Post/Author/DateTime	Post
doughal 04-28-06, 09:39 PM	Human Ranger 1 Point Blank Shot 2 Combat style Archery (give Rapid shot as a feat) 3 Precise Shot 4 5 6 Improved Combat Style (Many shot), Improved Initiative 7 8 9 Evasion, Mounted Archery 10 11 Combat Style Mastery (Improved Precise Shot) 12 Far Shot 13 14 15 feat 16 17 18 feat 19 20 This is a full BAB class. At 16th lvl, with Rapid Shot and Manyshot you get 5 attacks per round. Each attack launches 4 arrows. That’s 20d8 base. (assuming all arrows hit) Now assume a strength bow (+5). If all arrows hit that’s +100 to your base damage, thus 20d8+100. But who is gonna have just a simple str bow. At lvl 16 you’ll have at least a strength bow with Frost or even a +5 composite longbow of frost (+5 str). That makes it 20d8 + 20d6(frost) + 200(str+magic) depending on how nice a bow you’ve got. Again, assume that all arrows hit, that’s 240-480. Even if only one set of arrows per round hits that’s still 48-96 points. Add to that all the rangerly goodness and lvl 4 ranger spells and its pretty impressive. Now what I’d like to know is why people say Cleric Archer is the best? Even with persistent buffs and such can they match those kind of damage numbers?
PhoenixInferno 04-28-06, 09:47 PM	Totally off base. Rapid Shot and Manyshot can't be used together - Rapid Shot is part of your full-attack (a full-round action) and Manyshot is a standard action.
RendakorRahn 04-28-06, 09:48 PM	Many Shot is a standard action. Doesnt work with Rapidshot or anything else. Edit: Gah, Phoenix beat me.
PhoenixInferno 04-28-06, 09:54 PM	Many Shot is a standard action. Doesnt work with Rapidshot or anything else. Edit: Gah, Phoenix beat me.Improved Initiative, my friend.
RendakorRahn 04-28-06, 09:55 PM	Improved Initiative, my friend. Dumping Dex ftl.
doughal 04-28-06, 09:56 PM	An attack is a standard action. Manyshot is an attack. Rapid shot gives you one extra attack per round with a ranged weapon. Nothing is the description of Rapid Shot says it can't be used with Manyshot, nor the other way around. I don't understand how they don't work together.
Gondoras 04-28-06, 09:57 PM	I've never played a Ranger/Cleric, but I almost want to, now. At Ranger11/Cleric9, you'd have a BAB of 17/12/7/2, which isn't far off from the alternative of going all Ranger. You Still have many of the same goodies that the Ranger has, plus some serious spell casting ability....tack on Righteous Might to that stud bow that you'd have. There are plenty of other spells that'd I think would turn a Ranger into an extremely scary build and you'd still have your open feats to mess with. Judgement call when it comes down to it. You'd be giving up Hide in Plain Site, a couple of Favored enemies and Camouflage, but I believe the return is much greater.
Vorlir 04-28-06, 09:58 PM	How about the part that says you must take a full attack action, right in the description of the feat in the phb. And a standard action is seperate from a full attack action.
doughal 04-28-06, 10:03 PM	Got it. I just completely spaced on that line. Wishful thinking I guess. <sigh>
RendakorRahn 04-28-06, 10:06 PM	Manyshot says that it requires a standard action to use: As a standard action, you may fire two arrows at a single opponent within 30 feet. Both arrows use the same attack roll (with a -4 penalty) to determine success and deal damage normally Rapid shot requires you to take a full attack action: You can get one extra attack per round with a ranged weapon. The attack is at your highest base attack bonus, but each attack you make in that round (the extra one and the normal ones) takes a -2 penalty. You must use the full attack action to use this feat. A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step emphasis mine.
doughal 04-28-06, 10:24 PM	Ok, so we are talking 232-384 if all 16 arrows hit and with a nice bow. That is unless I completely don't understand Manyshot. My original question still stands though. Doesn't a straight ranger still outdamage a straight cleric? How would a cleric bring their damage up to those numbers? Althougth the Ranger11/Cleric9 mentioned sounds pretty interesting.
PhoenixInferno 04-28-06, 10:30 PM	Ok, so we are talking 232-384 if all 16 arrows hit and with a nice bow. That is unless I completely don't understand Manyshot.The latter is true in this case. Manyshot is a STANDARD action. Full Attack is not 4 ATTACK actions (which means Manyshot still couldn't be used because Attack actions are different from Standard actions). My original question still stands though. Doesn't a straight ranger still outdamage a straight cleric? How would a cleric bring their damage up to those numbers?Possibly - depends on how well you can stack on the bonus damage. The point of the Cleric Archer is that you can become almost as good as (if not better than) a Ranger/Fighter archer with minimal feat investment, leaving you just as skilled at healing, spellcasting, and meleeing. Its the VERSATILITY of the Cleric Archer, not the raw brute firepower, that makes it better. Althougth the Ranger11/Cleric9 mentioned sounds pretty interesting.If you had Unearthed Arcana (or used the Variant rules in the SRD) you could use Prestige Ranger if you chose the right domains.
ZeroEffect 04-28-06, 10:47 PM	Ok, so we are talking 232-384 if all 16 arrows hit and with a nice bow. That is unless I completely don't understand Manyshot. My original question still stands though. Doesn't a straight ranger still outdamage a straight cleric? How would a cleric bring their damage up to those numbers? Althougth the Ranger11/Cleric9 mentioned sounds pretty interesting. You really need to go back and read the basic rules on standard actions, move actions, and full attack actions. Best to do that before you come back to this thread and stick your foot in your mouth again... and again... and again... ;)
doughal 04-28-06, 10:53 PM	I'm sorry guys. The density in my cranial region seems to be pretty severe tonight. I've just recently converted over to 3.5 and I still don't understand everything. I get that Manyshot is a standard action, and thus not a Full attack action which is what Rapid shot is. However, doesn't that mean that Manyshot could be used on each of your regular attacks durning a round? At 16th lvl you get 4 attacks per round. Doesn't that mean 4 arrows at +16, 4 arrows at +11, 4 arrows at +6, and 4 arrows at +1? Or am I still missing something?
Subedei 04-28-06, 11:00 PM	Clearly not, as manyshot requires a standard action and a full attack requires standard action.
ZeroEffect 04-28-06, 11:03 PM	I'm sorry guys. The density in my cranial region seems to be pretty severe tonight. I've just recently converted over to 3.5 and I still don't understand everything. I get that Manyshot is a standard action, and thus not a Full attack action which is what Rapid shot is. However, doesn't that mean that Manyshot could be used on each of your regular attacks durning a round? At 16th lvl you get 4 attacks per round. Doesn't that mean 4 arrows at +16, 4 arrows at +11, 4 arrows at +6, and 4 arrows at +1? Or am I still missing something? In a round you can do one of two things... 1. Make a Move Action and a Standard Action. (This is where you would use Manyshot, to fire more than one arrow with your SINGLE Standard Action.) or 2. Make a Full Attack Action and NO Move Action. (This is where you would use Rapid Shot, to get an extra attack in addition to the 4 attacks that you get from your Full Attack Action.) You can't do both. A Full Attack Action is not comprised of multiple Standard Actions.
Gondoras 04-28-06, 11:08 PM	otherwise Rogues would find a way to Sneak Attack 3 times in a single round or a fighters that would power attack 4 times in a round. It's just a way to keep things somewhat level. You'd still have a nice attack, but it gives a foe at least some hope :)
Subedei 04-28-06, 11:11 PM	Rogues can sneak attack multiple times in a round, fighters can power attack multiple times in a round.
doughal 04-28-06, 11:13 PM	I think I understand now. Like I said, I just recently converted over to 3.5. Thanks for being patient, and helping me to understand.
ZeroEffect 04-28-06, 11:19 PM	I think I understand now. Like I said, I just recently converted over to 3.5. Thanks for being patient, and helping me to understand. No problem. This stuff was an even bigger stumbling block for me when I converted to 3.5. I'd go with a Ranger, Ranger/Fighter, or Rogue/Fighter/Ranger if you want more feats and skills (important for the scout role). You might be interested in the Scout class from CAdv but I can't comment on it since I have very little experience with it. I'd go with a Cleric archer if you want to have full Cleric casting in addition to doing great damage with your arrows... Just like PhoenixInferno said... Definitely take the Prestige Ranger if it's available.
X-Codes 04-29-06, 03:59 AM	Prestige Ranger = Ranger Bonus Feats in Full Plate + 1/2 Druid or Cleric spell progression. It's just plain awesome. Also, where is your Mounted Combat pre-requisite to Mounted Archery?
Gondoras 04-29-06, 11:34 AM	Rogues can sneak attack multiple times in a round, fighters can power attack multiple times in a round. yeah, I realized it later. I was trying to come up with a great thought and failed miserably :)
EvilVegan 04-29-06, 12:07 PM	yeah, I realized it later. I was trying to come up with a great thought and failed miserably :) I thought you were going for irony. My original question still stands though. Doesn't a straight ranger still outdamage a straight cleric? How would a cleric bring their damage up to those numbers? Human Ranger 1 Point Blank Shot, mounted combat (I think you meant to put it here) 2 Combat style Archery (give Rapid shot as a feat) 3 Precise Shot 6 Improved Combat Style (Many shot), Improved Initiative 9 Evasion, Mounted Archery 11 Combat Style Mastery (Improved Precise Shot) 12 Far Shot 15 feat 18 feat Against favored enemies this guy is a beast, against others he's doing d8 + str + enhancement + elemental/wounding enchantments. Human Cleric, 1 Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Extend Spell (Planning domain), Weapon Focus (Long Bow / War domain) 3 Persistent Spell 6 Divine Persistent Spell 9 Zen Archery 12 Rapid Shot 15 Extra Turning (or if night sticks are available get something else, like quicken/divine quicken) 18 Extra Turning This guy can disable/buff/heal, wear full plate, has exactly the same HP range, and can cast divine persistent divine power (full BAB +hp +6 str) and divine persistent righteous might (large size, +4 str/+2 con, DR, etc), as well as greater magic weapon (more money on special qualities, less on enhancement bonuses), divine favor, magic vestment (same as GMW). He's doing 2d6 (large bow via righteous might) + str (can put a 10 in str and still have a 20 after buffs) + enhancement (Higher than ranger's on average thanks to greater magic weapon) + elemental/wounding enchantments (Also higher on average indirectly because of greater magic weapon) + divine favor. Did I mention he also has FULL clerical casting, where a ranger has ranger casting and hide in plain sight in the woods, and an animal companion that's half as good as a druids? So the damage is at the very least comparable, and at the most I'd say a cleric is probably out damaging the ranger (except against favored enemies, maybe). Add in area debuffs, area buffs, area damage, miracle, etc. and ranger just falls further and further behind. Plus a ranger can't even make a decent flare by casting light on an arrow, since they don't have that spell. A cleric can cast celestial brilliance on an arrow and have a flare that lasts for days (and does excellent damage to undead). Of course a cleric is very susceptible to a dispel magic and a ranger is not.
brownfox 04-29-06, 03:35 PM	I dig Rangers & the Wizards of the Coast. They've made a rocking game and can do no wrong! So...Can anyone tell me what I am failing to consider or am overlooking when I think it a mistake for Point Blank Shot be a prerequisite for Far Shot? Is there a real world experience with firearms or bows that made the designers think the two skills share an underlying similarity? I’ve no experience w/ firearms/bows so can only imagine – but that’s what we’re all good at :D. Anyhow, rangers I dig and this continually irks me along my feat path. I believe there must be some reason that my buddies and I are overlooking because so much creative talent has designed the rest of Faerun and the accompanied mechanics that I still enjoy learning. Thanks for any insight you guru’s have on this topic!
MSW 05-01-06, 06:03 PM	Just to counterpoint EvilVegan's excellent assesment of ranger/cleric archers, the Ranger will have many more skills and higher skill rolls then the cleric. The ranger also gets all the basic D&D skills (spot/listen/survival/hide/move silently/ride) as class skills. Clerics just get the +2 skill points per level, ranger gets +6. Ranger also gets full BaB progrssion (+1 per level) which is nice. The cleric (according to Wizards) is the most powerful class in the game. This character will be more versatile in more situatons. The ranger will be a lot of fun to play, and is a good character for players that tend to roll not so good. (the offset of higher BaB and higher skill ranks does wonders.)
Pyrthas 05-01-06, 07:27 PM	Ranger also gets full BaB progrssion (+1 per level) which is nice.Yeah, but clerics get divine power to compensate, so this isn't much of a difference between rangers and clerics (or, perhaps more accurately, it's one specific instance of the more general issue for clerics of being susceptible to dispel). The point about skills is worth noting, but I think that all it shows is that rangers are a little bit versatile, too. Full casting and the ability to melee just fine strikes me as more valuable than several useful but by no means indispensable skills. Rangers have some things going for them, but clerics have so many more.
Valanthe 05-01-06, 08:31 PM	Honestly I see a straight ranger as a pathetically weak class. You really don't get anything from the class at later levels. What am I talking about? This "amazing" build, if it worked, could be done by a fighter and earlier. Sure, the ranger has skillpoints. But he doesn't have the skill list to be the party skillmonkey. Sure, he has spells. But he doesn't have the casting to be the party healer or buffer, or even close. These options make him more versatile, but he's weaker at any of the iconic rolls than most other classes would be.
ZeroEffect 05-02-06, 12:57 AM	Honestly I see a straight ranger as a pathetically weak class. You really don't get anything from the class at later levels. What am I talking about? This "amazing" build, if it worked, could be done by a fighter and earlier. Sure, the ranger has skillpoints. But he doesn't have the skill list to be the party skillmonkey. Sure, he has spells. But he doesn't have the casting to be the party healer or buffer, or even close. These options make him more versatile, but he's weaker at any of the iconic rolls than most other classes would be. You don't know what you're talking about. Skills are VERY important for a scout/archer. Spellcasting and wand use are also very useful. The Favored Enemy ability is amazing if used properly. A Fighter doesn't get any of these features. A Fighter only gets extra feats, which are pointless since a 20th level Ranger can also get every archery feat in the book earlier than 20th level. A Fighter archer CAN'T fulfill the role of party scout, which is what the Ranger does perfectly. Ranger 20, Ranger 18/Fighter 2, and Ranger 16/Fighter 4 are all preferable to Fighter 20 in this role.
Gondoras 05-02-06, 02:41 AM	To help add to the previous argument, A ranger is not expected to be the skillmonkey....that's why they have rogues. Ranger is also not expected to be the party's healer.....that's why there are Paladin's and Clerics. Hence the reason for cross-classing. A ranger does get 6+ skill points each level which are definitely plenty and will aid the party in spotting enemies and other various things. By getting all of the feats the Ranger needs and some nice spells from the Cleric class, this character would be flat-out tough. Most of the skill ranks will be high enough to get the job done by the time the Cleric levels start, too. As for the fighter, they only get 2+ skill points, would have the same BAB as a Ranger, and a huge amount of feats that would probably be wasted. Probably why most builds on this board only involve 2 levels of Fighter at the most. If Ranger 11/Cleric 9 isn't desirable, go Ranger 11/Wizard 9. Similar concept, but you can't heal and have different spells. You can still use spells that aid your party and yourself.....Greater Invisibility, Waves of Fatigue, Teleport. List goes on. In either case, having up to level 5 spells at your disposal, being able to fight in Melee, plenty of skill points, and still having a stout ranged attack is pretty much any gamer's dream. You could get more focused on one aspect of this and take PrC's to make it better, but this is a pretty strong all-around build.....and more desirable than being a bard ;)
Medicelious-Melharmonac 05-02-06, 08:14 AM	Now what I’d like to know is why people say Cleric Archer is the best? Even with persistent buffs and such can they match those kind of damage numbers? Because the cleric is much more effective at buffing themselves. As a high level cleric I do not need a +5 bow I cast Greater Magic Weapon which mean I can have a +1 holy blah blah blah bow up to +9 enhancements then make it a +5 with GMW. Add in the fact that Divine Power makes your BAB equal to a rangers plus the fact that I can raise my STR by 10 (Divine Power + Righteous Might) allowing me more Strength bonus to damage. Add in a Quickened Divine Favor and your looking at another +3 to hit and damage. so a quick and dirty using your numbers. Per arrow assuming +1 frost (+5 Mighty) composite longbow + GMW + Righteous Might size increase: 2D6 + 10 [Strength] + 5 [weapon] + 3 [Divine Favor] + 1D6 3D6 + 18 per arrow or 20D8 +20D6 +360 damage for the 20 shots... There is a lot more that can be done to improve damage but they would require quickened spells (Righteous Wrath of the Faithful for an extra attack and +3 to hit and damage).
Muaadeeb 05-05-06, 10:31 AM	One thing this thread has done is point out the clerics spell casting ability with solid examples. At the same time this thread has only hinted at the ranger's spell casting abilities. Let me list a few spells that bring the ranger more power and versatility: Spell Levels: ((Focusing on combat ability not full range of spells)). 1st: Arrow Mind - threaten with bow in adjacent squares. Guided Shot - ignore range, cover, and concealment. Hawkeye - +50% range. Hunter's Mercy - Next shot is automatically a critical. Sniper's Shot - no range limit on sneak attack. 2nd Level: Align Fang - grant natural weapon alignment bane. Extracting Shot - automatically confirm crits against favored enemies. Fell the Greatest Foe - Bonus damage on foe's larger than you. 3rd Level: Align Fang, Mass - as above but allies as well. Arrow Storm - One ranged attack against each foe in one range increment. Decoy Image - similar to mirror image but for you and allies. Find the Gap - your attacked ignore armor and natural armor. 4th Level: Foe Bane - Weapon becomes +5 and does 2d6 bonus dam against favored enemy. Wild Runner - Change into centaur -- how cool is that?!?!! I listed only the direct combat spells available to the ranger. ((Spell Compendium)). These spells are very diverse and give the ranger a lot of power. I know a cleric would have more diversity but I would hate to fight a foe that can force his next shot to be a automatic critical (x3 bow) and all normal critical's automatically confirm. Take this into the account that the ranger can also automatically by pass armor and natural armor stacked with ignoring cover, concealment and range -- makes the full BAB ranger very dangerous. Once you add in the stealth/terrain abilities the ranger is an excellent scout/assassin and general killing machine. Thoughts?
Valanthe 05-05-06, 10:48 AM	You don't know what you're talking about. Skills are VERY important for a scout/archer. Spellcasting and wand use are also very useful. The Favored Enemy ability is amazing if used properly. A Fighter doesn't get any of these features. A Fighter only gets extra feats, which are pointless since a 20th level Ranger can also get every archery feat in the book earlier than 20th level. A Fighter archer CAN'T fulfill the role of party scout, which is what the Ranger does perfectly. Ranger 20, Ranger 18/Fighter 2, and Ranger 16/Fighter 4 are all preferable to Fighter 20 in this role. Congratulations, you beat Fighter 20. :rolleyes: On a more serious note. At a one level dip, you get full wand usage. Spellcasting is obviously useful, but not enough to justify the class. I've never had luck with Favored Enemy. Unless you go into a game knowing what your opponents are going to be, I've found that there are too many possible opponents. Unless your DM is going to start sending monsters against you that are your favored enemy, you're pretty much SOL. (Except the Stalker of Evil build, obviously) While ranger does fulfill party scout, so does the rogue, and much better. Since you need both a party scout and disarmer, why bother splitting the rolls? I suppose if your rogue decides to dump int or something like that, the ranger would be good to shore up scouting, but when was the last time you've seen that happen?
Prominence 05-05-06, 11:05 AM	On a more serious note. At a one level dip, you get full wand usage. Spellcasting is obviously useful, but not enough to justify the class. You get full wand usage, but it's not practical to buy most ranger wands. Technically, a wand of 4th level ranger spells can be made... at CL 14 minimum. This can get absurdly expensive. Furthermore, there's ways to get Arcane spells in your ranger spell slots. I've never had luck with Favored Enemy. Unless you go into a game knowing what your opponents are going to be, I've found that there are too many possible opponents. Unless your DM is going to start sending monsters against you that are your favored enemy, you're pretty much SOL. (Except the Stalker of Evil build, obviously). In any campaign, you're almost assuredly going to face undead at some point, and probably evil outsiders / monstrous humanoids. A fair bit of aberrations/magical beasts sometimes, too. Evil, of course, comes up a lot and stacks with the above 99% of the time. If your DM loves humanoid opponents, you might be hard pressed and need to take Scaly Ones (Serpent Kingdoms)/human/elf/goblinoid or organizations (PGtF has information on it) or UA Variant (environmental bonuses). Bottom line, you can make Favored Enemy work if you're smart, and it's no less conditional than Sneak Attack - which half the stuff at 20 is immune to. While ranger does fulfill party scout, so does the rogue, and much better. Since you need both a party scout and disarmer, why bother splitting the rolls? I suppose if your rogue decides to dump int or something like that, the ranger would be good to shore up scouting, but when was the last time you've seen that happen? Well, a ranger has a slightly easier time taking since the ranger will not need Greater Manyshot to deal his favored enemy damage. It is not precision damage. Furthermore, they gain a their extra arrows faster than the normal rogue, ending up with 5 arrows instead of 4 without multiclassing. Finally, two scouts are better than one - and 9 arrows kills more stuff than 4. One of the key things to party optimization is overlapping skills. Your cleric can fail his knowledge religion but the wizard might roll it high enough with his int bonus
ksbsnowowl 05-05-06, 01:01 PM	You get full wand usage, but it's not practical to buy most ranger wands. Technically, a wand of 4th level ranger spells can be made... at CL 14 minimum. This can get absurdly expensive. Wrong on multiple counts. A 12th level Ranger could have the Craft Wand feat, but he would not need to make his wands at that caster level. The lowest CL a wand can have is not the lowest level at which a character can obtain the crafting feat, it is the lowest level needed to cast the spell. A 12th level Ranger with the Craft Wand feat could make a wand of, say...Hunter's Mercy (1st level spell) at second CL, making the market price for said item 1500 gp. However, the extremity of a 12th level ranger with the craft wand feat is not needed to make wands of ranger spells. All you need is a 5th level wizard (or any full caster) with the Craft Wand feat, and a 4th level ranger with at least a 12 Wisdom (for first level spells, obviously). The Wizard can craft the wand, while the Ranger provides the spell for the two days of the wand's crafting time. Since wands are neither Arcane nor Divine, the resulting wand can be used by anyone with the spell on his class spell list.
Valanthe 05-05-06, 02:44 PM	You get full wand usage, but it's not practical to buy most ranger wands. Technically, a wand of 4th level ranger spells can be made... at CL 14 minimum. This can get absurdly expensive. Furthermore, there's ways to get Arcane spells in your ranger spell slots. Snow already beat me on this part. In any campaign, you're almost assuredly going to face undead at some point, and probably evil outsiders / monstrous humanoids. A fair bit of aberrations/magical beasts sometimes, too. Evil, of course, comes up a lot and stacks with the above 99% of the time. If your DM loves humanoid opponents, you might be hard pressed and need to take Scaly Ones (Serpent Kingdoms)/human/elf/goblinoid or organizations (PGtF has information on it) or UA Variant (environmental bonuses). Bottom line, you can make Favored Enemy work if you're smart, and it's no less conditional than Sneak Attack - which half the stuff at 20 is immune to. You are not in any way almost assuredly going to face undead at some point. Ditto with anything else. For example, my last campaign I was in held all humanoids, which we were not informed of at the start. I've been in, and run more than one campaign that had no undead at all. And being slighty more useful in a handful of battles hardly justifies a class. And Favored Enemy(evil) comes from a PrC I can't remember atm, not the Ranger class. And to merely suggest that Favored Enemy is only as conditional as Sneak Attack makes you look like an idiot. Just a quick breeze through the ranger favored enemies lists aberrations, animals, dragons, fey, giant, 10 humanoids, magical beasts, monstrous humanoid, 9 outsiders, and vermin, whom the majority of which can be sneak attacked. I fail to see these as being "equally" conditional. And on top of that, spells like Gravestrike add more versatily to Sneak Attack. As far as I know, there aren't any spells that allow you to apply Favored Enemy bonuses to more targets. I may be wrong on that, though. So no, your "bottom line" doesn't exist. Well, a ranger has a slightly easier time taking since the ranger will not need Greater Manyshot to deal his favored enemy damage. It is not precision damage. Furthermore, they gain a their extra arrows faster than the normal rogue, ending up with 5 arrows instead of 4 without multiclassing. Finally, two scouts are better than one - and 9 arrows kills more stuff than 4. One of the key things to party optimization is overlapping skills. Your cleric can fail his knowledge religion but the wizard might roll it high enough with his int bonus I can't understand what you're even trying to say by the beginning of this paragraph. What does archery have to do with tanking(What I assume you're talking about, although I can't figure out why...)? And in a lot of parties, you don't have the players to afford two scouts. Sure, overlapping skills is important, but you can do it a lot better than having a straight ranger.
Prominence 05-11-06, 08:41 AM	However, the extremity of a 12th level ranger with the craft wand feat is not needed to make wands of ranger spells. All you need is a 5th level wizard (or any full caster) with the Craft Wand feat, and a 4th level ranger with at least a 12 Wisdom (for first level spells, obviously). The Wizard can craft the wand, while the Ranger provides the spell for the two days of the wand's crafting time. Since wands are neither Arcane nor Divine, the resulting wand can be used by anyone with the spell on his class spell list. 1. I was refering to spells higher than level 1, hence the level four spell comment. I'm pretty sure minimum caster level for the wand wouls be minimum level the ranger can cast the spell. There are other spells besides Hunter's Mercy which are nice to have, which would cost 21000 each. 2. A lot of ranger spells are ranger specific. I can't understand what you're even trying to say by the beginning of this paragraph. What does archery have to do with tanking(What I assume you're talking about, although I can't figure out why...)? And in a lot of parties, you don't have the players to afford two scouts. Sure, overlapping skills is important, but you can do it a lot better than having a straight ranger. I'm saying FE isn't precision, so it doesn't require an extra feat to apply it to manyshot. Manyshot can deliver FE damage just fine, saving a few feats in comparison.