Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Uller" data-source="post: 198095" data-attributes="member: 413">The ranger is definately playable as is.&nbsp; It may not fit everyone's idea of what a ranger should be, but that is just a matter of taste, really.&nbsp;&nbsp; (I think most people don't think of a ranger as a two-sword-wielding spell caster...).&nbsp; But mechanically, it's fine.&nbsp;&nbsp; You get full BAB, good skills, good skill selection, limited spells and animal companions.&nbsp;&nbsp; There is no class combination that can do that.As for Rangers being &quot;top-heavy&quot;(i.e. people take one level of Ranger just for the quasi-feats)...I don't see it as a problem.&nbsp; Sure, it is a no-brainer for certain character concepts to take a level of Ranger...particularly ones that involve melee combat, stealth and light armor.&nbsp; But I don't see a problem with it at all.&nbsp; After all, those quasi-feats have a very severe limitation: you can only use them while wearing light armor and are lightly encumbered.&nbsp; For most characters, it is a bad idea to wade into melee with little or no armor.&nbsp;&nbsp; You could say that fighters are top-heavy, too:&nbsp; For just two levels of fighter, you get any TWO feats from a very substantial list and can use them WITHOUT RESTRICTION, plus you get access to all types of armor...so, 1 level of ranger = two feats w/ heavy restrictions or 2 levels of figher = 2 feats w/o restriction...seems like a fair trade off to me!If I'm playing a rogue that plans on doing a lot of fighting, I'd go with two levels of fighter over one level of Ranger, so I have the option of heavier armor if I need it.&nbsp; If I'm not going to be in melee too much...then I'd go with the one level of Ranger.&nbsp; If I am going to avoid melee like the plague, then I'd just go with straight rogue.Edit: In fact, I'm thinking my next character will be an elf wizard/fighter who favors a longbow as a weapon.&nbsp; I'm going to take just two levels of fighter just to get some bow feats and eventually increase it to 4 levels to get specialization.&nbsp; Is there a problem with that when that is my character concept?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Uller, post: 198095, member: 413"] The ranger is definately playable as is. It may not fit everyone's idea of what a ranger should be, but that is just a matter of taste, really. (I think most people don't think of a ranger as a two-sword-wielding spell caster...). But mechanically, it's fine. You get full BAB, good skills, good skill selection, limited spells and animal companions. There is no class combination that can do that. As for Rangers being "top-heavy"(i.e. people take one level of Ranger just for the quasi-feats)...I don't see it as a problem. Sure, it is a no-brainer for certain character concepts to take a level of Ranger...particularly ones that involve melee combat, stealth and light armor. But I don't see a problem with it at all. After all, those quasi-feats have a very severe limitation: you can only use them while wearing light armor and are lightly encumbered. For most characters, it is a bad idea to wade into melee with little or no armor. You could say that fighters are top-heavy, too: For just two levels of fighter, you get any TWO feats from a very substantial list and can use them WITHOUT RESTRICTION, plus you get access to all types of armor...so, 1 level of ranger = two feats w/ heavy restrictions or 2 levels of figher = 2 feats w/o restriction...seems like a fair trade off to me! If I'm playing a rogue that plans on doing a lot of fighting, I'd go with two levels of fighter over one level of Ranger, so I have the option of heavier armor if I need it. If I'm not going to be in melee too much...then I'd go with the one level of Ranger. If I am going to avoid melee like the plague, then I'd just go with straight rogue. Edit: In fact, I'm thinking my next character will be an elf wizard/fighter who favors a longbow as a weapon. I'm going to take just two levels of fighter just to get some bow feats and eventually increase it to 4 levels to get specialization. Is there a problem with that when that is my character concept? [/QUOTE]

Verification