What class are you going to pick in the upcoming Pathfinder: Kingmaker?

[Darkzone]

Jack of all trades, master of none.

It plays that ways for until you reach level 12ish, for sure. By then all of the synergies come into play, and you're taking silver and gold medals in any event, rather than just placing. They are in most ways, equal to the pure rogue. In some ways better. Lagging in the spell level hurts at the mid-tiers, but the only real change is omitting spells that do damage for your sneak attacks. The HUGE advantage that it has over pure casters, is that you can turn any (ranged) touch attack spell--including can-trips, into a vessel for your sneak attacks. Doing 7d6 + 1d3 acid damage from across the field with an inexhaustible and humble Acid Splash cantrip is brutal. Add in all of the awesome class features, and it's worth the cost of Level 9 spells.

I love power gaming, because it shows where a system, that tries to balance things, simply fails. And i love to make classes / prestige classes combos just for this sake. Also if a system tries to balance everything out it just loses its cutting edge. So let us have some fun together:
Arcane Trickster's (AT) "Impromptu Sneak Attack" at 3Lv can be only used once per day and at 7Lv 2 times. So you have to go the 10Lv of the AT for "Suprise Spells" which gives us also a +5d6 for Sneak Attack. And since the requirment for AT is +2d6 Sneak Attack this makes the +7d6 Sneak Attack that we can use against flat-footed targets == 13 Character Lv (3Lv of Rogue (R) and 10Lv of AT ). But we also need 3Lv of spell caster (Wizard W) for AT, so we are / need at least 16 Character Level to use Suprise Spells, but i don't exactly know if racial spell abilities count towards the AT requirement of one 2nd level arcane spell cast ability in Pathfinder. Now to gain also the Eldrich Knight (EK) prestige class we need +2Lv of arcane caster for the 3Lv arcane spells requirement (18 Character Level). So in the end (assuming the limit at Lv 20) you can only take 2Lv of EK, but you gain one additional spell casting level.
Results in:
Ability of casting 4th Level arcane spells (4,4,3,2,1 +10), (low mid tier)
+7d6 Sneak Attack, (high mid tier)
Base Attack (+2 (R 3Lv), +2(W 5Lv), +5(AT 10Lv), +2(EK 2Lv) == 11,6,1 ), (mid tier)
Saves ((1,3,1)3Lv R, (1,1,4)5Lv W, (3,5,5)10Lv AT, (1,1,1)2Lv EK == 6,10,11). (mid tier)
Initiative: D20 + Dex bonus + Improved Initiative (+4) (EK Bonus Combat Feat).
As i already said: Jack of all trades, master of none. "Surprise Spells" is good, but you need a high initiative to play it out and classes that have Uncanny Dodge break this ability. Impromptu Sneak Attack allows you to deal 2*7d6 a day (could be even in the same round), which is not that high in DnD 3.5E and Pathfinder. Would your build look like that?

 

[Chippy]

What I immediately took away from this poll is that its been 20 odd years since BG1 and 10 plus games ... and still no iteration of a classical RPG has made the Ranger class appealing from either a roleplaying, skill, or powergaming aspect.
Don't know whether to laugh or despair.

 

[deuxhero]

Problem is RTWP fucks over ranged attackers without some melee to keep enemies occupied. Made even worse by the tendency of cRPGs to start combat at arms distance (both from having pre-fight dialog and just bad design). Dual wielding just plain old sucks in 3.X systems outside of a very limited number of character types (PF Paladin, of all classes, is the only one that can actually manage it in a mostly core setting). You don't get any nifty unique spells like a Paladin does as a ranger. Class is horribly unfocused (magic using wilderness class with good archery and an animal companion) for anything that isn't a D&D based game to include but one element of it (normally "uses bows"), which isn't that much of a problem for a Paladin (armored guy with defensive spells and, sometimes, a magic horse).

 

[Chippy]

I know its a 'in a perfect world' request - but the Ranger has always been so generic, that they might as well just make the class a sub-selection of perks, feats, and skills - and then open up all classes to the rolplaying aspects of tracking and animal/monster lore like we saw in the Witcher 3. Huge amount of work I expect, but then also expect nobody plays a Ranger while powergaming.

 

[Cael]

Jack of all trades, master of none.

It plays that ways for until you reach level 12ish, for sure. By then all of the synergies come into play, and you're taking silver and gold medals in any event, rather than just placing. They are in most ways, equal to the pure rogue. In some ways better. Lagging in the spell level hurts at the mid-tiers, but the only real change is omitting spells that do damage for your sneak attacks. The HUGE advantage that it has over pure casters, is that you can turn any (ranged) touch attack spell--including can-trips, into a vessel for your sneak attacks. Doing 7d6 + 1d3 acid damage from across the field with an inexhaustible and humble Acid Splash cantrip is brutal. Add in all of the awesome class features, and it's worth the cost of Level 9 spells.

I love power gaming, because it shows where a system, that tries to balance things, simply fails. And i love to make classes / prestige classes combos just for this sake. Also if a system tries to balance everything out it just loses its cutting edge. So let us have some fun together:
Arcane Trickster's (AT) "Impromptu Sneak Attack" at 3Lv can be only used once per day and at 7Lv 2 times. So you have to go the 10Lv of the AT for "Suprise Spells" which gives us also a +5d6 for Sneak Attack. And since the requirment for AT is +2d6 Sneak Attack this makes the +7d6 Sneak Attack that we can use against flat-footed targets == 13 Character Lv (3Lv of Rogue (R) and 10Lv of AT ). But we also need 3Lv of spell caster (Wizard W) for AT, so we are / need at least 16 Character Level to use Suprise Spells, but i don't exactly know if racial spell abilities count towards the AT requirement of one 2nd level arcane spell cast ability in Pathfinder. Now to gain also the Eldrich Knight (EK) prestige class we need +2Lv of arcane caster for the 3Lv arcane spells requirement (18 Character Level). So in the end (assuming the limit at Lv 20) you can only take 2Lv of EK, but you gain one additional spell casting level.
Results in:
Ability of casting 4th Level arcane spells (4,4,3,2,1 +10), (low mid tier)
+7d6 Sneak Attack, (high mid tier)
Base Attack (+2 (R 3Lv), +2(W 5Lv), +5(AT 10Lv), +2(EK 2Lv) == 11,6,1 ), (mid tier)
Saves ((1,3,1)3Lv R, (1,1,4)5Lv W, (3,5,5)10Lv AT, (1,1,1)2Lv EK == 6,10,11). (mid tier)
Initiative: D20 + Dex bonus + Improved Initiative (+4) (EK Bonus Combat Feat).
As i already said: Jack of all trades, master of none. "Surprise Spells" is good, but you need a high initiative to play it out and classes that have Uncanny Dodge break this ability. Impromptu Sneak Attack allows you to deal 2*7d6 a day (could be even in the same round), which is not that high in DnD 3.5E and Pathfinder. Would your build look like that?

It is a weakness of that many CharOp noobs and dramafags fall into. They look at the build at level 20 only, and forget that most games end way before that. In 3.5, the Rainbow Servant is another PrC that CharOp noobs like to pillory because of the full access to Cleric spells at level 10 is "supa-OP!!!!" Of course, you have to be level 16 minimum to get it and you can only get it for some spontaneous casters (others follow the usual spell known gain tables) like the Warmage (weak caster to begin with) or Dread Necromancer (most of your spells would be duplicated by the Cleric spells). How many times have you played a PnP game that went up to level 16+?

And the fucktard that you quoted violated the most basic principle of CharOp: Never loose caster levels unless it is really, really, REALLY worth it. Arcane Trickster isn't. Unseen Seer, on the other hand, is if you want to play the Rogue/Mage.

"...worth the cost of 9th level spells..." *spits* Fucking noob. 9th level spells is a Goddamned Solar with Slay Anything arrows. The muppet thinks that 7d6+1d3 is "worth it"...

 

[Roqua]

I know its a 'in a perfect world' request - but the Ranger has always been so generic, that they might as well just make the class a sub-selection of perks, feats, and skills - and then open up all classes to the rolplaying aspects of tracking and animal/monster lore like we saw in the Witcher 3. Huge amount of work I expect, but then also expect nobody plays a Ranger while powergaming.

I disagree. I don't know about Pathfinder, but in AD&D they had clear distinctions that separated them from fighters, as much as Paladins, and restrictions that worked well as a multiclass.

In 3.5 they were very, very distinct as a class. You went bow or dual weapons, got an animal companion, some nice tracking shit, some good RP shit, etc. Synergize with rogue with decent skill points per level. Decent feats for extended rules.

I'm just not seeing them as generic.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

In 3.5 they were very, very distinct as a class. You went bow or dual weapons, got an animal companion, some nice tracking shit, some good RP shit, etc. Synergize with rogue with decent skill points per level. Decent feats for extended rules

No crpg made good use of a Ranger though.

 

[Roqua]

In 3.5 they were very, very distinct as a class. You went bow or dual weapons, got an animal companion, some nice tracking shit, some good RP shit, etc. Synergize with rogue with decent skill points per level. Decent feats for extended rules

No crpg made good use of a Ranger though.

ToEE and NWN 2 is one example of making great use of them. As well as EoB trilogy, Ravenlofts, Dark Suns, GB games. Especially the Ravenloft games with only two character slots and a bunch of shit to jam in.

Can you guys give me specifics of why they are so generic and bad? Because I'm not seeing it.

 

[Cael]

In 3.5 they were very, very distinct as a class. You went bow or dual weapons, got an animal companion, some nice tracking shit, some good RP shit, etc. Synergize with rogue with decent skill points per level. Decent feats for extended rules

No crpg made good use of a Ranger though.

ToEE and NWN 2 is one example of making great use of them. As well as EoB trilogy, Ravenlofts, Dark Suns, GB games. Especially the Ravenloft games with only two character slots and a bunch of shit to jam in.

Can you guys give me specifics of why they are so generic and bad? Because I'm not seeing it.

What did ToEE and NWN2 do that made great use of Rangers? I never use that class in any way shape or form to complete the games. I find even the Fighter is a better fit to the hack and slash play than a Ranger due to the latter's light armour requirements and lower HP, and missile weapons in general being pretty bad weapons in a RTwP environment.

 

[Roqua]

In 3.5 they were very, very distinct as a class. You went bow or dual weapons, got an animal companion, some nice tracking shit, some good RP shit, etc. Synergize with rogue with decent skill points per level. Decent feats for extended rules

No crpg made good use of a Ranger though.

ToEE and NWN 2 is one example of making great use of them. As well as EoB trilogy, Ravenlofts, Dark Suns, GB games. Especially the Ravenloft games with only two character slots and a bunch of shit to jam in.

Can you guys give me specifics of why they are so generic and bad? Because I'm not seeing it.

What did ToEE and NWN2 do that made great use of Rangers? I never use that class in any way shape or form to complete the games. I find even the Fighter is a better fit to the hack and slash play than a Ranger due to the latter's light armour requirements and lower HP, and missile weapons in general being pretty bad weapons in a RTwP environment.

In ToEE I usually go rogue-ranger to have a decent high evade fighter. In NWN 2 while trying to avoid horrible recruitable companions the best way I can find to make a solo sustainable, low maintenance powerhouse that can lockpick/traps is 1rogue/rest-ranger. Rogue/fighter doesn't have the skills or skill points to work. The only other way I found is 2rogue/rest-warlock but warlock is a pain and ranger is easy-mode. But the warlock's ability to do constant AOE is certainly awesome.

In the NWN1 and 2 persistent worlds ranger is the easiest class to solo with (besides the Ravenloft one for NWN1 where I found a rogue/druid is easiest at early levels, but the rogue/ranger is much better at higher.

And, again, in the AD&D games where you multiclass ranger was the clear best call for many combos as it got healing spells and the benefits/restrictions synergized more.

I think you guys are hyper-focused on the IE games, where they were archers and just archers. They still had their benefits in the IE games, but actual rpg fans don't look to the IE games with their shitty combat and shitty chardev and IE-unique kits to define a class seen in tons of games with way better combat and chardev.

For 3.5 Ranger has fighter BAB, gets evade in most games (and you can just go 2 rogue to get it if it doesn't), gets all the TWF feats free, gets healing, the light armor trade-off for evasion is a no-brainer and I'd do it as a fighter if I could, gets way more skill points in skills that mostly synergize with rogue, etc, etc. Plus gets heals and a really useful companion, and games like NWN 2 had feats to dramatically improve the companions survivability and damage output (like the one that brings its level to your ranger level).

 

[rashiakas]

PF Rangers are actually pretty good. Boon Companion rises your Animal Companion to Druid levels, Combat Style let you take improved precise shot at level 6 and with instant enemy you get to use your full favoured enemy bonus on everything you want. Add clustered shot at level 6 and you have one of the highest DPR classes in the game, along with a strong pet, some spells and good skills.

 

[Roqua]

PF Rangers are actually pretty good. Boon Companion rises your Animal Companion to Druid levels, Combat Style let you take improved precise shot at level 6 and with instant enemy you get to use your full favoured enemy bonus on everything you want. Add clustered shot at level 6 and you have one of the highest DPR classes in the game, along with a strong pet, some spells and good skills.

Are they ranged only? No melee option or version or whatever this game calls them?

 

[Cael]

In 3.5 they were very, very distinct as a class. You went bow or dual weapons, got an animal companion, some nice tracking shit, some good RP shit, etc. Synergize with rogue with decent skill points per level. Decent feats for extended rules

No crpg made good use of a Ranger though.

ToEE and NWN 2 is one example of making great use of them. As well as EoB trilogy, Ravenlofts, Dark Suns, GB games. Especially the Ravenloft games with only two character slots and a bunch of shit to jam in.

Can you guys give me specifics of why they are so generic and bad? Because I'm not seeing it.

What did ToEE and NWN2 do that made great use of Rangers? I never use that class in any way shape or form to complete the games. I find even the Fighter is a better fit to the hack and slash play than a Ranger due to the latter's light armour requirements and lower HP, and missile weapons in general being pretty bad weapons in a RTwP environment.

In ToEE I usually go rogue-ranger to have a decent high evade fighter. In NWN 2 while trying to avoid horrible recruitable companions the best way I can find to make a solo sustainable, low maintenance powerhouse that can lockpick/traps is 1rogue/rest-ranger. Rogue/fighter doesn't have the skills or skill points to work. The only other way I found is 2rogue/rest-warlock but warlock is a pain and ranger is easy-mode. But the warlock's ability to do constant AOE is certainly awesome.

In the NWN1 and 2 persistent worlds ranger is the easiest class to solo with (besides the Ravenloft one for NWN1 where I found a rogue/druid is easiest at early levels, but the rogue/ranger is much better at higher.

And, again, in the AD&D games where you multiclass ranger was the clear best call for many combos as it got healing spells and the benefits/restrictions synergized more.

I think you guys are hyper-focused on the IE games, where they were archers and just archers. They still had their benefits in the IE games, but actual rpg fans don't look to the IE games with their shitty combat and shitty chardev and IE-unique kits to define a class seen in tons of games with way better combat and chardev.

For 3.5 Ranger has fighter BAB, gets evade in most games (and you can just go 2 rogue to get it if it doesn't), gets all the TWF feats free, gets healing, the light armor trade-off for evasion is a no-brainer and I'd do it as a fighter if I could, gets way more skill points in skills that mostly synergize with rogue, etc, etc. Plus gets heals and a really useful companion, and games like NWN 2 had feats to dramatically improve the companions survivability and damage output (like the one that brings its level to your ranger level).

Not particularly convincing.

In NWN2, you get a Rogue companion before you even get to Fort Locke. You don't need to be a rogue yourself. If you want to solo things, a rogue/wizard is actually better as you only need 1 rogue level to get Trap Finding while the wizard can summon stuff to tank for you. Being Int based, you get enough to crossclass most skills to a usable level pretty easily. The ranger's companion is half that of a druid and nowhere near a summon, and Evasion is overrated in many cases. The most dangerous spells are not damage spells but those that immobilise you, and Evasion doesn't help with that.

Honestly, though, I have never found rogue to be all that useful in terms to picking locks and the like in NWN. A fighter/RDD could easily brute force most things and have the HP to tank hits, and is my standard goto for a solo run. Sure, you can't dual-wield easily (it is far easier in NWN1), but who cares when you have a mithral platemail and an adamantine tower shield on?

The Warlock's AoE is overrated as you have to be in the middle of the fight to use it effectively, and you are pretty squishy.

As for IE games, missile weapons are OP in IE games. They were nerfed hard in 3.x games (NWN, ToEE, etc.). That is because IE games had a minor stun effect when you were hit and missile weapons can stunlock someone long enough to do massive damage to a target when you have 4-5 archers at your back. In 3.x games, people just charge through the arrows, take a couple of hits and be in your face before you can act. That is why I didn't mention IE games in my post. IE games are a case for archers, not against. In fact, in IE games, using the Archer kit is a good, easy way to have a low maintenance gatling gun.

 

[rashiakas]

PF Rangers are actually pretty good. Boon Companion rises your Animal Companion to Druid levels, Combat Style let you take improved precise shot at level 6 and with instant enemy you get to use your full favoured enemy bonus on everything you want. Add clustered shot at level 6 and you have one of the highest DPR classes in the game, along with a strong pet, some spells and good skills.

Are they ranged only? No melee option or version or whatever this game calls them?

Archery is the most optimised style, but Pathifnder is pretty flexible so you can basicaly do what you want. Check https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/ranger/ranger-combat-styles/ this site, this are the available ranger styles that dictate what bonus feats you can pick without the need to have the prerequisites. This allows the ranger to do some builds no other class can, like dual wielding with a low dex stat. Some archetypes also favour melee combat, like the wild stalker who gets to use barabrian rage and some rage powers. While a pure melee ranger isnt the most optimal choice, its certainly a viable one.

 

[rashiakas]

As for rogues, in PF anyone can open locks and disarm traps, its a simple skill check. You only need trapfinding (the rogues special ability) to disarm magical traps, but that ability can be gained by different means. This, combined with the fact that rogues are pretty poor in combat, made them one of the lowest tier classes in PF.

 

[Cael]

As for rogues, in PF anyone can open locks and disarm traps, its a simple skill check. You only need trapfinding (the rogues special ability) to disarm magical traps, but that ability can be gained by different means. This, combined with the fact that rogues are pretty poor in combat, made them one of the lowest tier classes in PF.

They are pretty low tier in 3.5 also. Most of their stuff can be done by others and the only unique thing they bring is basically Trap Finding, where they are the only ones who can find traps with a DC of 20 or higher. Of course, then WotC added other classes that has the same thing, most notably the artificer.

Even their iconic sneak attack is far better off done with an Unseen Seer than with a Rogue simply because of the Hunter's Eye spell coupled with a reserve feat that allows a ranged touch acid attack at will as a standard action, doing damage equal to your highest spell level prepared acid spell in d6 (off the top of my head anyway), so 9d6 if you want to blow a 9th level spell slot on a Heightened Acid Splash (or just take heightened spell and be a Sorcerer with Acid Splash as a spell known). You basically end up with 9d6+whatever sneak attack bonus you get acid attack once per round as a range touch sneak attack.

 

[rashiakas]

If you would be able to cast level 9 spells and decide to waste your round to do xd6 damage you would never reach the level to cast level 9 spells to begin with.

 

[Neanderthal]

I'm thinking a Half Orc Barb with dump stats in INT and CHA, really fucking nasty psychotic bastard who rapes and kills almost everything he comes across. Doubt many o companions'll survive.

Throne of skulls, Lake of blood type.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Spoiler

Jack of all trades, master of none.

It plays that ways for until you reach level 12ish, for sure. By then all of the synergies come into play, and you're taking silver and gold medals in any event, rather than just placing. They are in most ways, equal to the pure rogue. In some ways better. Lagging in the spell level hurts at the mid-tiers, but the only real change is omitting spells that do damage for your sneak attacks. The HUGE advantage that it has over pure casters, is that you can turn any (ranged) touch attack spell--including can-trips, into a vessel for your sneak attacks. Doing 7d6 + 1d3 acid damage from across the field with an inexhaustible and humble Acid Splash cantrip is brutal. Add in all of the awesome class features, and it's worth the cost of Level 9 spells.

I love power gaming, because it shows where a system, that tries to balance things, simply fails. And i love to make classes / prestige classes combos just for this sake. Also if a system tries to balance everything out it just loses its cutting edge. So let us have some fun together:
Arcane Trickster's (AT) "Impromptu Sneak Attack" at 3Lv can be only used once per day and at 7Lv 2 times. So you have to go the 10Lv of the AT for "Suprise Spells" which gives us also a +5d6 for Sneak Attack. And since the requirment for AT is +2d6 Sneak Attack this makes the +7d6 Sneak Attack that we can use against flat-footed targets == 13 Character Lv (3Lv of Rogue (R) and 10Lv of AT ). But we also need 3Lv of spell caster (Wizard W) for AT, so we are / need at least 16 Character Level to use Suprise Spells, but i don't exactly know if racial spell abilities count towards the AT requirement of one 2nd level arcane spell cast ability in Pathfinder. Now to gain also the Eldrich Knight (EK) prestige class we need +2Lv of arcane caster for the 3Lv arcane spells requirement (18 Character Level). So in the end (assuming the limit at Lv 20) you can only take 2Lv of EK, but you gain one additional spell casting level.

Results in:
Ability of casting 4th Level arcane spells (4,4,3,2,1 +10), (low mid tier)
+7d6 Sneak Attack, (high mid tier)
Base Attack (+2 (R 3Lv), +2(W 5Lv), +5(AT 10Lv), +2(EK 2Lv) == 11,6,1 ), (mid tier)
Saves ((1,3,1)3Lv R, (1,1,4)5Lv W, (3,5,5)10Lv AT, (1,1,1)2Lv EK == 6,10,11). (mid tier)
Initiative: D20 + Dex bonus + Improved Initiative (+4) (EK Bonus Combat Feat).
As i already said: Jack of all trades, master of none. "Surprise Spells" is good, but you need a high initiative to play it out and classes that have Uncanny Dodge break this ability. Impromptu Sneak Attack allows you to deal 2*7d6 a day (could be even in the same round), which is not that high in DnD 3.5E and Pathfinder. Would your build look like that?

I'm not sure how you're computing this. In D&D, a level 20 Arcane Trickster/Eldritch Knight can have a caster level of 20, with access to Level 8 spells. Impromptu Sneak attack is nice, but not necessary at all to land sneak attacks due to all of their spell casting. Eldritch Knight isn't necessary, which means you can even have access to Level 9 spells if you want. If you're playing pathfinder, feats can make it so that you're an equivalent caster of Level 18, with a casting Level of 20. Trading 1 Level 8 spell and 2 Level 9 spells to keep paces with a high level rogue and a 10+ level fighter in addition to all of your spellcasting is sweet deal.

The way the class plays, and its strengths merely plays well when you gish it up. Particularly if you dual weild and focus in spells which incapacitate. Even at level 10, when it is a bit awkward, it is at worst a fully functional rogue of equivalent level with Level 4 spells. Endless skills + decent versatile sneak attack + nearly full spell casting + decent BAB is a great deal. It's like what a 3rd edition bard SHOULD be, without being awful or gimmicky song shtick. The endurance and versatility of the character is also superb. It's a character that excels and encourages creativity. That makes it fun to play, rather than leaning on a crossbow for 80% of your actions until you're maximum level. Though I guess you might be playing a softball module where you can fully rest after every telegraphed encounter, which would explain your antipathy. When I like to power game, it's all about illusionists and shadow adept/casters.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

In SoZ I always include a rogue/ranger multiclass for overworld skills and ranged sneak attack + the free ranger feats for archery style.

So that's uh one exception to rangers sucking in CRPGs...

 

[Cael]

If you would be able to cast level 9 spells and decide to waste your round to do xd6 damage you would never reach the level to cast level 9 spells to begin with.

Irrelevant.

For 1 feat, you get a range touch attack that can scale up at the same rate as a sneak attack, does acid damage and can be used all the time instead of only when you can sneak attack. It renders the rogue's iconic sneak attack valueless.

And it stacks with sneak attack for even more damage shenannigans if you are that way inclined, which I sometimes do in PnP when I am playing with newbie party members so that I don't go all out caster-one-man-army-shine-all-the-time and make it unfun for them.

 

[Roqua]

If you want to solo things, a rogue/wizard is actually better as you only need 1 rogue level to get Trap Finding while the wizard can summon stuff to tank for you.

Since I am not low T I don't play wizards when I play solo. Or sorcerers. I will drop my T levels to play a warlock since you don't have to rest spam and abuse one of the key mechanics that made the game so easy. And telling me about a thief companion on a solo run isn't helpful and is probably linked to the reason you cannot see rangers are not generic.

The ranger's companion is half that of a druid and nowhere near a summon, and Evasion is overrated in many cases.

Again, NWN 2 has a feat that brings it up to your ranger level. And its only like level -4 normally in NWN2 I believe. And evasion is never overrated. Big damage spikes come from DEX saves. Improved evasion, if anything, is grossly underrated. You would know this if you played ToEE and the only non-popamole ways to play NWN 1/2 - in the PWs doing group content solo.

The most dangerous spells are not damage spells but those that immobilise you, and Evasion doesn't help with that.

Hmm - if only there was some way I could reliably get out of CC. Hmmm. And most of the time I can eat it and just kill the melee guys around me and do my usual click and watch for 95% of everything.

Honestly, though, I have never found rogue to be all that useful in terms to picking locks and the like in NWN.

Picking pockets may not be useful, but my OCD does not allow me to not pick locks and disable traps. Not having detect (spot/search), disable device and open locks is not an option for me. If I am going solo I have them.

A fighter/RDD could easily brute force most things and have the HP to tank hits

Fighters and Rangers have the same HPs per level. And RDD needs sorcerer or bard. And RDD big benefit is all the stats, and you get stat boosting items like candy in NWN2. My ranger would tear you to pieces with little effort.

The Warlock's AoE is overrated as you have to be in the middle of the fight to use it effectively, and you are pretty squishy.

Warlocks have multiple ways to aoe. One for the spam attack is the chain. I build my warlocks to take hits and be able to be in the middle of a fight, since, gain, its solo and I have no other choice but to be there.

This was supposed to be about ranger being bad and generic. They aren't. Another underrated class in 3.5 (that wasn't that good in 3.0 IMO) is the Bard. Especially with some of the PRCs from the big mod thing that adds in a ton of them. They open a couple of really high melee damage builds for bard-base, some with full BAB.

 

[toro]

High INT Barbarian ... that's the way I play every game

 

[Cael]

If you want to solo things, a rogue/wizard is actually better as you only need 1 rogue level to get Trap Finding while the wizard can summon stuff to tank for you.

Since I am not low T I don't play wizards when I play solo. Or sorcerers. I will drop my T levels to play a warlock since you don't have to rest spam and abuse one of the key mechanics that made the game so easy. And telling me about a thief companion on a solo run isn't helpful and is probably linked to the reason you cannot see rangers are not generic.

The ranger's companion is half that of a druid and nowhere near a summon, and Evasion is overrated in many cases.

Again, NWN 2 has a feat that brings it up to your ranger level. And its only like level -4 normally in NWN2 I believe. And evasion is never overrated. Big damage spikes come from DEX saves. Improved evasion, if anything, is grossly underrated. You would know this if you played ToEE and the only non-popamole ways to play NWN 1/2 - in the PWs doing group content solo.

The most dangerous spells are not damage spells but those that immobilise you, and Evasion doesn't help with that.

Hmm - if only there was some way I could reliably get out of CC. Hmmm. And most of the time I can eat it and just kill the melee guys around me and do my usual click and watch for 95% of everything.

Honestly, though, I have never found rogue to be all that useful in terms to picking locks and the like in NWN.

Picking pockets may not be useful, but my OCD does not allow me to not pick locks and disable traps. Not having detect (spot/search), disable device and open locks is not an option for me. If I am going solo I have them.

A fighter/RDD could easily brute force most things and have the HP to tank hits

Fighters and Rangers have the same HPs per level. And RDD needs sorcerer or bard. And RDD big benefit is all the stats, and you get stat boosting items like candy in NWN2. My ranger would tear you to pieces with little effort.

The Warlock's AoE is overrated as you have to be in the middle of the fight to use it effectively, and you are pretty squishy.

Warlocks have multiple ways to aoe. One for the spam attack is the chain. I build my warlocks to take hits and be able to be in the middle of a fight, since, gain, its solo and I have no other choice but to be there.

This was supposed to be about ranger being bad and generic. They aren't. Another underrated class in 3.5 (that wasn't that good in 3.0 IMO) is the Bard. Especially with some of the PRCs from the big mod thing that adds in a ton of them. They open a couple of really high melee damage builds for bard-base, some with full BAB.

So, in other words, you make all sorts of excuse not to play a better class. No wonder you rate weak classes so high, when you arbitrarily ban stronger classes.

 

[Roqua]

So, in other words, you make all sorts of excuse not to play a better class. No wonder you rate weak classes so high, when you arbitrarily ban stronger classes.

Great replies. Very well thought out, buddy. You are a true master of solo builds.