Pure ranger?

[Aarkon Draco]

after having tried to make a coupple pure rangers ive dropped them to the weakest pure class (used to be pure rogue) weak damage weak AC and medocre abilitys make them very difficult to level. rogues atleast get evasion tumble ac sneak damage to bolster their attacks and umd for ii wands ect. even pure ftr barbar monk and pally minus the bonuses are far better than the ranger. theres alot of good suggestions in the pure class thread about them one i would like to see is keen senses outdoors this would help alot not having to practicly be forced to go with elf for race and open them to other races a bit. druegar for ex with their II token helps ALOT with their short commings but then you can practicly forget being a spotter with no keen senses.

even their epic feat bane of enemys honestly doesent put a dent in their lack of damage IMO. if done as intended ( dual wielding since they get no bow perks like in nwn2 ) their ac is horrendous compared to all other dexers who have acess to tumble ( 4 more ac for them if you cross class the max 20 on a ranger ) no evasion hurts alot too and while not all dexers get evasion ( bards for ex ) they have other things to compinsate ( bard song bonus hp and energy buffer ect) that are far better than a pure ranger ( prot from energy .... ).

i realize that pure class bonuses take a while to script and balance but given how weak the ranger is i wonder why it wasent one of the first to get them.


oh and AO needs effective and working jobs too

[Blystos Re]

If I may...

A pure ranger can be quite devastating if played a specific way. There are a few feats and skills that, in my opinion are crucial if you want to make a pure ranger.

• Hide
  Move Silently
  Set Trap
  Craft Trap
  Spot
  Blinding speed
  Called Shot
  Weapon Finesse
  Improved Critical: Longbow

A front-lines, melee ranger will get pwnd a good percentage of the time. A sneaky ranger can do the pwning.

[LinuxPup]

I Certainly have no problems with improving rangers.

As far as damage... a pure ranger gets +9 damage from favored enemy and +2d6 with bane of enemies. Also I believe the +2 AB from bane of enemies counts against damage reduction... so a ranger with a black sword and bane of enemies can pierce through +10/ damage reduction.

I don't think damage is a problem for rangers... they're better off than fighters (even with epic weapon specialization) and barbarians (except for the pure barb stuff).

[-BannyD-]

rangers do immense damage. if i ever got my one ranger to lvl 40...he would easily punch people in the face for 100+ 1handed but buffed.

their main problem is survivability and although they get access to a lot of awesome skills...you will never be able to utilize them all cause they dont get enough skill points.

[Nognog]

rangers get a good hide / ms bonus, I saw str rangers sneaking with a halberd hitting very hard and hiding again, something a fighter cant do. And the spot bonus. I wonder if they can get a " detector" to see enemy stats, ac ab discipline, saves..etc...

[Bargeld]

As he stumbled through the masses of rats and beetles in the Legion tunnels, one of my DD teammates came up with an idea for an 'artifact item' which I thought was rather appropriate for a pure ranger:

X many times per day the ranger is able to activate 'Nature's Walk'. Any natural creature within this aura become neutrally aligned to the ranger, allowing him to walk the land unmolested. A ranger is able to effect any creature with a CR rating equal to or less than 5 + CHA modifier.

Twists on this could make it a saving throw for creatures modified by CHA. It could lso be a permanent effect, as it is more of a nice utility rather than a massive lvl 40 ability.

Yes, we in SL still have some hope that rangers will one day be accessible. Perhap the new patch will unbalance things enough to warrant this

[-BannyD-]

uhh...what pure ranger is going to have any Charisma bonus at all? why would we want to waste a pure class bonus on something to make rats scared of us...

[cRaZy8or5e]

Laufer has glorious aspirations to be the Rat King!!! Second only to the Lizard King.

[Blystos Re]

Hey, that doesn't sound so bad.

Go read King Rat and tell me that doesn't sound cool.

[LinuxPup]

We've got some cool stuff planned... I've implemented a feature for rangers which we're debating and testing... should make the class more appealing (if it goes in).

[P. Fricebottle]

rangers do immense damage. if i ever got my one ranger to lvl 40...he would easily punch people in the face for 100+ 1handed but buffed.

their main problem is survivability and although they get access to a lot of awesome skills...you will never be able to utilize them all cause they dont get enough skill points.

No. I'm actually going to agree with Draco. Rotumus Kane got one to 30+ and his damage was crappy, even against his Favored Enemies.

[LinuxPup]

Really? I was playing a ranger earlier today and his damage is great... does more damage than most fighters... and more non-sneak damage than just about any other dex class except maybe Bard (close call).

Fighters only get epic weapon specialization which, combined with weapon specialization is +6. Rangers can get up to +9 with +2d6 from Bane of Enemies. Throwing in some Harper Scout can increase your damage a bit more too.

[Lorkar]

Shame MA or SL can't have Rangers.

[-BannyD-]

rangers do immense damage. if i ever got my one ranger to lvl 40...he would easily punch people in the face for 100+ 1handed but buffed.

their main problem is survivability and although they get access to a lot of awesome skills...you will never be able to utilize them all cause they dont get enough skill points.

No. I'm actually going to agree with Draco. Rotumus Kane got one to 30+ and his damage was crappy, even against his Favored Enemies.

ehh sorry, im gonna have to disagree with you here. ive long been a ranger fan because of their amazing stealth skills and damage. if you remember my original slave character, Slave Elessar, was a ranger/rogue/SD....str based and it only took a few hits to kill anything at all. taht was years ago when ns4 irst came out, but they are no different now (rangers that is). have a dex ranger build that can strike for 60s consistently by itself with fists and high ab...and my str ranger build thats not finished would be hitting for 80s by itself. i havent played him in awhile, but last time i did i was about lvl 30 going against that one cleric/BG from LA..tLB guy who was 40 at the time. got his devil distracted on a few rats, and by the time it took the devil to kill like 3 rats, the owner was dead...lvl 30ish vs40...and i believe he had on the correct resistance shield.

so dont tell me rangers suck with damage...pve they can be hard to lvl...pvp they own. go finishing lvling up my str ranger, give him a bard and cleric, and fear 100+1handed hits coming at you with 75ab/ac+....but im lazy.

but then again, those builds arent pure . a pure build wouldnt have the ac/ab/dmg as the one mentioned above. i would imagine a pure ranger, dex based...to be about 55ab/60ac on its own...str based probably 58ab/50ac, depending on what kind of armor you wear. neither is spectacular, and if they arent fighting their favored enemies they will suck in all aspects.

for pure ranger i would suggest: a -slight- damage boost, maybe acid elemental (wilderness-ey), decent ab/ac boost, unparalleled wilderness fighting ability, and i dunno what else...cool stuff heh

[frogofpeace]

Yeah, i have a ranger/sd/monk who can put out damage quick against favored enemies (I just wish he had taken FE:Gnome lol). They need more defense, no doubt about it; given the AC/resistance/DR boosts given to fighters, paladins, and barbs, they ought to get something really good. I wouldn't limit it to outdoors, either, or you really limit playability (I'd suspect, but none of the relics, e.g. are outside, right? and are the epic areas? HoD? DWP?) I know the wilderness aspect fits the class, but still.

I never have understood why Tumble isn't a class skill for rangers.