Your next v3.5 ranger - 2weapons or bow?

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Both. My next ranger will use throwing axes.

I'm thinking dwarven ranger with the waraxe/throwing axe combo. Take the ranger TWF feats; spend the regular feats on throwing skills (since Manyshot is useless with a thrown weapon). Add a little quick draw action and you've got great options. Only drawback is the low movement rate (but add a level of barbarian ...).

 

[Beckett]

I had been planning on bringing in a Ranger/Deepwood Sniper once I get back to my home group. Although the original design, with paired short swords in case of melee, was nice, I'm looking forward to the additional bow feats.

 

[rowport]

Beckett-

Hey, I am interested in more about your converted Sniper. Most of the posts I have read are of the Rangers are overpowered/Rangers are "nerfed" variety, so I have not picked up many ideas about actually converted 3E characters. I play a Rogue/Ranger right now, and his main schtick is archery, with a future plan of either DS or Foe Hunter (depending mostly on whether he realizes that devoting his life to hunting giants is a futile exercise). In any case, converting to the Archery path in 3.5E sounds like the logical choice, but I am not convinced that it suits the character very well. His two-weapon melee skills are used as often as his archery skills, and often with sneak attack. So, eliminating the melee focus entirely does not seem right to me. Have you thought about picking up some of each paths' feats (is that even an option)?

 

[Beckett]

Rowport-

The character hasn't been made yet; I'm at college, and will be joining a campaign in progress. My original concept was switching over to the Snipe asap; I like rangers, but beyond the spells, there just didn't seem to be much reason to stick with the class if I wanted to be an archer. Since I had the two-weapon feats whether I wanted them or not, I figured I'd use them if I had to melee.

With 3.5, the missile weapon path just fit so much better with the archer concept; heck, with all the stuff the ranger gets at higher levels, I'm almost reluctant to pick up the prestige class. The Deepwood Sniper's requirements aren't met with the ranger bonus feats, so I'll be picking the same feats as before, but now my bonus feats actually augment what I'll be doing most of the time. For melee now, I'll probably switch to sword&board, to make up for the light armor and reduced hit die.

For your character, either sticking to two-weapons or mix & matching (if allowed) between the feat paths sounds like the best option. An extra sneak attack or two adds up to a lot of damage, possibly more than the bonus archery attacks.

 

[shilsen]

I'm already playing a ranger (up to 14th lvl now), so I'm not likely to play another for a while. But if I was, I'd go the archery route. I'll leave the melee combat to the stupi...ahem, brave and the bold

 

[Ranger REG]

When I first got into D&D, my first PC was a bow-wielding ranger with bow specialization (thanks to 1e Unearthed Arcana). While 3e do not allow bow specialization for ranger class, I will take the archery combat path to bring back that old nostalgic feeling I have for my first ranger.

Well, actually, he was an archer-ranger (thanks to Best of Dragon magazine).

 

[paulewaug]

Well I would have chosen 2 weapon style but I could do that with a Fighter, so if I played a 3.5 Ranger it would be for the flavor of playing a Ranger.

In 3.0 we just started a new campaign a few sessions ago and I am playing a "ranger".
Ranger 1 and Fighter levels mostly thereafter, this was because as far as the GM was concerned "once a ranger, always a ranger" so even though he advances as a Fighter he is still "a Ranger" and for the extra "outdoorsy" skill points.

I have been thinking about using 2 weapons from time to time, just because he can.
So far my oportunities to use my bow have been pretty poor, as has been the case with this DMs games so far. We don't have very many encounters at long distance, and the bad guys mob up on us pretty quick.
We have to keep our 4 pcs pretty grouped to help each other out. So I don't see much archery going on in any of those games. I appreciate the theory of the nasty archer in 3.0 but have not had the pleasure of using it or seeing it in action.

I will more likely play a Druid though!!! hehe