Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Paradisio 01-05-05, 11:11 PM	I realize there are more options but I would prefer to use one or the other, I get more feats as a fighter, but more special abilities as a ranger, any idea what is better in the long run?
Kintara 01-05-05, 11:58 PM	Well, in the long run many/most optimizers jump into a prestige class. Either or both classes would work. It depends on where you want to end up. Take a look at the various prestige classes available to you, and whether you're interested in any of them. Personally, I'm not a pro optimizer, so I just go with what my concept would fit with best. For example, I have an idea for a Great Crossbow shooter. Since I can't supplement the damage with Strength, I was thinking of taking Fighter for the Specializations. How far I go with fighter depends on whether there are still any juicy feats to take.
Zyme86 01-06-05, 03:03 AM	Simply put, crossbows in D&D utterly suck. Even with tht most powerful of them (not including balistas) you do 2d8. With bows, one can do much better. But you do have a point, you must be looking at the longrun. For example, everying time your strength increaces, you have to make a new bow, or forego the increaced damage from strength. I favor the ranger for their magic abilities. Esepecially when you use suplemental material, IE one spell lets you split an arrow # of time = to your caster level. There are three decent paths in which can be taken: 3 Range or fight/6 Sorc/2 Arcane Archer, Fireball Arrows are fun 5 Range/ Horizon Walker Master of terrains and plainar terrains 5 Range or fight/Order of the Bow Bow sniper or even the Deepwood Sniper But to be honest, bow work becomes seriously underpowered without the use of magic (like the AA, even the Order of the Bow and the Deepwood Sniper have limited effectiveness in the long run. As one approaches high level(between 8-12) bow take a backseat to magic, and their effectiveness is decreaced by fighters who hit for 50+/round (or hulking hurlers for 1.2 trillion+)
Kintara 01-06-05, 03:41 AM	Simply put, crossbows in D&D utterly suck. Even with tht most powerful of them (not including balistas) you do 2d8. With bows, one can do much better. Ahh, but part of the fun of the idea is how to make it work. I'm not sure how I could make it better than a traditional archer, though. One benefit is I can dump Strength. Also, crossbows can be used prone, which is a nice way to improve defense. Still, I can forget about making a full attack. I'm still not sure how to deal with that. Maybe going Psychic Warrior would help.... Anyway, yeah.
Zyme86 01-06-05, 04:43 AM	Have you ever seen the rapid reload w/lt. or hand crossbow ar a free action or a move for a heavy or great crossbow. only applys to one typ of crossbow as a time. dont forget the gnome bow sights from A&EG. allows you to treat objects a two range incriments closer for 150gp.
carnivore 01-06-05, 07:36 AM	IMO, ranger is much better, more skills(especially the more valuable ones) but as Kintara said i would try to get to a PrC as fast as i could. usually i try to get the best of both: ranger 1 ranger 2 fighter 1 fighter 2 ranger 3 PrC..................... gets you 5 bonus feats, lots of good class skills, Full BAB, mostly good saves. :D
Zyme86 01-06-05, 10:22 AM	first all you get is a few extra feats, a multiclass penality and lose all the abilities of the ranger you enjoy?
carnivore 01-06-05, 10:30 AM	first all you get is a few extra feats, a multiclass penality and lose all the abilities of the ranger you enjoy? :uh-huh: :thinks: what are you talking about? :confused:
charlesatan 01-06-05, 10:44 AM	As mentioned above, there are a couple of prestige classes that enable you to do more than a plain Ranger or Fighter could. It also depends on what you want your character to do and the opponents you face. I mean if you're expecting to face a lot of your favored enemies, you might get more mileage from a Ranger. However, if your GM throws you a mixed bunch, for sheer damage, a Fighter might be the way to go (since he has access to Weapon Specialization). If you want your character to be more flexible, on the other hand, the Ranger might be a better choice not only becauses of his additional skill points but access to spells as well (and that includes the ability to use cure light wounds wands).
charlesatan 01-06-05, 10:47 AM	first all you get is a few extra feats, a multiclass penality and lose all the abilities of the ranger you enjoy? Actually there's no multiclass penalty since the levels only have 1 level in difference. You only use some of your ranger abilities if you wear armor heavier than light. And why complain about having more feats? But again, it's a case to case basis. There are times when I'd want to go full ranger, and there are times when I want to go full fighter.
Kaboth 01-06-05, 04:07 PM	Well it is going to depend on what you want to do. Warriors can wear heavier armor and have more HP and to focus on less things. Rangers have good HP, lighter armor, but gain tons of skill points, better saves, and abilities good for the party but dont forget their spells to. If you looking for strictly damage, warrior is going to do it hands down. Just simply do the fact of feats and they get to focus on physical characteristics only. Ranger has to spread it around (attributes). Rangers have more use and better rounded out. if you want to use PRC's, I would go Arcane Archer and Order of the Bow Intiate. You would have to dip one level in to wizard, sorc or bard to qualify for Arcane Archer. I would do atleast 9 levels of Arcane Archer just for the enhance arrows ability. It realy depends on what you are wanting to achieve, like i said before.