Fighter vs. Ranger TWF

[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.