Opinions on Rangers

Remove all ads!

Hmmmm. i would like to know your opinions on rangers and whether they're worth playing in IWD. Thanks.

 

Rangers? TOTALY KICK ASS!

 

I didn't think my ranger was going to be any good, and I rued the day I made one, until I realized quite early on that he got the most kills for my party. More than my paladin, even more than my regular fighter.

If use use exclusively long swords with him, he gets an extra attack, which makes him a real threat at higher levels. Just make sure you don't use a shield.

Personally, none of my characters (except clerics or fighter/clerics or druids) use shields as they do not allow a good ranged weapon. Therefore, it's good to go for the high damage two handed weapons rather than the low damage one handed ones.

Cheers!

 

Rangers a sweet. there are numerous advantages to having a Ranger. Stealth Mode, Dual Attack, and healing (Cleric spells) at higher levels make them a great addition to any party. my second time thru i had only one healer which was a Druid, and my Ranger's healing ability came in very handy later on on the game. my Elven Ranger with a Dex. of 19, specialized in longbows and longswords had the most kills by the end of the game.

 

I guess I got hooked on Kivan the Ranger in BG1 thanks to his cool 'Clint Eastwood' soundset. I continued the experiment with a Ranger in IWD to try out the extra attack/round with longswords. Don't overlook the 'charm animals' ability. I picked up a winter wolf in the frozen aquarium who lasted most of the level (needed a few top ups when it wore off)
Overall - Rangers a hit!

 

If you think that Rangers are good with the extra longsword attack, try specializing in great swords instead. I know that they aren't supposed to get the extra attack, but mine did. Two and a half attacks makes up for the fact that they can't put more than two points into a proficiency. The hide in shadows ability is also good since I dual-class my thieves and don't bother to put points into their hide in shadows (or pick pockets either).

 

So for which weapons do they get extra attack?

What is highest wisdom and intelligence that I would need for my ranger and paladin?
How are spells affected?

 

Rangers get an extra attack with ANY melee weapon (even 2-handed) if they don't wear a shield.

Int and wis are useless for Rangers.

 

correction, Int and Cha are useless for Rangers, You need wisdom of 14 minimum to become ranger anyways. the 14 wisdom is about as much as you really need. no real bonuses above that (unless they remembered to add the magical defence bonus in which case you should get +1 to saves against magic for each stat from 15-18 wis).

Oh and almost forgot, i love rangers. Though more of other reasons that how good/bad they are. but the first character i make in these games is always my good old ranger that have been with me forever

 

There is only one race for rangers in the game: yep, the elf. They are the best at what they do. Additional attack with long sword and bonus with long bows + they get some bonus of their race, so they totally kick ass in the game. An elven ranger is close to lethality of a dwarven fighter, maybe even more as these lousy proficiency points aren't much of a point at the latter parts of the game because items are overcoming this types of disabilities.

 

The disadvantages for elves are worse than the bonusses.
The bonusses for ***** instead of ** in a weapon are enormous, +1 attack/round , +2 thac0, +3 damage.
But at the beginning the ranger is better than the fighter, the extra attacks applies even with greatswords and while wielding heavy armor.
With HoW they gain useful druid spells later.

 

In all my parties where rangers where included they always had the highest amount of kills. It doesn't really matter what race they are human, half-elf or elf. An elf does offer some bonus to bows if I decide to use them with 2 roles. They are one of the best tanks in the game. Fighters are nice at the start because they level up faster, but the mastery in a weapon does not compare with the extra attack/round rangers get. There's also another benefit. Rangers get the highest amount of atributes to distribute. Is quite possible to build a ranger that has 18 in 3 stats and still has a reasonable amount in a 4th. That's why they make great leaders along with paladins.

 

Rangers are worth it when you multiclass them with Clerics.

If what kmonster says is true about 2 handed weapons getting an extra attack, it makes them a lot better, but I think a single-classed Fighter is more powerful.

 

No is not. Compared to a ranger, a single class fighter with mastery in a weapon gets an extra +2 to hit and +3 to damage. A ranger gets an extra attack/round. Along with the casting spells and large number of atributes, this makes ranger a better class than the pure fighter. Ranger/Cleric is good, but compared to BG games and the non-HoW version of IWD, they get to cast druidic spells, once the ranger achives the proper level to cast them. Which means that a Ranger/Cleric will be unable to cast level 7 druidic spells.
And yes, it is true, rangers get an extra attack, not only on single handed weapons (like the manual says), but with any melee weapon as long as you don't use a shield. Give her a 2H sword or a Halberd and is going to be the best tank available.

 

When you increase the weapon specialisation from **** to *****, you gain a full extra attack.
So fighters of level9 or higher can get the same number of attacks as rangers of the same level, but they also get extra specialisation bonusses and can wear a shield without loosing an attack.

 

Oh yes, this is indeed a huge advantage. They get an extra attack at level 9 (rangers have it at level 1) and this by no means make them better than the ranger, but rather equal if you don't count the spells and the extra atributes.
So to conclude the "advantage" that makes fighter "better" than the ranger are: -2 to THAC0 and the ability to wear a shield starting from level 9. Put this vs spell casting and extra damage from the 2H weapons and see what it gets.

 

Rangers are indeed awesome. The main advantage is versatility vs. a fighter; whereas Mr. Fighter Man has to go all the way to +++++ in a weapon to get the full benefit, Ms. Ranger only has to go to ++, and can thus be effective in many weapons, not just one or two. That's damn handy in IWD, where there are so many random drops you don't want to have to rely upon them for getting the exact kind of weaponry you want. Add in limited spellcasting, stealth and other class abilities (track, charm animals) and the ranger is a more all-round character. No-one beats fighters at what they do best: swing their favourite weapon all day long without pause or buffing. But the ability to do other things too is often worth more to the party.

 

@redrake:
You ignored in your conclusion:
- the +3 damage the fighter gets (didn't bother to read the manual or my prior post, did you ?)
- the 4 AC or other bonusses you can get with shield, it does matter if 1 or 5 of 20 enemy attacks succeed.
In some situations extra AC can even be more useful than extra attacks.
The best weapons are one-handed.
- the fact that fighters level faster than rangers
- the fighter's better shooting skill
- the fact that fighters can be races which are better than humans (like gnomes)

 

Also a Fighter at level 13 will have 2 attacks per round and another +1 attac for grand mastery in choosen weapon. So 3 attacks per round.

A ranger at same level will have 2 attacks per round, and a half extra attack for specialisation, and +1 attack when using for example a longsword or greatsword. this still only comes to 3.5 attacks, only half an attack more than a fighter will get in hes choosen weapon.

Fighter still gets more bonuses on hit and damage that ranger doesnt get. And as Kmonster said, i would prefer the shield in most cases.

Either way, the extra attack makes rangers good, but still not a full match for a fighter.

Personally i always bring along a ranger, becose of rolepalying reasons mostly. and i love characters that can hide/stealth. Also the track skill in HoW is fun.I have never really bothered about that extra attack much. And as often as not used shield on him in close combat.

 

Since when this thread became a Fighter VS Ranger one? Anyway Rangers KICK ASS.

A first level Elven Ranger with a long sword has IMO 3 attacks per round (1 base + 1 no shield + 1 Being an Elf using Long swords)

That's some serious ass kicking.