds (Cant really compete with the big spells on the list, but is worth mentioning)
Nondetection (may have it's uses from time to time)

The spells above does almost always have a place in an adventure, if not for anything else, they unburden the cleric. And they defenitly is one of the best spell lists for adventuring alone and be one of the most dangerous opponents in a wilderness environment.

And on another notion: When playing a ranger, it is almost always better to not use two weapon fighting then to use it. A lot of weak rangers are weak because they use double short sword combos or something like that when it would be superior to use a great sword.

 

[Vanye]

The change I'm making to the ranger is to replace the TWF/Ambidex shtick with one bonus feat every 5 levels, starting at 2nd (ie 2nd, 7th, 12th, 17th). This can be chosen from any feat on the fighter list except Weapon Spec, plus a few others. This works for me. It probably won't work for anyone else, but that's not my problem.

What an amazing coinkydink. That's exactly what I did, well, almost. I gave them Track and another bonus feat at 1st level, but I may change that based on some feedback at Monte's board. I added in some of the more general feats to their list (Alertness, Athletic, Endurance, Run) as those are feats that could be useful, but most people don't want to spend one of their precious feats on it, but may be more willing to spend a bonus feat...

 

[Acmite]

My favorite combo I've seen? Ranger/Rogue/Fighter/Barbarian. Now that makes an interesting character.

........with a scary low Will saving throw, I'd think. That's a Hold Person/Charm Person target waiting to happen......

And that's the only real downside I see. Otherwise those classes seem to meld well.

 

[Acmite]

1) All cool Ranger abilities take forever to get and have limited use, or are achievable with a single level of Ranger.

Two weapon fighting, Ambidex, Tracking, Imp Two Weapon.. they are given at 1st level or require something not related to the class (BAB). Why take more than one Ranger level? Not for the abilities.

When your BAB reaches +9 a Ranger can CHOOSE to gain ITWF even if he does not have the other pre-reqs. It is NOT a bonus feat. I see this misconception on a weekly basis--strangely enough, I see a "Rangers got the Shaft" thread about once a week. Hmmm.....

 

[Gromm]

So one less thing for the Ranger then. I forgot "virtual feats" didn't get thought of until S&F.
I just made a NPC ranger in my campaign, and seems pretty darned powerful. He might not be the strongest guy going toe to toe with a Armored Fighter, but his skills make him darn near undetectable, unsurprisable, and unavoidable (he'll track you anywhere).
Of course being evil he gets to pick FavEn Humans, but theres only one human in the party anyway so its not a huge deal.