Can a ranger take up the mantle for a fighter? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Can a ranger take up the mantle for a fighter? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
swindy
08-16-06, 07:35 AM Well, im just wondering can a ranger be as good as a fighter? Im definately thinking two weapon fighter. The only downside i see is that he doesnt get as many feats and cant wear heavy armour. But he gets so many extras and can also be a very good scout.

Just want to know if he can be an equal to the fighter.
Asurya
08-16-06, 08:10 AM in a word : no

in a more detailled manner, no matter how hard you will try, you will not be as good as the fighter (if you stay stright ranger that is, but if you want to dip in fighter.. then what was the point of your former question, anyway digression ended)

But the real question is why care? the fighter is good at his thing because he is supposed to be (and if you check out these boards, many think that the class does not even achieve this), if you can beat him on his ground making another class then who would choose to play a fighter?

As for your ranger, i dont know your campaign settings but on my own experience, it's much more worth taking the archer path.. you definitely are not prepared to be a front line fighter especially in early levels (which I am for now) and I have a really hard time trying to tank (I'm the only fighter-related class of my party)
If your DM allows you material from these boards, consider looking toward the rapid strike tree in the Jaerom feats (found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=3123067&postcount=1), at the bottom of the post)
swindy
08-16-06, 08:45 AM Thanks for the info.
CaoSlayer
08-16-06, 09:26 AM you have one BIG advantage over a fighter in TWF it is that YOU DONT NEED HIGH DEX, that it is right, you can get all the TWF with little dex and then focus in str. being able to deal decent damage and if you get profiency with a double weapon, being able to power attack nicely.

Of course your mayor trouble it is that you cant tank as good with little hp and no so good armor.

A ranger with high str and con it is a very good fighter.

In addition if you use splatbooks laterly have been include lots of swift action spells to the ranger being a nice thing, finally your animal companion it is a nice meat shield and can provide flank bonus that outset the TWF penalties.

A fighter can be better, of course, but you are decent by yourself and have a big bag of tricks with more skills and spells.
bitnine
08-16-06, 09:57 AM I suppose a low-dex ranger could go for TWF and use a two handed weapon and armor spikes as his weapons of choice, boosting himself with spells like swift haste and the like. Given the right selections, he could likely fill the party role in a respectable fashion. Particularly if the campaign focuses on a particular enemy type for the ranger to select as a favored enemy, pick up some bane weapons, and take favored power attack.
babysamurai
08-16-06, 10:14 AM The group I’m DMing for has a Half-Orc, Barbarian 2/Ranger 7 with:

TWF
ITWF
Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword)
Oversized Two-weapon Fighting
Dual Strike
Two-Weapon Pounce

…And he’s ganking some serious ass.
swindy
08-16-06, 10:35 AM Hmmm some good things i hear. Keep them coming please!
runestar
08-16-06, 10:44 AM you have one BIG advantage over a fighter in TWF it is that YOU DONT NEED HIGH DEX
However, you are limited to light armour if you wish to retain your bonus ranger feats, so you will want a high dex score nonetheless to take advantage of the high max dex caps light armour offers, and to get a halfway decent ac score since light armours have quite low armour values. :)

I suppose with appropriate gear and some twinking, he could make for a decent tank. :)
Tony Vargas
08-16-06, 01:25 PM A TWF ranger can't tank like a fighter, but he can pull frontlining duty for a party if there's no one better.

The problem with the ranger is that he needs more stats than a fighter - he needs DEX to keep his AC adequate, INT & WIS to support his skills (and WIS to support his spells), STR for melee/long-comp-bow damage, and, like everyone, CON for hps. A fighter, OTOH, can get by with little more than STR & CON. In a high point-buy game, the ranger can afford enough STR to dish out some damage, enough DEX to keep his AC up, enough CON to have frontline-worth hps, and still keep his WIS high enough to cast, and he can frontline. You could also sacrifice spell casting by dumping WIS, and settle for few skills and create a ranger that's a passable frontliner, though a sub-optimal ranger.

That said, even a 'normal' ranger can pull frontline duties in a small party or one that lacks any other melee potentential. In the latter case, he'll need some help, and 'frontlining' will have to be slightly different. For instance, in a divine-heavy party, with a frontlining ranger, buffing the ranger up will be vital; while, if the party is arcane-heavy, the goal will be to keep fights very short, so the ranger doesn't have to fronline for long. If the party is stealth-oriented and mobile, frontlining may not even be an issue - the party evades some encounters and flees those where a heavy frontliner would have been required, skirmishing, instead.
Seerow
08-16-06, 02:43 PM 1) What books do you have? Spell Compendium really makes Ranger a more valid choice whichever path you chose.
2) Why would you WANT to be as bad as a Fighter?
bitnine
08-16-06, 02:48 PM The problem with the ranger is that he needs more stats than a fighter - he needs DEX to keep his AC adequate, INT & WIS to support his skills (and WIS to support his spells), STR for melee/long-comp-bow damage, and, like everyone, CON for hps. A fighter, OTOH, can get by with little more than STR & CON. In a high point-buy game, the ranger can afford enough STR to dish out some damage, enough DEX to keep his AC up, enough CON to have frontline-worth hps, and still keep his WIS high enough to cast, and he can frontline. You could also sacrifice spell casting by dumping WIS, and settle for few skills and create a ranger that's a passable frontliner, though a sub-optimal ranger.This is largely true, and a ranger will probably always be more in the MAD camp than the fighter. However, I think that a ranger who is shooting to be more of a frontliner than a general ranger can dump INT. Given their number of skill points, keeping survival, spot/listen, and hide/move silently maxed will provide a good skill role to the party, with a sixth to be divided or focused as needed. Gear might be a bit influential. In a standard wealth game, starting in with a 12 WIS and shooting to increase it through magical means at higher levels is viable, but finding yourself in a low-magic world unable to make use of 3rd level spells without using an ability increase might be sorta harsh. And there's a question of if you'll be able to get that tasty mithril breastplate for your ranger. However, even towards the edge, you're still looking at high STR, mid DEX, with as much CON as possible, which is more division than a fighter sees.

(Also, as far as WIS goes, might be helpful to know if you're looking at a particular PrC or multiclassing. If you don't reach the point where you'd actually gain decent spellcasting, WIS isn't going to be as important to you. Though you should definately still make the most of having spells on your class list. Being able to use wands of cure light wounds and certain buffing scrolls can be a great help. Things like energy protection, tree stride, and foebane make for some pretty nice situational boosts that may prove to be a savior at some time.)
AkaKageWarrior
08-16-06, 03:27 PM Up to level 20, I'll take some 19 levels of cleric to boost my 1 ranger level...
makes him a good fighter and better spellcaster! ;)

okay, seriously, there are a lot of new ranger spells in the complete books which really give him a boost in combat, some of them are hilariously powerful IMO. (was it "volley of arrows" or so?).

but to boost the melee prowess, some fighter levels (or barbarian, as above, + maybe the extra rage feat) are helpful.

I love 3.5 rangers, because they are really versatile with their skills, abilities and spells.

AKW
Tony Vargas
08-16-06, 03:58 PM However, I think that a ranger who is shooting to be more of a frontliner than a general ranger can dump INT.Agreed. It's just kinda a waste with thier excellent skill list.

In a standard wealth game, starting in with a 12 WIS and shooting to increase it through magical means at higher levels is viable, but finding yourself in a low-magic world unable to make use of 3rd level spells without using an ability increase might be sorta harsh. Nod. WIS boosters also take up a useful slot (knecklace/periapt/amulet). Ignoring spell casting by not investing in WIS is also an option, if you can get Wands, for instance, you can access your best low-level spells quite a lot.

However, even towards the edge, you're still looking at high STR, mid DEX, with as much CON as possible, which is more division than a fighter sees.Right. If stats are tight, the Fighter can get by on just STR and CON, the ranger needs those to frontline, plus a good DEX to keep up his AC in light armor, even if he's focused primarily on melee. If more stats are available, the Fighter can expand his feat selection by investing more in DEX and INT, and the Ranger becomes more viable in a frontlining role.

I guess we could just tell the OP: try to get your DM to go for high-point-buy.
The_Shaman
08-16-06, 04:18 PM Well, if it's spells you need, you may as well make a "prestige ranger" with a few levels of fighter and cleric. Chances are, you will cast better.

As it is, a ranger can do most things a dexterity fighter can, but can't tank like a heavy fighter. Unfortunately, he doesn't have the armor or hit die for one. That doesn't mean he or she can't be the main warrior, just that this party should have this in mind for their tactics. If they have enough summons to act as shields, the ranger could handle the "mere" damage-dealing.
CaoSlayer
08-16-06, 04:19 PM really, at mid levels the only thing a ranger needs for tanking like the best fighter of the world it is to have an arcanist to cast displacement or improved invisibility, the miss chance just it is on numerica terms the same that doubling the hp.
The_Shaman
08-16-06, 04:25 PM Heh, maybe but it works even better on a cleric with divine power :)
CaoSlayer
08-16-06, 06:12 PM Heh, maybe but it works even better on a cleric with divine power :)

yes, yes... CoDzilla it is better, but that isnt the matter of the topic.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
swindy 08-16-06, 07:35 AM	Well, im just wondering can a ranger be as good as a fighter? Im definately thinking two weapon fighter. The only downside i see is that he doesnt get as many feats and cant wear heavy armour. But he gets so many extras and can also be a very good scout. Just want to know if he can be an equal to the fighter.
Asurya 08-16-06, 08:10 AM	in a word : no in a more detailled manner, no matter how hard you will try, you will not be as good as the fighter (if you stay stright ranger that is, but if you want to dip in fighter.. then what was the point of your former question, anyway digression ended) But the real question is why care? the fighter is good at his thing because he is supposed to be (and if you check out these boards, many think that the class does not even achieve this), if you can beat him on his ground making another class then who would choose to play a fighter? As for your ranger, i dont know your campaign settings but on my own experience, it's much more worth taking the archer path.. you definitely are not prepared to be a front line fighter especially in early levels (which I am for now) and I have a really hard time trying to tank (I'm the only fighter-related class of my party) If your DM allows you material from these boards, consider looking toward the rapid strike tree in the Jaerom feats (found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=3123067&postcount=1), at the bottom of the post)
swindy 08-16-06, 08:45 AM	Thanks for the info.
CaoSlayer 08-16-06, 09:26 AM	you have one BIG advantage over a fighter in TWF it is that YOU DONT NEED HIGH DEX, that it is right, you can get all the TWF with little dex and then focus in str. being able to deal decent damage and if you get profiency with a double weapon, being able to power attack nicely. Of course your mayor trouble it is that you cant tank as good with little hp and no so good armor. A ranger with high str and con it is a very good fighter. In addition if you use splatbooks laterly have been include lots of swift action spells to the ranger being a nice thing, finally your animal companion it is a nice meat shield and can provide flank bonus that outset the TWF penalties. A fighter can be better, of course, but you are decent by yourself and have a big bag of tricks with more skills and spells.
bitnine 08-16-06, 09:57 AM	I suppose a low-dex ranger could go for TWF and use a two handed weapon and armor spikes as his weapons of choice, boosting himself with spells like swift haste and the like. Given the right selections, he could likely fill the party role in a respectable fashion. Particularly if the campaign focuses on a particular enemy type for the ranger to select as a favored enemy, pick up some bane weapons, and take favored power attack.
babysamurai 08-16-06, 10:14 AM	The group I’m DMing for has a Half-Orc, Barbarian 2/Ranger 7 with: TWF ITWF Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword) Oversized Two-weapon Fighting Dual Strike Two-Weapon Pounce …And he’s ganking some serious ass.
swindy 08-16-06, 10:35 AM	Hmmm some good things i hear. Keep them coming please!
runestar 08-16-06, 10:44 AM	you have one BIG advantage over a fighter in TWF it is that YOU DONT NEED HIGH DEX However, you are limited to light armour if you wish to retain your bonus ranger feats, so you will want a high dex score nonetheless to take advantage of the high max dex caps light armour offers, and to get a halfway decent ac score since light armours have quite low armour values. :) I suppose with appropriate gear and some twinking, he could make for a decent tank. :)
Tony Vargas 08-16-06, 01:25 PM	A TWF ranger can't tank like a fighter, but he can pull frontlining duty for a party if there's no one better. The problem with the ranger is that he needs more stats than a fighter - he needs DEX to keep his AC adequate, INT & WIS to support his skills (and WIS to support his spells), STR for melee/long-comp-bow damage, and, like everyone, CON for hps. A fighter, OTOH, can get by with little more than STR & CON. In a high point-buy game, the ranger can afford enough STR to dish out some damage, enough DEX to keep his AC up, enough CON to have frontline-worth hps, and still keep his WIS high enough to cast, and he can frontline. You could also sacrifice spell casting by dumping WIS, and settle for few skills and create a ranger that's a passable frontliner, though a sub-optimal ranger. That said, even a 'normal' ranger can pull frontline duties in a small party or one that lacks any other melee potentential. In the latter case, he'll need some help, and 'frontlining' will have to be slightly different. For instance, in a divine-heavy party, with a frontlining ranger, buffing the ranger up will be vital; while, if the party is arcane-heavy, the goal will be to keep fights very short, so the ranger doesn't have to fronline for long. If the party is stealth-oriented and mobile, frontlining may not even be an issue - the party evades some encounters and flees those where a heavy frontliner would have been required, skirmishing, instead.
Seerow 08-16-06, 02:43 PM	1) What books do you have? Spell Compendium really makes Ranger a more valid choice whichever path you chose. 2) Why would you WANT to be as bad as a Fighter?
bitnine 08-16-06, 02:48 PM	The problem with the ranger is that he needs more stats than a fighter - he needs DEX to keep his AC adequate, INT & WIS to support his skills (and WIS to support his spells), STR for melee/long-comp-bow damage, and, like everyone, CON for hps. A fighter, OTOH, can get by with little more than STR & CON. In a high point-buy game, the ranger can afford enough STR to dish out some damage, enough DEX to keep his AC up, enough CON to have frontline-worth hps, and still keep his WIS high enough to cast, and he can frontline. You could also sacrifice spell casting by dumping WIS, and settle for few skills and create a ranger that's a passable frontliner, though a sub-optimal ranger.This is largely true, and a ranger will probably always be more in the MAD camp than the fighter. However, I think that a ranger who is shooting to be more of a frontliner than a general ranger can dump INT. Given their number of skill points, keeping survival, spot/listen, and hide/move silently maxed will provide a good skill role to the party, with a sixth to be divided or focused as needed. Gear might be a bit influential. In a standard wealth game, starting in with a 12 WIS and shooting to increase it through magical means at higher levels is viable, but finding yourself in a low-magic world unable to make use of 3rd level spells without using an ability increase might be sorta harsh. And there's a question of if you'll be able to get that tasty mithril breastplate for your ranger. However, even towards the edge, you're still looking at high STR, mid DEX, with as much CON as possible, which is more division than a fighter sees. (Also, as far as WIS goes, might be helpful to know if you're looking at a particular PrC or multiclassing. If you don't reach the point where you'd actually gain decent spellcasting, WIS isn't going to be as important to you. Though you should definately still make the most of having spells on your class list. Being able to use wands of cure light wounds and certain buffing scrolls can be a great help. Things like energy protection, tree stride, and foebane make for some pretty nice situational boosts that may prove to be a savior at some time.)
AkaKageWarrior 08-16-06, 03:27 PM	Up to level 20, I'll take some 19 levels of cleric to boost my 1 ranger level... makes him a good fighter and better spellcaster! ;) okay, seriously, there are a lot of new ranger spells in the complete books which really give him a boost in combat, some of them are hilariously powerful IMO. (was it "volley of arrows" or so?). but to boost the melee prowess, some fighter levels (or barbarian, as above, + maybe the extra rage feat) are helpful. I love 3.5 rangers, because they are really versatile with their skills, abilities and spells. AKW
Tony Vargas 08-16-06, 03:58 PM	However, I think that a ranger who is shooting to be more of a frontliner than a general ranger can dump INT.Agreed. It's just kinda a waste with thier excellent skill list. In a standard wealth game, starting in with a 12 WIS and shooting to increase it through magical means at higher levels is viable, but finding yourself in a low-magic world unable to make use of 3rd level spells without using an ability increase might be sorta harsh. Nod. WIS boosters also take up a useful slot (knecklace/periapt/amulet). Ignoring spell casting by not investing in WIS is also an option, if you can get Wands, for instance, you can access your best low-level spells quite a lot. However, even towards the edge, you're still looking at high STR, mid DEX, with as much CON as possible, which is more division than a fighter sees.Right. If stats are tight, the Fighter can get by on just STR and CON, the ranger needs those to frontline, plus a good DEX to keep up his AC in light armor, even if he's focused primarily on melee. If more stats are available, the Fighter can expand his feat selection by investing more in DEX and INT, and the Ranger becomes more viable in a frontlining role. I guess we could just tell the OP: try to get your DM to go for high-point-buy.
The_Shaman 08-16-06, 04:18 PM	Well, if it's spells you need, you may as well make a "prestige ranger" with a few levels of fighter and cleric. Chances are, you will cast better. As it is, a ranger can do most things a dexterity fighter can, but can't tank like a heavy fighter. Unfortunately, he doesn't have the armor or hit die for one. That doesn't mean he or she can't be the main warrior, just that this party should have this in mind for their tactics. If they have enough summons to act as shields, the ranger could handle the "mere" damage-dealing.
CaoSlayer 08-16-06, 04:19 PM	really, at mid levels the only thing a ranger needs for tanking like the best fighter of the world it is to have an arcanist to cast displacement or improved invisibility, the miss chance just it is on numerica terms the same that doubling the hp.
The_Shaman 08-16-06, 04:25 PM	Heh, maybe but it works even better on a cleric with divine power :)
CaoSlayer 08-16-06, 06:12 PM	Heh, maybe but it works even better on a cleric with divine power :) yes, yes... CoDzilla it is better, but that isnt the matter of the topic.