Fighter vs. Ranger TWF

[Philibusta]

I've been playing DDO going on two years now, and for a long while, something's been running around in my head.

Something that just doesn't really make sense to me.

Let me explain.

Why is is that Ranger Tempests have the potential to become better two-weapon fighters than a...fighter?

Think about it:

Two people start the training necessary to become their given classes, a fighter and a ranger.

While the ranger is learning to use his weapons, the fighter is also training with his weapons.

While the ranger is learning to use divine magic, the fighter is...training with his weapons.

While the ranger is learning how to pewpew better than anyone else...the fighter is training with is weapons.

While the ranger is learning how to talk to the chimpunks and hug all the trees and all that other Woodsy the Owl stuff rangers learn, the fighter is...you guessed it...training with his weapons.

So with all this time devoted to things other than how to melee, how in the world is it that a ranger can be a better two-weapon fighter than a fighter?

Isn't it kinda like saying a general practice doctor would be better to perform your heart transplant than a cardiologist?
Discuss.

[dkyle]

Fighter spends more time learning how to survive combat better (bigger hit-die, heavier armor, Stalwart Defender), training their strength (Enhancements), and perfecting their use of a specific weapon (Kensai).

Overall, a Fighter TWF is currently better than a Ranger TWF. Ranger is only competitive vs Favored Enemies. Basically, the Ranger is highly dedicated to striking as often as possible with their weapons, but is less good at making those hits count, unless facing specific kinds of enemies.

[Philibusta]

So, really then, the fighter is still only better at low-mid levels. Cause at high levels, all the ranger needs to do to be better than the fighter is choose Evil Outsiders, Aberrations, and Undead as favored enemies.

[k1ngp1n]

So, really then, the fighter is still only better at low-mid levels. Cause at high levels, all the ranger needs to do to be better than the fighter is choose Evil Outsiders, Aberrations, and Undead as favored enemies.

Uhh....


Since when is a TWF ranger competitive with a TWF fighter? The fighter outclasses the ranger at every turn, even against FE.

[grodon9999]

So, really then, the fighter is still only better at low-mid levels. Cause at high levels, all the ranger needs to do to be better than the fighter is choose Evil Outsiders, Aberrations, and Undead as favored enemies.

as a pure combatant, fighter is better by every measurable metric.

[dkyle]

So, really then, the fighter is still only better at low-mid levels. Cause at high levels, all the ranger needs to do to be better than the fighter is choose Evil Outsiders, Aberrations, and Undead as favored enemies.

Epics?

And I said "competitive". I don't think Rangers are better, even against favored enemies. Especially since end-game also has a lot of content with moderate length fights where a Fighter's Haste Boosts count for a ton.

And that's just DPS. In terms of HP, a Fighter is realistically capable of far more than a Ranger. A Fighter can spend 7 feats on Toughness, with no loss of DPS. A Ranger doesn't even get Toughness Enhancements.

[Malison]

Ranger:
+2 str (rams)
+2 dmg (rams)
+14 dmg (FE)
---17 mainhand damage
+20% offhand strikes (tempest)
+5% doublestrike

Fighter:
+3 str (enh)
+4 dmg (greater weapon spec)
+8 str (kensai surge)
+2 dmg (figher enhancement)
+2 dmg (kensai enhancement)
---13.5 mainhand damage
+4 seeker (kensai enh)
+1 threat range (kensai)
Haste Boost, 30%
+10% doublestrike (capstone)
Capacity for tactics
More bonus feats than ranger

The slight disadvantage in pure damage is outmatched by the fighter's crit bonuses and haste boost. The only possible point giving the ranger an advantage would be 100% fortification, and even then it's still probably the fighter.

The real question is, why DON'T ranger tempests have the capacity to outdo fighters in TWF? Tempest grants nothing but TWF bonuses. Kensai improves any weapon style.

[dkyle]

The real question is, why DON'T ranger tempests have the capacity to outdo fighters in TWF? Tempest grants nothing but TWF bonuses. Kensai improves any weapon style.

A given character will only, realistically, be TWF or THF. Limiting bonuses to one style is not a significantly limiting downside.

And in fact, Kensai is even more limiting: for a given character it normally only applies to one weapon, and takes up more AP on a very AP staved class if you try to extend it to more weapons. But it doesn't matter much, since a given character is likely to use the same weapon types 90% of the time anyway.

[grodon9999]

The real question is, why DON'T ranger tempests have the capacity to outdo fighters in TWF? Tempest grants nothing but TWF bonuses. Kensai improves any weapon style.

Self-buffing/self-healing. That's the point of balance.

Tempest III could still use a bit of a boost without things getting crazy.

[licho]

Ranger gets:
+20% offhand attack
+5% mainhand doublestrike
+14 dmg against FE
+3 dmg from rams

Fighters gets:
+4 from weapon spec
+1,5 from str ench
+4 Power surge
+2 From Fighter ench Specializacion
+2 from Kensai Mastery
+4 seeker, which can be translated to +1,6 dmg
+10% mainhand double strike
+30% haste boost
+1 critical range

Maybe i forgot about something :-/

So the only condicion when Ranger>Fighter is when:
- they fight against FE
- the FE has 100% fortificacion
- the FE has DR not bypassed by fighter weapon of choice, some golems or sceles come to mind (also portals ;-) ).

And this is the problem. Even against FE ranger do not outperform other classes, and against others its just -14 dmg per hit behind. With every adventure pack the probality of come not fe rise. In the same time ranger do not offer party general utylity, resistance and fom are nice, but there are many classes who can do same.

Also i do not have logic problems with TWF against FE Ranger being better than fighter, in the same way as i do not have problems with 2H Barbarian outperforming 2H FIghter against 50% fort mobs.

IMHO rangers could be really buffed without smashing cosmic balance, making temp III 10% adding some kind of melee capstone (some kind of haste like clikie), and short term buffs will give some life into class.

EDIT: of course got ninjed.

[grodon9999]

IMHO rangers could be really buffed without smashing cosmic balance, making temp III 10% adding some kind of melee capstone (some kind of haste like clikie), and short term buffs will give some life into class.


Double-strike equal to 5% plus your DEX bonus and full STR to off-hand attacks is what I want, and it'd still be behind Kensai.

[Therigar]

And in fact, Kensai is even more limiting: for a given character it normally only applies to one weapon, and takes up more AP on a very AP staved class if you try to extend it to more weapons.

Q: How do you extend Kensai to more than one weapon?

A: You don't. You must pick one, and only one, weapon to specialize in with the Kensai enhancement line.

[dkyle]

Q: How do you extend Kensai to more than one weapon?

A: You don't. You must pick one, and only one, weapon to specialize in with the Kensai enhancement line.

Ah, OK, I thought you could take more than one. Never tried, since it was never worth it to me, but I thought I had seen them still sitting there after taking one. Guess not.

[Rauven]

The real issue isn't Ranger vs Fighter, it's Tempest vs Kensei. Tempest took quite a beating when it lost the 10% attack speed competence bonus from temp I. Temp III's 5% doublestrike does not make up for that loss; especially when you consider that the former fighter capstone granted a 10% competence bonus and now grants 10% doublestrike to melee weapons (as well as 10% ranged/thrown attack speed boost).

A few things that could be done to improve tempest:

Increase the doublestrike benefit from temp III to 10-15% and/or;
Add a haste boost to temp I, maybe a 10% attack speed boost (lesser than fighter/rogue HB I) that can be increased through additional enhancements and/or;
Make a tempest oriented capstone that grants a doublestrike bonus that would stack with temp III.


Anyone of these would go a long way to bringing tempest closer to kensei dps without going overboard.

[licho]

Add a haste boost to temp I, maybe a 10% attack speed boost (lesser than fighter/rogue HB I) that can be increased through additional enhancements and/or;


While i support buffing rangers, and giving them some kind of haste boost this one is dangerous.
levels 1-6 are not so bad. You get bunch of free feats. You get rams, and +5against, the 10% offhand is quite fair.
The problems with rangers starts from 13+ when you really dont get anything special anymore.
So some haste like bonus could apear but, maybe as capstone. (similar to power surge, but speed based)

[Therigar]

The real issue isn't Ranger vs Fighter, it's Tempest vs Kensei.

No, it really is ranger vs fighter. The premise is that rangers have the ability to become better TWF than fighters. That is not true. The vast amount of end game modeling that has been done regarding DPS shows that even against FE rangers do not do better. This is borne out in actual practice by players.

There was a time when Tempest was the only PrE and rangers were the melee class of choice. That changed when the other melee classes received their own PrEs. It is because of the addition of fighter PrEs that ranger is not better.

If you remove the PrEs completely then fighter > ranger. If you include the PrEs then fighter > ranger. It was only when ranger was the only class with a PrE that ranger > fighter.

This entire thread exists only because of a false premise presented by the OP -- "that Ranger Tempests have the potential to become better two-weapon fighters." Unless we intentionally manipulate the fighter's enhancements and feats to prevent them, it is not possible for fighters to be worse. So, if this false starting point is discounted then there is no need for the thread -- since the conclusion the OP reaches can never exist.

[Chai]

The real question is, why DON'T ranger tempests have the capacity to outdo fighters in TWF? Tempest grants nothing but TWF bonuses. Kensai improves any weapon style.

Kensai improves one chosen weapon the most. Fighters have to choose what that is going to be and stick with it by using quite a few feats to back it up.

Ranger is a hybrid class with alot of stuff already chosen for you.

Fighter is more of a blank template with more feats but nothing already chosen. The player can build it up as they see fit.

[Rauven]

While i support buffing rangers, and giving them some kind of haste boost this one is dangerous.
levels 1-6 are not so bad. You get bunch of free feats. You get rams, and +5against, the 10% offhand is quite fair.
The problems with rangers starts from 13+ when you really dont get anything special anymore.
So some haste like bonus could apear but, maybe as capstone. (similar to power surge, but speed based)

I don't see how a 10% haste boost with temp I is a problem, considering that tempest's wouldn't get it until lvl 6 whereas fighters and rogues can get 15% at lvl 1. The free feats granted by ranger 6 (2 fe's, wild empathy, bow str, rapid shot, die hard, many shot & itwf) are offset by the 3 feats a tempest has to take to quality for the pre. Compare that to kensei I, fighter 6 gets 4 bonus feats and kensei I requires 2 feats spent on weapon focus and specialization.

[licho]

I don't see how a 10% haste boost with temp I is a problem, considering that tempest's wouldn't get it until lvl 6 whereas fighters and rogues can get 15% at lvl 1. The free feats granted by ranger 6 (2 fe's, wild empathy, bow str, rapid shot, die hard, many shot & itwf) are offset by the 3 feats a tempest has to take to quality for the pre. Compare that to kensei I, fighter 6 gets 4 bonus feats and kensei I requires 2 feats spent on weapon focus and specialization.

You forgot about 10% offhand proc which already exist, and ram might which is another +3 dmg in your face.
Level 1-12 is when rangers get something, you can argue that some classes got better but the difference is not so astonishing. After level 13+ ranger gains is symbolic in comparison to other classes.
Boosting Temp 1 will only make them nice splash levels, but do not change class as whole.

[Rauven]

You forgot about 10% offhand proc which already exist, and ram might which is another +3 dmg in your face.
Level 1-12 is when rangers get something, you can argue that some classes got better but the difference is not so astonishing. After level 13+ ranger gains is symbolic in comparison to other classes.
Boosting Temp 1 will only make them nice splash levels, but do not change class as whole.

I didn't forget it simply wasn't the focus of my comment. A temp I will have +10% off hand procs (70% compared to 60% with just ITWF) and +3 dmg from a 6 min rams. A kensei I with weapon master I will have +2 attack, +3 dmg and +2 to crit dmg with their specialized weapon and can have 6 uses of +15-20% attack speed boost.

And no, I didn't forget that the temp I will also have +3 ac and the ability to run around swinging their weapons without the -4 penalty for moving.

I don't see how 6 ranger splash with a 5 use/rest 10% haste action boost, +10% off hand attacks and 6 min rams +3 dmg is over powered or that more beneficial than 6 fighter splash, which would grant 2 free feats (2 of the 4 free fighter feats used to buy kensei I), +2 attack, +3 damage and 6 uses/rest of +15-2-% attack speed boost. Yes, the ranger gets TWF and ITWF free, as well as a couple ranged feats, but has to spend 3 feats to quality for tempest I.

[BOgre]

As it so happens I and my buddy have been duoing the game since we came here back in January, and He's a Whirlwind TWF Khop Kensai, and I'm a Tempest Trapmonky Khop TWF. We've alwasy been within a rank or two of each other. Occasionally I've lvled a day ahead of him, and even in those cases, he's out damaged me by lots. I WAS pretty close when fighting my FEs back in our middle levels, but now at level 17-18, he's back to outclassing me again by lots. With his fighter haste boost, better crits/seeker, and of course all the Kensai, it's just no contest. He's even REALLY slack at gearing. Where I've picked up the Abishai set, Bloodstone, and some specialized beaters, he's been content with his +5 Metalline Khop of Idon'trememberwhat and +4 something Silver Khop of blahblahblah, both of which I IcyBursted for him. I have to swap 4 different robes and 2 hats situationally, 3 different goggs and 4 rings, 2 sets of gloves, all just to be able to pull off the skills a Ranger should naturally be good at. He doesn't even have 2 hotbars. ONE HOTBAR... it makes my head spin.
What I bring to our duo is the ability to pewpew the casters waaaay back behind the fight before he gets in range to engage, buffing us with resists and FoM, locked chests, doors and traps, contributing to DPS and dividing/conquering. All of which he could manage without, or with a hire + pots.
Don't get me wrong, I like my toon and I'll be TRing into another Ranger, but:
There's no doubt in my mind that Fighter TWF > Ranger TWF.

[Rydin_Dirtay]

since the conclusion the OP reaches can never exist.

This is exactly right. I play both. Tempest dps is in no way better than Fighter/Kensei dps in today's DDO. Read Therigar's entire post (I just quoted a part of it) above, it is right on like goldie. The Ranger can do more roles than the Fighter, but out-dps'ing him will not happen, even against FE's, although there it is closer.

[Aerendil]

Thing is, in PnP the "master TWF" prestige class was the Tempest. And, of course, in PnP, any character can qualify for pretty much every PrC, given you have the right skills, feats, and so on.

Meaning Bards could become Assassins; Monks become Kensai; and yes, Fighters become Tempests.

In DDO, things are a bit more restrictive, and the TWF PrE was given only to the Rangers. So technically they will be the "best" at TWF. No other PrE offers 100% TWF rate.

However, as pointed out above, DDO is all about dps, and the Fighter more than makes up for that with haste boosts, weapon alacrity, and Kensai's damage / str boost / etc.

/shrug
Apples vs. apples, IMO. They're both fantastic TWFers in the end. Each just has it's own perks.

[FrozenNova]

A tempest can cast freedom of movement, resist energy, and highly potent cure serious. A tempest can easily maintain trap skills and umd, and can easily have tier 1 haste boost. A tempest has evasion. A tempest has a semi useful capacity to pull out manyshot with improved precise shot. A tempest has a much wider variety of available skills. A tempest has sprint boost.

I'm fine with fighters being better at fighting my favored enemies - there's not a lot that can compare to a tempest's versatility.
I'm more miffed at being near useless against non-favored-enemies. I would prefer the favored enemy bonus toned down a bit, and ranger base damage toned up a bit. Or - the ability to change favored enemies much more easily than a feat swap.

Disclaimer: I don't play rangers.

[grodon9999]

I'm more miffed at being near useless against non-favored-enemies. I would prefer the favored enemy bonus toned down a bit, and ranger base damage toned up a bit. Or - the ability to change favored enemies much more easily than a feat swap.

Disclaimer: I don't play rangers.

An Extra FE per PRE tier with the ability to switch them via an enhancement reset would be very welcome.

And high-DPS rangers can be built, you just have to stop at ranger 12 and deeply splash.

[BOgre]

In DDO, things are a bit more restrictive, and the TWF PrE was given only to the Rangers. So technically they will be the "best" at TWF. No other PrE offers 100% TWF rate.


100%? I was under the impression that the max proc rate was 80%. Did I misunderstand something again? Plus, aren't the TFW feats available to fighters and monks as well?

Or are you just talking the Tempest line? Cuz that doesn't give you 100% either. It just lowers the to-hit penalty for each hand, bringing your penalty to 0 for each hand (with the twf feats added in of course), instead of -6/-10 without. Again, if I'm mistaken I'd love to be corrected.

without twf feats or temp your penalty for fighting with two weaps is -6/-10
TWF reduces by 2/6 giving you-- -4/-4
OTWF reduces by another 2/2 -- -2/-2
TempII/III reduce by 1 each for a total of 0/0

[grodon9999]

100%? I was under the impression that the max was 80%. Did I misunderstand something again? Plus, aren't the TFW feats available to fighters as well?

A Tempest II gets 100% off-hand attacks.

[dkyle]

100%? I was under the impression that the max was 80%. Did I misunderstand something again?

Tempest I and II each add another +10% offhand proc. So at Tempest II, they get 100% offhand proc.

[BOgre]

Ah, cool. Not sure how I missed that. :) I'm mor uberrer than I thotz :)

[anto_capone]

Something that probably should be considered in a discussion such as this is that the capstone for tempest is worthless, so you are splashing at least two levels of another class.

Monk/Rogue/Fighter ect. :)

Tempests aren't the max TWF dps, but it can be very close with gear/build.

The trade off is *way more* versatility and survivability imo.

[licho]

Something that probably should be considered in a discussion such as this is that the capstone for tempest is worthless, (...)

Wait, since when Tempest has capstone? ;-) (just teasing, but its smile with tears)

Btw dont you think that "you can splash any number of levels for better result" is not a best class feature?

[EpiKagEMO]

Fighter.
Boom power surge +4 damage. Kensai specials. +5 damage and hits. Haste boosts.

Ranger.
20% better chances of swinging. 5% chance to double strike. +1 damage.

Fighter wins if you would be pvping.
Ranger would win if he would bring out his bow and start kiting and throwing manyshoot and sprints everywhere.
(notice how i just totally ignored tempest when pvping. :3 )

Ranger=better solo
Fighter=better dps

[Malison]

Kensai improves one chosen weapon the most. Fighters have to choose what that is going to be and stick with it by using quite a few feats to back it up.

I got a lot of responses of this, so I guess my comment wasn't clear. I meant that Kensai can apply to TWF, THF, S&B, or even ranged; not to all at the same time. The point is versatility in building the fighter at the cost of versatility in weapon choice after it's built. And as others have mentioned, most of the time players use the same weapon. If you haven't crafted greensteel or epic weapons and want to switch your kensai focus, it's just an enhancement retrain away. I'd be more sympathetic to this train of thought if Weapon Focus / Specialization and Improved Crit were specific to a specific weapon like in PnP instead of to a whole class of weapons.


Ranger is a hybrid class with alot of stuff already chosen for you.

Fighter is more of a blank template with more feats but nothing already chosen. The player can build it up as they see fit.

This then leaves the suggestion that Ranger is a class preferable for new players who may not know much about building their toon, while less effective for the experienced player than other alternatives. Is that a satisfactory place for it to be in terms of balance? Newbie-friendliness is the only explanation I can see to reasonably keep rangers behind other classes.

--

Also, I have to disagree with ranger = survivability. They get fom, resist energy, cure serious, and evasion. The spells are nearly always covered in group play. They can be achieved via items, scrolls, and/or potions. Evasion, sure, it's nice, but not as gamebreaking as many seem to think. The ranger's capacity for competitive AC is largely from splashing monk. A TWF ranger requires less dex than a TWF fighter thanks to freely granted feats, but won't wear heavy armor or he loses that last advantage of evasion. Likewise, his capacity for traps/locks is completely from splashing rogue. I find it inconsistent to compare benefits of nonranger and nonfighter splashes when comparing rangers and fighters.

Btw dont you think that "you can splash any number of levels for better result" is not a best class feature?
This. It's like saying flat out that the less you take in ranger, the better you'll do.

--

I see no reason why any class should deal more damage to a ranger's favored enemy than the ranger, except maybe a paladin to evil outsiders. If rangers are far behind fighers/barbs against non-favored enemies, then so be it.

This from a former Exploiter who TR'd into Fighter. It was just better.

[Crann]

I had to re-check the date on the OP to see if it was Pre-Update 5.

It may have been true then, it is not now.

[grodon9999]

Also, I have to disagree with ranger = survivability.

And you'd be incorrect.




They get fom, resist energy, cure serious, and evasion. The spells are nearly always covered in group play.

True, but it makes it easier to solo stuff and in a group you save the real casters SP (not what we're talking about, but it is another perk).

You understate the superb self-healing you can build into a ranger, my CSW hits about 250. This is HUGE regarding survivability for soling and group play. My fighter cannot self-heal, CSW pots take forever to fill up a 700 point HP-bar :)




Evasion, sure, it's nice, but not as gamebreaking as many seem to think.

Rangers get excellent reflex saves so they will have more useful evasion than a splashed-fighter. it does cut down on a ton of incoming damage as many of the bit hits in this game are AOE spells.



The ranger's capacity for competitive AC is largely from splashing monk.

You are correct here, it's not a "ranger" trait at all. What works for a ranger is since they get evasion anyway they don't need a two-splash as 18/1/1 gives you more versatility options than 18/2




A TWF ranger requires less dex than a TWF fighter thanks to freely granted feats, but won't wear heavy armor or he loses that last advantage of evasion.

Why in God's name would you wear heavy armor?



Likewise, his capacity for traps/locks is completely from splashing rogue. I find it inconsistent to compare benefits of nonranger and nonfighter splashes when comparing rangers and fighters.


That's the blessing and the curse of the ranger class, it takes splashes very well and has such a lousy capstone their is no point at all in taking it. Tempest is a very middle-weighted PRE as well so deep-splashes work great.

[Aerendil]

Also, I have to disagree with ranger = survivability. They get fom, resist energy, cure serious, and evasion. The spells are nearly always covered in group play. They can be achieved via items, scrolls, and/or potions. Evasion, sure, it's nice, but not as gamebreaking as many seem to think. The ranger's capacity for competitive AC is largely from splashing monk. A TWF ranger requires less dex than a TWF fighter thanks to freely granted feats, but won't wear heavy armor or he loses that last advantage of evasion. Likewise, his capacity for traps/locks is completely from splashing rogue. I find it inconsistent to compare benefits of nonranger and nonfighter splashes when comparing rangers and fighters.

I think the survivability comment was with regards to solo.

In a group or raid, clearly survivability is out of your hands. That's up to the healers to keep you alive.

But solo, the Ranger wins hands-down. Evasion, resist energy, FoM, cure serious (which with Maximise and Sup. Potency can hit for 150+, not counting healing amp). Plus full ranged ability for free, allowing you to manyshot that beholder from the other side of the room, rather than running into it melee range.

I haven't seen many Fighter solo VoD / Shroud / etc. posts, but I have seen quite a few Ranger ones.


So yes, Fighter in a group or raid setting will be better dps. But that's pretty much all they can do. So that's definitely a fair trade.

This would be like arguing Fighter TWF > Bard TWF. Obviously for pure dps concerns, the answer is "yes it is".
But a Ranger, like a Bard, isn't measured solely by TWF dps.

[grodon9999]

This from a former Exploiter who TR'd into Fighter. It was just better.

My fighter (stalwart) is a much better raid tanker.

My fighter (Kensai) does more DPS most of the time (Exploiter is better situationally, a good example is Abbot or Wiz king where 100% off-hand attack and FE undead tips the scales).

Is that "better?" I'm not so sure. Taking into account everything he brings to a group. Granted a lot of the ranger perks do come from splashing, but it adds up. he can get epic traps, do a decent amount of buffing and healing. When we short-man stuff he's always the guy I bring for those reasons.

My rangers solo Base 1 in EVoN6. My fighters can't do that.

My rangers solo Sins of Attrition on elite. My fighters probably can't do that (not getting 400 silver flame favor this life).

In perfect situations where all I have to do is kill the fighter is better. If the situation isn't perfect, that added versatility or the ranger pays off.

Tempest III is still weak though, that needs more mojo.

[Luckness]

This. It's like saying flat out that the less you take in ranger, the better you'll do.

I don't agree...

Kensai III is much better than Tempest III, and Fighter capstone is much better than Ranger capstone for melee. (The Ranger capstone doesn't even do anything for melee. All Rangers get for melee at level 20 is another +2 FE damage.)

If you want to stack the deck against the Ranger build melee, you'd stipulate that it has to be compared as a level 20 Ranger. If you want to compare the best "Ranger" build with the best "Fighter" build, you'd have to find the best dps build for each, whether that is pure or multiclass.

In theory, there could be a really good first tier prestige enhancement (and a good class to take 6 levels in), a really good second tier prestige enhancement (and a good class to take 12 levels in). And neither of those classes might be the highest DPS (due to substandard third tier PrE's), but the combination could (again, in theory) come out on top.

That is mostly the situation that Ranger is in. They get a very good PrE line for multiplying base damage (the 20% extra offhand and 5% extra mainhand). But they get just Favored Enemy and Ram's Might for boosting damage output from class and enhancements (and no melee capstone). They're begging to have the last and weakest tier of the PrE lopped off in order to get the first tier of a class with some simple benefits to mainhand/offhand damage (which they're already quite good at scaling up). Whether that's Frenzied Berserker I, Kensai I, Knight of the Chalice I, or Assassin I... any of them would bring more to the DPS table.

Not considering this would be like flat out refusing to consider comparing the best "apple" to the best "orange" ... maybe the best apple has to have a twist of pineapple to be the best apple. Except for those aesthetically opposed to multiclassing, people should be interested in that possibility.

Obviously race is also important, with Half-Elf and rogue dilly or Half-Orc and rogue splash both being worth considering (3d6 for dilly or 1d6+3 for 1 level rogue, good situational damage on both hands at low cost).

I will grant you that it does distract from the comparison of Fighter "versus" Ranger. After all a multiclass may even mix both of these together... I'm tempted to say that most Tempest builds already do.

[Malison]

So yes, Fighter in a group or raid setting will be better dps. But that's pretty much all they can do.

I agree with everything in your post except this. Fighter tactics are strong.


If you want to stack the deck against the Ranger build melee, you'd stipulate that it has to be compared as a level 20 Ranger. If you want to compare the best "Ranger" build with the best "Fighter" build, you'd have to find the best dps build for each, whether that is pure or multiclass.

This is a good distinction to make, and emphasizes one key point that my viewpoint here does not address. My reasoning follows the next quote.


Why in God's name would you wear heavy armor?

I mentioned it because your options for AC are heavy armor and a lot of gear, or monk splash and a lot of gear. Because I prefer to look at this topic without much mention of multiclassing, what you get is functional (nonraid) AC being much easier for the fighter, for whom it makes no difference what he's got on his body. Yes, that preference is flawed because of how bad the ranger capstone is, but I find it to be proper to compare the classes as themselves.


That's the blessing and the curse of the ranger class, it takes splashes very well and has such a lousy capstone their is no point at all in taking it. Tempest is a very middle-weighted PRE as well so deep-splashes work great.

I agree with this.


You understate the superb self-healing you can build into a ranger, my CSW hits about 250. This is HUGE regarding survivability for soling and group play. My fighter cannot self-heal, CSW pots take forever to fill up a 700 point HP-bar :)

That's true, I do understate the healing. This is partly from my pure-class approach to the question; a nonhuman 20 ranger doesn't have the freedom to take maximize without dropping a standard combat feat. Tempest takes 4 feats, then toughness, power attack, improved crit. To get either khopeshes or maximize requires human or splashing.

I guess the best way to summarize my thoughts is that it's sad to me that the best way to make a good ranger is to take less ranger levels.

[grodon9999]

I guess the best way to summarize my thoughts is that it's sad to me that the best way to make a good ranger is to take less ranger levels.

Very sad, but very true.

[Beer_Dude]

The easiest answer is a ranger is better for twf because he only needs a 11 dex and a +2 tome to get tempest becauase he/she gets twf for free regardless of dex. If they didn't want tempest (not sure whythey would) they could start at 8 8 dex. The rest of the points can go into str and con a fighter has to get their dex way higher thus less points for con and str.

When this is done a human ranger can clear 550 hp with the right gear which is more than enough for any quest even if tanking. Add in 6 or 8 levels of fighter for kensai and FTR str 2 and the ranger will out perform the fighter. A pure fighter will only have 1 more point in str than the ranger who has rams might on so there is no real difference in str damage and the ranger will also have ftr haste boost not as high of an attack speed % but not too far off than a pure fighter.

There really is no reason to go more than 12 levels of ranger IMO. Actully I prefer to go 11 ranger, 6 fighter, and 3 pally. Dump wis put the points into cha take Force of pesonality. Saves go thru the roof and UMDing heal scrolls are a peice of cake. Along with that you're immune to disease and fear, and get 3 Fe's, and able to buff as well.

Add it all together and IMO the ranger wins out by a slight margin. If nothing esle because of the extra stat points at roll up. The only thing the ranger misses in a 12/8 or an 11/6/3 toon is a couple of feats and a few hp. But the HP gap is usually closed by the extra stat points available to con that the fighter would have to put into dex.

[stainer]

There really is no reason to go more than 12 levels of ranger IMO. Actully I prefer to go 11 ranger, 6 fighter, and 3 pally. Dump wis put the points into cha take Force of pesonality. Saves go thru the roof and UMDing heal scrolls are a peice of cake. Along with that you're immune to disease and fear, and get 3 Fe's, and able to buff as well.



I disagree with you, respectfully and even then just a little. 14 levels of Ranger are handy for FOM. Greenis is a 14/6 TempII/KenI and he puts out the hurt. If I would have went 8 ftr 12 ranger, I would have got one more feat, but I had a ton already.

[dkyle]

A pure fighter will only have 1 more point in str than the ranger who has rams might on so there is no real difference in str damage and the ranger will also have ftr haste boost not as high of an attack speed % but not too far off than a pure fighter.

A pure fighter gets power surge for 8 more STR. Yeah, it doesn't last forever, but end-game doesn't have many places where it won't last.

A pure fighter gets +1 crit range, and 10% doublestrike, which together on a Khopesh or Pick fighter, significantly out-weigh the +20% off-hand a Tempest II gets, in terms of multiplying base damage.

A pure Fighter also gets +4 base damage against all enemies over a 6 Fighter. 12 Ranger gives +9 damage, but only against 3 specific favored enemies.

Ranger is fine as a versatility choice, but it really isn't as close as you suggest in terms of DPS.

[Beer_Dude]

I disagree with you, respectfully and even then just a little. 14 levels of Ranger are handy for FOM. Greenis is a 14/6 TempII/KenI and he puts out the hurt. If I would have went 8 ftr 12 ranger, I would have got one more feat, but I had a ton already.

I said that's how I prefer. IMO I'm only missig out on FOM which I can use scrolls for. I usually only have enough scrolls for me as you can only get them from a chest (as far as I know). I'll trade the FOM and 1 more FE for the three levels of pally but that's my play style. I still pass out all the other buffs poison, resists, protects, etc. and have more than enough mana for a raid. I don't think a healer/bard is going to miss that much SP by handing out FOM if I get all the other buffs that I mentioned. So it's a matter of choice if I wasn't going to put the 3 pally level in I'd do as you and go 14/6 or 12/8 still gets you FOM, but I prefer the pally levels for more immunities, umd, and MUCH higer saves with the FOP feat.

Now get off my lawn Randy!

[Beer_Dude]

A pure fighter gets power surge for 8 more STR. Yeah, it doesn't last forever, but end-game doesn't have many places where it won't last.

A pure fighter gets +1 crit range, and 10% doublestrike, which together on a Khopesh or Pick fighter, significantly out-weigh the +20% off-hand a Tempest II gets, in terms of multiplying base damage.

A pure Fighter also gets +4 base damage against all enemies over a 6 Fighter. 12 Ranger gives +9 damage, but only against 3 specific favored enemies.

Ranger is fine as a versatility choice, but it really isn't as close as you suggest in terms of DPS.

Your crit range is about to be negated on end game bosses since you brought up end game and most mobs in end game are going to be a FE so the +9 comes into play quit a bit in end game. Also, and correct me if I'm wrong (as I'm not certain). If you pop your power surge then you can't pop your haste boost correct? So one has surge the other has boost which draws it close together.

The fact of the matter is the way the checks and balances are in the game. It's designed for all classes to be pretty close when it comes to a DPS toon. That's assuming equal gear and well thought out toons.

[stainer]

Your crit range is about to be negated on end game bosses since you brought up end game and most mobs in end game are going to be a FE so the +9 comes into play quit a bit in end game. Also, and correct me if I'm wrong (as I'm not certain). If you pop your power surge then you can't pop your haste boost correct? So one has surge the other has boost which draws it close together.

The fact of the matter is the way the checks and balances are in the game. It's designed for all classes to be pretty close when it comes to a DPS toon. That's assuming equal gear and well thought out toons.

Power surge and haste boost can be triggered together.

[Kinerd]

I don't see how a 10% haste boost with temp I is a problem, considering that tempest's wouldn't get it until lvl 6 whereas fighters and rogues can get 15% at lvl 1. The free feats granted by ranger 6 (2 fe's, wild empathy, bow str, rapid shot, die hard, many shot & itwf) are offset by the 3 feats a tempest has to take to quality for the pre. Compare that to kensei I, fighter 6 gets 4 bonus feats and kensei I requires 2 feats spent on weapon focus and specialization.The problem is more: why bother taking more than 6 ranger in your scenario? We've been down that road before. Where rangers need melee DPS help is the levels past 12, and desperately in the levels past 18.
Rangers get excellent reflex saves so they will have more useful evasion than a splashed-fighter. it does cut down on a ton of incoming damage as many of the bit hits in this game are AOE spells.Pure ranger gets +12. Fighter / 2 rogue gets +9, +3 from Kensei against spells for a total of +12. The fighter also might start with higher Dex to get TWF feats, so they would actually be ahead of the ranger all other things being equal. An exploiter would have +15, but even then it's going to be a close run thing, not a dramatic advantage for the ranger.
Is that "better?" I'm not so sure. Taking into account everything he brings to a group. Granted a lot of the ranger perks do come from splashing, but it adds up. he can get epic traps, do a decent amount of buffing and healing. When we short-man stuff he's always the guy I bring for those reasons.I'm always a little embarrassed when I have to start healing another exploiter with my exploiter.
Kensai III is much better than Tempest IIII'm not so sure. For a khopesh against 0 fort, we're talking a 29/27 increase in weapon base damage only (and piddly from bursts) for the fighter, or 7.4%. Against 50 fort that's down to 4.3%. Double-strike's contribution depends on Strength bonus, but it's definitely between 2.5% and 3.3%, plus it multiplies everything and doesn't get eaten up by increased fortification. The capstone is a disaster, but I think Tempest 3 gets an unfair shake.
The fact of the matter is the way the checks and balances are in the game. It's designed for all classes to be pretty close when it comes to a DPS toon. That's assuming equal gear and well thought out toons.I think you grossly overestimate how coherent and well-thought-out Turbine's vision for/of the game is.