Ranger Tweaks and rebalancing

[Templarion]

Excellent ideas overall Brennie.

/signed

[Lornman]

I'm not sure what you mean abotu being re-speccable vi enhancements. My proposed consolidation would simply create new Favored Enemy Categories to replace teh feats we have now. Only the damage/atack/defense/resist enhancement lines we have now would be purchasable via AP.

Yeah, I was kind of out of place on that one. It was something that I saw suggested in another thread/topic and it was on my mind.

I've seen arguments for/against that Tempests should be the best DPS for TWF and my thought on the argument is that it should be situational with emphasis on Favored Enemies. Pick one FE that you want to specialize in (think this would work well with the consolidated FE idea) and for that specific FE (or group) then the Ranger is the undisputed master of killing that type of critter. Add a free feat upon taking Tempest III which would be something like expanded critical range (or some additional cumalative bonus to ToHit, Damage, etc) against your "special FE". Wouldn't be too overpowering I don't think since a Fighter/Barb would still out DPS on all other opponents.

This would be the incentive to go for Tempest III and the ManyHit (nice name, lol) capstone would be a compelling reason to stay pure while Tempest.

[NaturalHazard]

i know this is about rangers but about the ranged over haul would this effect repeaters and throwing weapons as well?

[Alabore]

The groups could still use a bit of balancing, but in the end even a pure ranger could only take 5 of 10-12, leaving 50-60% of the games enemies outside their Enemy Specialization.

I guess I more or less agree with the breakdown you suggested.
Maybe I'd consolidate all goblinoids, orcs and maybe ogres in one enemy choice - in some fantasy settings they are considered related races.

All small to human sized non-monstrous humanoids - humans, elves, dwarves, halflings - could count as "normal humanoids", while most other creatures - from gnoll to minotaur, maybe sahuagins too - would count as "monstrous humanoids".

I like the renaming you suggested for outsiders, extraplanars.
Maybe we could consider some further consolidation: I'd classify mephit-likes as elementals, and remove the alignment difference.
I know this might break with pnp tradition, but game balance is the real issue here; undead covers a lot of foes; lawful outsiders maybe a couple entities.

Some creatures might have overlapping categories; some already have.
I am not sure what giant class should include; ogre might have a class overlap here: monstrous/giant or maybe goblinoid/giant.

[sephiroth1084]

Dont think anyone has hit on it, but in addition to being all beast like with their TWF, rangers are also known for their bows.

As of now, pure bow damage is not good, excepting while manyshotting and when many enemies are lined up in a row. I do not feel that this should be the case.

I would suggest a weapon fire rate bonus, or even multiple arrows based on proximity. As of now, i am thinking of a scaling effect:

Ranged Weapon Fighting I- You gain +2 to-hit for bows, when you are within 15 game feet of an opponent, you fire 25% faster.
Ranged Weapon Fighting II- You gain +2 to-hit for bows, when you are within 30 game feet of an opponent, you gain a 25% attack speed increase, when you are within 15 game feet of an opponent you gain a 50% attack speed increase.
Ranged Weapon Fighting III- You gain another +2 to-hit for bows, when you are within 45 feet, 25% speed increase, within 30 ft, 50% increase, within 15 ft, 75% increase.

I do not think this would lead to an unreasonable amount of damage, but if it does, simply change the percentage values. (if you want a RL type explanation, it is muuuuch easier to nock and fire arrows when things are closer rather than further because aiming is quicker.

Actually, this is very interesting. Part of the problem with archery is that it necessarily reduces the danger for the character, which I'm sure is part of the reason it has been kept so gimpy for so long. This improves archery, but does so, in the greatest way, by pushing archers into close combat.

[Requiro]

In another thread discussing some Polish the rangers could use, i made this post. I spent enough time on it that I'd like to repost it as its own, seperate suggestion.

My thoughts on Rangers -

(…)

• Ranged overhaul. (…) overall increase in ranged attack speed, while tweaking manyshot to impose an attack speed penalty while active (…)
  Agreed.

• Consolidation/Overhaul of Favored Enemy.
  Agreed.

• Buff Up Tempest III. (…) currently Tempest III isn't worth the 18 levels of ranger (…) Agreed. (…) unique bonus, such as full strength to offhand (…) Nice idea Idk if balanced, but nice. Need more statistic on that. Also, put less weight on the AC bonuses from Tempest. A pure ranger tempest will likely not give a rats patoot about AC. Not Agreed AC is bad designed in DDO. But there is still viable style for some build.

• More Good Ranger Spells. (..) for now Rangers get stuck with some pretty lame spells (…)
  Agreed. My suggestion is:
  
  • Level 1: Magical Arrow: 50 +1 arrows with Righteousness property
  • Level 2: Flame arrow (from arcane spells)
  • Level 3: Poison Arrow: 50 + 3 arrows with 1d6 acid damage and Puncting property
  • Level 3: Understand nature: Summon Ent who will fight against you enemy. He can’t move, ranged attack and not dismiss your Nature’a Ally but dismiss other Ent.
  • Level 4: Barkskin mass
  • Level 4: Charm animal
  • Level 4: Unity with Nature: Summon stronger version of Ent who additionally poison enemies.

• More Capstones.
  Agreed.
  My suggestion is:
  
  • Improve current Capstone: Add: +2 AC (shield bonus), +1 to-hit and dmg for each hand, +5% attack speed when fighting TWF and +2 additional damage on Favored Enemy
  • Alternative Capstone: +2 dex, +2 AC (shield bonus), +1 to-hit and dmg for each hand, +5% attack speed when fighting TWF and both capstones +2 additional damage on Favored Enemy

• A Second Look at Secondary Benefits. Two secondary ranger concerns are Half Elf Dilettante, and Ranger Past Life Feats:

Half Elf Dilettante: (...)
Agreed. But in my opinion mix of your proposal is better idea. Leave Bow Strength Lite and add one possible Favored Enemy with +1 damage on the beginning and +1 per tier .

The Ranger Past Life passive feat (...)
My proposal

• +2 To all resistance
• +2 damage to ranged combat
• +1% change to get double strike while melee

The Ranger past life Active feat is even worse. (...)
Agreed Your suggestion about Ram’s Might is nice. But what about to mix this idea? Let’s say:

• Nature Power 3/rest, grant:
• Ram’s Might (+2 str, size bonus)
• Barkskin (+2 AC + 1 AC every 3 level above 3rd without limits – max. on level 18 – 7 AC)

• Dismiss Charm. We can Dominate Animals, so we should be able to get rid of that blue hat when necessary(...)
  Agreed.

• AA ToD Set. AA is a complete Prestige enhancement line. Really? I still thing that they working about improvements on this PrE (at least I hope so). If not your idea is very nice.

Lots of good ideas. Comments in this color

/mosty signed

[Nevid]

1. Don’t limit rangers to being a “Watered down druid” when it comes to casting. There are plenty of Ranger specific spells from P&P that could easily make their way over to DDO.

2. Any proposed changes to Tempest III needs to compete with taking 7 levels of Fighter or Rogue. (Mainly the benefits of Haste Boost)

3. Any proposed melee capstone needs to compete with the benefits of the 1 Monk/1 Rogue splash.

4. There is plenty of room for the shield bonus for TWF to grow. Turbine forgot to implement the rest of the Two Weapon Defense chain.

5. Any new addons needs to target Action Points and not feats. Tempests already have 4 of their 7 feats pre-spent for them and in practical experience 6 of their 7 feats are pre spent. This also ties back to point #3 because a lot of the benefits of 7 Fighter or rogue comes back to the fact that rangers have a lot of AP's to dump into the Kensai enhancement chain or all the rogue sneak attack enhancements and haste boost.

1. Yes, some nice ranger specific spells are in order. I think every class needs a few nice class specific spells.

2. I like the 100% strength bonues to the offhand.

3. For a tempest, I believe any capstone should include a critical range bonus for FE. It just makes sense that if you are a master of TWF and have studdied your FE through 20 levels, you know where to hit them to make it hurt and are pretty good and putting that shot where it needs to be put.

4. As long as AC is irrelevant, this is irrelevant. However, it would be nice to see where a decent AC has some noticed value again.

I would also like to add that even though I am not sure if a 100% ranged style is appropriate, it should be improved so that it is more functional and viable than a 20 second burst every two minutes.

[Brennie]

Excellent ideas overall Brennie.

/signed

Thanks! I appreciate the support

... Pick one FE that you want to specialize in (think this would work well with the consolidated FE idea) and for that specific FE (or group) then the Ranger is the undisputed master of killing that type of critter... Add a free feat upon taking Tempest III which would be something like expanded critical range (or some additional cumalative bonus to ToHit, Damage, etc) against your "special FE". ...

Even with out current broken Favored Enemies, Rangers can still cover 99% of engame content, and a fair bit of mid to late game content as well. I think this falls into the same problem as "Rangers should be the best TWF in all situations", but to a lesser degree (Especially compared to paladins, who should do as much or more damage to evil outsiders with Knight of the Chalice, since it is a much narrower specialization). The problem does remain though, that if a ranger can't out DPS Favored enemies with a whopping +14 damage against them, then that -14 damage against everything else makes them useless again. This is anotehr issue that i didn't really know hwo to address: how to you balance rangers so that they aren't overpowered versus Favored Enemies or underpowered against non-Favored Enemies?

Also note that some of the most popular Favored Enemy types (Undead, construct, elemental) wouldn't gain any benefit from expanded crit range or multiplier.

i know this is about rangers but about the ranged over haul would this effect repeaters and throwing weapons as well?

Any ranged overhaul would likely affect all means of ranged combat, except spell flinging (As it is inherently a different system). Problems right now include low attack speed, low attack speed increase from BaB, reduced benefit from attack speed boosts (Such as Ranger capstone, haste, haste boost, etc) which some people attribute to the static length of the "reload/redraw" speed, split attributes for damage and to hit, the fact that ranged uses both hands (Or cannot be dual weildided, in throwing's case) so it loses out on the benefits of Two Weapon Fighting or Two Handed Fighting (Glancing blows for THF, 1.5x strength for both, Double the benefit of static damage increases for TWF, Double benefit from power attack for both, double benefit from racial weapon lines for both), as well as lacking sources of static damage increase available to melee (Power Attack, Divine Might, Smite Evil, Divine Sacrifice, Wrack Construct, Sneak attack from more that arms length, and other sources of "+damage for melee only"). All of these issues shoudl be addressed for a serious revamp of Ranged Combat.

...Maybe I'd consolidate all goblinoids, orcs and maybe ogres in one enemy choice - in some fantasy settings they are considered related races.

Splitting the monster-type-humanoid races was an option i considered, but although the monster-type-humanoid races are extremely common, they thin out a bit at endgame, and outside of epics, none are tough enough to really require mega damage bonuses to deal with. Keep in mind, although i am trying to group enemies by a common theme, that Balancing the Favored Enemies is my first priority. Orcs, ogres, and goblinoids by themselves is going to be yet another Faorred Enemy group no one thinks twice about skipping.

All small to human sized non-monstrous humanoids - humans, elves, dwarves, halflings - could count as "normal humanoids", while most other creatures - from gnoll to minotaur, maybe sahuagins too - would count as "monstrous humanoids".

Thats basically the same as my breakdown. Its not perfect, since both catagories are a little overabundant in how common they are, but a little underwhelming in how tough they are, and how many notable bosses there are

I like the renaming you suggested for outsiders, extraplanars.
Maybe we could consider some further consolidation: I'd classify mephit-likes as elementals, and remove the alignment difference.
I know this might break with pnp tradition, but game balance is the real issue here; undead covers a lot of foes; lawful outsiders maybe a couple entities.

My first draft breakdown actually included mephits in Elementals. I figured that Elementals are mostly bigger, tougher enemies with DR and nasty abilities, so Mephits woudl fill out the fodder role for that category nicely. And it was also thematically pleasing. However, Elementals are one of the Top 5 Favored Enemies already and don't particularly need the boost, plus taking mephits away from "Other Outsiders" would severely weaken that group.

I do agree with lawful/chaotic outsiders. Keep in mind, all devils are lawful outsiders, so that is a very powerful group. But evil outsiders covers them and some extras too. Chaotic outsiders, however, are demons and tharaak hounds as far as i can tell, both of which are uncommon enough to be worthless. Breaking teh categories down into "Evil outsiders" and "Everything else" seemed like the best solution, balance wise.

Some creatures might have overlapping categories; some already have.
I am not sure what giant class should include; ogre might have a class overlap here: monstrous/giant or maybe goblinoid/giant.

Now that is an idea i hadn't though about. The precident already exists, with lawful/evil/chaotic outsiders. Infact, i think this is a great idea! Some of the weaker groups might be able to add some padding for the parts they have lacking (Like Elementals having very little fodder, which Mephits might be able to help fill in for), without having to deprive other categories of a similar benefit. My only concerns with this would be to try to keep the "overlapped" Enemies to mostly Fodder types, anything you hack your way through at Zerg speed just to get to the tougher fights. Tough enemies, like Elementals, Golems, Devil Bosses etc should be exclusive to one Favored Enemy type. Also, this shouldn't allow rangers to have any more than 50% of the games enemies on their Favored Enemy list with any given combination. A little mixing is fine, but allowing 90% of the game to become Favored Enemies for one character would just be silly.

Actually, this is very interesting. Part of the problem with archery is that it necessarily reduces the danger for the character, which I'm sure is part of the reason it has been kept so gimpy for so long. This improves archery, but does so, in the greatest way, by pushing archers into close combat.

Except Ranged characters would still suck while at range, which is almost entirely the point of BEING a ranged character. Otherwise, a bow is just a new fancy type of melee weapon. One of the biggest reasons i feel Ranged needs an overhaul is that I don't feel characters who devote feats, skills, AP, race consideration and gear to being the best Ranged character they can possibly be should feel compelled to get into close combat. Besides which, a lot of times that Ranged really shines is when you *can't* get into close combat, such as taking down perched archers, manyshotting a caster across a chasm, or plinking away at the Demon Queen when she teleports away to her ledge.

* Buff Up Tempest III. (…) currently Tempest III isn't worth the 18 levels of ranger (…) Agreed. (…) unique bonus, such as full strength to offhand (…) Nice idea Idk if balanced, but nice. Need more statistic on that. Also, put less weight on the AC bonuses from Tempest. A pure ranger tempest will likely not give a rats patoot about AC. Not Agreed AC is bad designed in DDO. But there is still viable style for some build.

I don't know anything about the number, to be honest. I just enjoyed the idea of a dual weilding tempest ranger with 2 exact copies of the same weapon using each hand equally. If the numbers on this came back to be underwhelming, using both hands with 105/105% chance to hit/doublestrike might be good too (Or return of dual wielding speed boost, but place it at Tempest III instead of Tempest I)

As for AC, I believe i worded my post badly as a few people have commented on this. I'm not advocating teh removal of AC from the Tempest lines, I'm merely stating that *most* builds with 18 levels of ranger would look at the AC bonus as a very minor or compeltely useless benefit. In that respect, Devs shouldn't look to boost Tempest III by simply adding more AC to it, as that is not the benefit the Ranger community is looking for.

* More Good Ranger Spells. (..) for now Rangers get stuck with some pretty lame spells (…)
Agreed. My suggestion is:
o Level 1: Magical Arrow: 50 +1 arrows with Righteousness property
o Level 2: Flame arrow (from arcane spells)
o Level 3: Poison Arrow: 50 + 3 arrows with 1d6 acid damage and Puncting property
o Level 3: Understand nature: Summon Ent who will fight against you enemy. He can’t move, ranged attack and not dismiss your Nature’a Ally but dismiss other Ent.
o Level 4: Barkskin mass
o Level 4: Charm animal
o Level 4: Unity with Nature: Summon stronger version of Ent who additionally poison enemies.

I like these ideas, though some of the arrows look a little on the "extra powerful" side, and I don't know how useful Charm Animal would be to a ranger who has absolute junk for DC's and spell penetration, unles sthe spell itself was tweaked to be more effective in a Rangers hands. I like the rest, especially the non-mobile summon, turret style One additional spell idea i really like Resists Elements, which acts as resist energy for *all* energy types, and Mass Resists Elements. These would follow the footsteps of Protection from Elements, and Mass Protection from Elements

* More Capstones.
Agreed.
My suggestion is:
o Improve current Capstone: Add: +2 AC (shield bonus), +1 to-hit and dmg for each hand, +5% attack speed when fighting TWF and +2 additional damage on Favored Enemy
o Alternative Capstone: +2 dex, +2 AC (shield bonus), +1 to-hit and dmg for each hand, +5% attack speed when fighting TWF and both capstones +2 additional damage on Favored Enemy

Would the shield bonus stack with the Tempest shield bonuses they already get? I like it otherwise, with one exception: If ranged attack speeds every get fixed, and the Ranger capstone ever grants a *true* 25% attack speed boost with ranged weapons, then the Ranged Capstone will be more than powerful enough to stand on its own with additional buffs.

* A Second Look at Secondary Benefits. Two secondary ranger concerns are Half Elf Dilettante, and Ranger Past Life Feats:

Half Elf Dilettante: (...)
Agreed. But in my opinion mix of your proposal is better idea. Leave Bow Strength Lite and add one possible Favored Enemy with +1 damage on the beginning and +1 per tier .

The Ranger Past Life passive feat (...)
My proposal

* +2 To all resistance
* +2 damage to ranged combat
* +1% change to get double strike while melee


The Ranger past life Active feat is even worse. (...)
Agreed Your suggestion about Ram’s Might is nice. But what about to mix this idea? Let’s say:

* Nature Power 3/rest, grant:
* Ram’s Might (+2 str, size bonus)
* Barkskin (+2 AC + 1 AC every 3 level above 3rd without limits – max. on level 18 – 7 AC)

I like your Helf Idea, But i don't know if your Ranger Past Life would be all that much better (1% doublestrike is less than 1% dps gain for a two-weapon fighter. Nice, but extremely marginal benefit). A combo power for the active feat sounds fine to me, but i would keep Barkskin capped at its appropriate levels. The answer to teh AC problem is not to increase the various means of getting AC in the game (I believe thats what broke it in the first place)

* AA ToD Set. AA is a complete Prestige enhancement line. Really? I still thing that they working about improvements on this PrE (at least I hope so). If not your idea is very nice.

AA could use a couple tweaks here and there, so I'm not saying its "Finished and set in stone forever and ever". However, it has all its teirs and is a fully usable prestige line. As such, it should have corresponding benefits for its ToD set. Even if AA gets completely rewritten down the line, the ToD set bonus would likely be something that would benefit the new AA too (Like +2 to hit/+2 damage with ranged weapons? Who knows)

Thank you for your detailed, and compatibly colorful response Requiro! You have some great suggestions that i hope also get looked at.

3. For a tempest, I believe any capstone should include a critical range bonus for FE. It just makes sense that if you are a master of TWF and have studdied your FE through 20 levels, you know where to hit them to make it hurt and are pretty good and putting that shot where it needs to be put.

I would also like to add that even though I am not sure if a 100% ranged style is appropriate, it should be improved so that it is more functional and viable than a 20 second burst every two minutes.

I agree with you on 1, 2, and 4 completely. 3, however, while an interesting idea, has its own issues. 3 of the most popular Favored Enemies in the current game (Undead, Elemental, Construct) and completely immune to critical hits. Expanded crit range or increase crit multiplier would give no benefit when facing those favored enemies. This would also apply to Oozes, plants, and a few others that are currently extremely underutilized Favored Enemies, but i hope will be rolled into more popular groups sometime in the future.

Also, i flat out agree with your ranged assesment. Ranged perhaps should not be an "all the time" thing, but should have benefits comparable to TWF and THF even when manyshot is off. TWF would and should be the best way to get a large number of hits on an enemy (barring manyshot) and this should be the best style for applying on-hit/on-crit effects as well as the largest beneficiary of static +damage bonuses. THF has its glancing blows, easy stat requirement, and little-to-no feat requirements (Since you can THF pretty well without any feats, which is an issue with the style by itself). This style should be preferable for characters who dump dex, or cannot afford 3 feats (This, obviously, would not be rangers, and wouldn't be Fighter-Archers either. Other classes whoa re more feat starved may prefer this route). If its in your face, and manyshot is off, maybe it'd be better to whip out a melee weapon and kill it. However, if it's not in your face, a character who has made considerable effort to be specialized in Ranged weapons should feel comfortable ranging them to death. Frankly, i think ranged should be buffed up to be pretty-darned good in all situations EXCEPT point blank range (Where they might suffer some penalties that would encourage them to melee instead). This is how it worked in PnP, where trying to range someone in melee not only had penalties, but also allowed enemies to smack you around each time you tried to get a shot off.

Thank you all for your contributions, suggestions, ideas, and responses. All this constructive feedback has got to amount to something good in the future, right ?

[Alabore]

Orcs, ogres, and goblinoids by themselves is going to be yet another Favored Enemy group no one thinks twice about skipping.

To be fair, what you suggested encompassed even more foe types:

Humanoid, Monstrous - As is, but include Orcs, Goblinoids, and Gnolls. Mostly fodder, with a few tough enemies. Found at all levels, though it thins higher up. A few notable bosses (medusa, mostly) but light in that area.

My first draft breakdown actually included mephits in Elementals.
...
However, Elementals are one of the Top 5 Favored Enemies already and don't particularly need the boost, plus taking mephits away from "Other Outsiders" would severely weaken that group.

Unless I'm completely wrong here, mephits are currently excluded from Favoured Enemy feats.

Tough enemies, like Elementals, Golems, Devil Bosses etc should be exclusive to one Favored Enemy type.

Granted, problem is: people are already choosing Undead, Evil Outsiders and maybe Elementals and Constructs.
A while ago Giants were considered another good choice; now some players suggest taking Monstrous Humanoids, against Sahuagins.
That already covers the big tough foes anyway.

Also, this shouldn't allow rangers to have any more than 50% of the games enemies on their Favored Enemy list with any given combination. A little mixing is fine, but allowing 90% of the game to become Favored Enemies for one character would just be silly.

I would suggest striking a balance at around 60-75% of potential foes, for a lvl 20 ranger.
This would make staying pure more attractive, and maybe counter the perception rangers aren't good dps outside the narrow scope of their favoured targets.

[krogyy]

i gave another though about ways to improve ranged combat. i start from the assumption that the rate of fire cannot be changed due to technical reasons. in my opinion the core of the problem lies around Manyshot and it's there the changes should occur.

option 1) decrease Manyshot cooldown. at the moment the average rate of fire is (20*4 + 100)*50/120 = 75 arrows/minute (assuming rate of fire is 50 arrows/minute).
in general (20*4 + x - 20)*50/x is the rate of fire depending on the cooldown x. a cooldown of 100 will yield an average rate of fire of 80 for example. for later use, a cooldown of 30 will yield an average rate of fire of 150. i don't know what is a balanced average rate of fire but it can be set to anything between 50 and 200.

option 2) change Manyshot to act as an action boost. no recharge, cooldown of 30, charges equal to dex bonus. with a likely dex score of 30 will give 10 charges, that is 5 minutes between shrines with a rate of fire of 150.
on the other side, max dex toons may get to a score of 50. that is 10 minutes of 150 attack/minute, may be overpowered after all...

option 2a) same as 2) but with a fixed 5 charges. add enhancements for ranger and elf that grant additional charges.

option 3) change Manyshot to act like radiant auras/smites. 3 charges, one additional chrage at BAB 11 and 16 respectively, cooldown of 20. leave recharges every 2 minutes. this gives 100 seconds with a rate of fire of 200 that lowers to 75 thereafter. (if 200 attacks/minutes for 100 seconds looks too overpowered, the cooldwon can be set to 30 sec thus lowering the burst potential to 150 attacks/minute for 150 seconds)
maybe, add enhancements for ranger and elf that grant additional charges.

my favorite solution is 3). this will allow to better adapt the use manyshots to the individual quest "rhythm", while not altering the average rate of fire much over the long term.

[Nevid]

i gave another though about ways to improve ranged combat. i start from the assumption that the rate of fire cannot be changed due to technical reasons. in my opinion the core of the problem lies around Manyshot and it's there the changes should occur.

option 1) decrease Manyshot cooldown. at the moment the average rate of fire is (20*4 + 100)*50/120 = 75 arrows/minute (assuming rate of fire is 50 arrows/minute).
in general (20*4 + x - 20)*50/x is the rate of fire depending on the cooldown x. a cooldown of 100 will yield an average rate of fire of 80 for example. for later use, a cooldown of 30 will yield an average rate of fire of 150. i don't know what is a balanced average rate of fire but it can be set to anything between 50 and 200.

option 2) change Manyshot to act as an action boost. no recharge, cooldown of 30, charges equal to dex bonus. with a likely dex score of 30 will give 10 charges, that is 5 minutes between shrines with a rate of fire of 150.
on the other side, max dex toons may get to a score of 50. that is 10 minutes of 150 attack/minute, may be overpowered after all...

option 2a) same as 2) but with a fixed 5 charges. add enhancements for ranger and elf that grant additional charges.

option 3) change Manyshot to act like radiant auras/smites. 3 charges, one additional chrage at BAB 11 and 16 respectively, cooldown of 20. leave recharges every 2 minutes. this gives 100 seconds with a rate of fire of 200 that lowers to 75 thereafter. (if 200 attacks/minutes for 100 seconds looks too overpowered, the cooldwon can be set to 30 sec thus lowering the burst potential to 150 attacks/minute for 150 seconds)
maybe, add enhancements for ranger and elf that grant additional charges.

my favorite solution is 3). this will allow to better adapt the use manyshots to the individual quest "rhythm", while not altering the average rate of fire much over the long term.

I have always thought a few simple fixes for longbows at least would be to

1) Make a longbow str bonus work like a two handed weapon.

2) Let power attack work with bows

These would be easy fixes and while they wont fix the fundmental issues with ranged fighting, could prop it up just a little.

[Lleren]

I like your example reworking of the Favored Enemy list.

[Requiro]

(...) I don't know how useful Charm Animal would be to a ranger who has absolute junk for DC's and spell penetration (...)

Well… This could be solved by special DC and without SP checks. DC let's say: 10 + Spell level + ability score (wisdom) + ranger level

Would the shield bonus stack with the Tempest shield bonuses they already get? Yes I like it otherwise, with one exception: If ranged attack speeds every get fixed, and the Ranger capstone ever grants a *true* 25% attack speed boost with ranged weapons, then the Ranged Capstone will be more than powerful enough to stand on its own with additional buffs.

Idk if they fix this issue in near future. In my proposal you get little more DPS from +2 dmg on FE (better then nothing)

I like your Helf Idea, But i don't know if your Ranger Past Life would be all that much better (1% doublestrike is less than 1% dps gain for a two-weapon fighter. Nice, but extremely marginal benefit).

Disagree. You can stack this bonus 3 times. That give you 3% to EVERYONE. For now there is no special ability to rise this bonus except some unique weapons, Temperst III and Fighter Capstone. In my opinion any min-max DPS will try to do 2-3 TR of ranger to get this bonus. Especially with Ram's might from slot-need past life feat.

Thank you for your detailed, and compatibly colorful response Requiro! You have some great suggestions that i hope also get looked at.

I'm glad that you like my ideas

[Beethoven]

To me the question boils down to, why is a +14 damage not enough to allow them out-dps, say, Kensai vs their favored enemy.

Fighter only get +3 STR from enhancements over Rangers.
Twf Fighters get 110%/80% mainhand/offhand procs.
Kensai gets a total of +8 damage from weapon specializations and signature weapon with a +1 crit range.
Kensai get another +4 damage from Power Surge.

Rangers get +14 vs Favored Enemies
Tempest get 105%/100% mainhand/offhand procs.

So, as far as the procs are concerned ranger get 5% less double-strike, but 20% higher offhand proc. In other words, for every additional double-strike the Kensai gets, the Tempest gets 4 off-hand procs.
Kensai (without Power Surge) get +9 to +10 damage vs the Tempest Rangers +14. That's a difference of 4-5 points of damage a swing. The increased crit range closes the gap again. Power Surge finally makes the Kensai pull ahead.

However, many ranger builds do not go max Strength, full out dps specced but sacrifice some to spec for versatility and survivability (ie: self healing, AC, etc.), which makes them really fall behind.

I do agree that Rangers could use a little something, but so far am not convinced that - all other things equal - the difference between a dps specced Tempest is as far behind as some people would like make it out.

That said, my personal favorite solution would be to change the Tempest Pre to stances. Ie: leave mainhand/offhand procs and double-strike as is and instead of giving a +4 shield bonus (which easily can be UMDed anyway) make it:

Defensive Stance:
Tempest I: +2 shield bonus to AC
Tempest II: +4 shield bonus to AC
Tempest III: +6 shield bonus to AC.

This way there would be an actual advantage of a Tempest III over someone using a shield wand.

Offensive Stance:
Tempest I: +1 damage bonus while wielding two-weapons (on both mainhand and offhand)
Tempest II: +2 damage bonus while wielding two-weapons.
Tempest III: +4 damage bonus while wielding two-weapons.

Also could add an AC penalty to offensive stance. To me that'd solve two issues: boost Tempest dps some and make Tempest III more worth it.

[TerraSkye]

Lookie I read your post and the debate well most of it. This pure ranger thing doesn't really apply to me...I play casters...Cleric mostly. Can you use that big brain of yours to propose a way to make zen archery a good idea so my cleric can use a bow like a big girl.

[azrael4h]

Lookie I read your post and the debate well most of it. This pure ranger thing doesn't really apply to me...I play casters...Cleric mostly. Can you use that big brain of yours to propose a way to make zen archery a good idea so my cleric can use a bow like a big girl.

I suggest asking this in the Cleric sub-forum, or starting another thread here if you want to make a suggestion on that build. This is a suggestion thread specifically based on improving the Ranger class.

Tempest III does need looking at, as currently there is no way I'd push 18 levels of Ranger for that as it is currently. There also needs to be a melee capstone, or at least a non-ranged capstone which competes with a single level of rogue for better UMD, and/or a level in monk or Fighter for an extra feat.

[NaturalHazard]

please dont take away my bush!!! I like my bush!!!!!

[Brennie]

Strap in people, here comes another mile-long Brennie response post! Maybe i can spice this one up with a little color coding...

(...)To be fair, what you suggested encompassed even more foe types(...)

I did indeed. My suggestion was to roll all the semi-humanoids (AKA anything that's not a player race but is affected by Charm person) into Monsterous Humanoid, while keeping the races already in Monsterous Humanoid. Currently, Monsterous Humanoid is a fairly unworth Favored Enemy class from 1-19, as Gargoyles, Minotaurs and Sahuaghins are tough but uncommon enemies, with no notable bosses. At 20, they're slightly more popular as they show up in Epics. However, having Goblinoids, Gnolls, and Orcs help fill out teh fodder roles would make them much more popular 1-19 and make them ever so slightly better for the epic market (Though epics are going to be revamped soon, so we'll see whetehr they stay as popular at 20). Having Monsterous humanoid stay the same and combining Gnolls, Goblinoids and Orcs woudl make both groups rather unattractive.

Unless I'm completely wrong here, mephits are currently excluded from Favoured Enemy feats.

This is true. This is also something I woudl like fixed, as Mephits are common as dirt in DDO, and every ranger is effectively -14 damage against them (Since they get no lovely favored enemy bonus no matter what). Same thing goes for Tieflings. My argument against Mephits being combined with Elementals is 1) Elementals are already a popular group who don't particularly need the boost, and 2) Then mephits cannot be part of the new "Other Outsiders" category. However, your suggestion that some enemy types might be able to straddle two different Favored Enemy Categories effectively alleviates the second problem, and the first problem is minor enough to be able to be overlooked easily.

I would suggest striking a balance at around 60-75% of potential foes, for a lvl 20 ranger.
This would make staying pure more attractive, and maybe counter the perception rangers aren't good dps outside the narrow scope of their favoured targets.

If Rangers are going to be doing more damage than anyone else to 75% of the game content, that would make them unbalanced versus fighters and barbarians, I'd say. However, this is a point that could use some discussion: Where do we draw the line, for the sake of balance?

i gave another though about ways to improve ranged combat. (...)
option 1) decrease Manyshot cooldown. (...)

I have some immediate issues with this, but admittedly some are more knee-jerk than others. Mostly, i don't want ranged damage to be solely dependent on Manyshot. For one thing, it excludes Crossbows, repeaters, throwing weapons, and any character who lacks the manyshot feat from the "fix". Second, the wide discrepancy from "using manyshot" to "not using manyshot" doesn't help the "Not using manyshot = useless mode" that ranged characters currently suffer. Faster Manyshot reset means more Awesome Mode, but doesn't fix the underlying issue. Lastly, there are times and places where *not* using manyshot is the only viable option. For instance, knowing there is a boss coming up soon, and you want to save your timer (Though your method would allow that "Waiting" period to be a lot smaller), or any situation that requires careful aggro management.

I believe you have some inventive ideas here, and i know you're trying to propose "What if ranged speed *Can't* be fixed" ideas, but in the long run I think manyshot-based-ranged-fix would only compound the issues ranged characters face.

option 2) change Manyshot to act as an action boost(...)

option 2a) same as 2) but with a fixed 5 charges. add enhancements for ranger and elf that grant additional charges.

I don't like the limitations this would create. Any non-elf, non-ranger character is going to suffer immensely. And even Elven Ranger characters would have issues with trying to Stockpile manyshot uses for "When it really matters" (I know my haste-boosty using characters do, as much as i try to avoid it )

option 3) change Manyshot to act like radiant auras/smites. (...)

A better option than 2, but still suffers from the initial flaws of the "better manyshot = better ranged" concept. Honestly, i think Manyshot needs to be nerfed significantly at the same time that range gets it boost, because "Just behind Two-Handed Fighting DPS" would be not so bad. "Just behind Two-Handed Fighting DPS" x4 for 20 seconds = more powerful than anything in the game.

I have always thought a few simple fixes for longbows at least would be to

1) Make a longbow str bonus work like a two handed weapon.

2) Let power attack work with bows

These would be easy fixes and while they wont fix the fundmental issues with ranged fighting, could prop it up just a little.

I fully support these ideas. Infact, i love these ideas, with one big caveat: they don't help fix ranged combat for anything but bow styles.

I had for a while toyed with the idea of making Bow Strength an active/toggle feat that functioned exactly like Power Attack, with a passive sub-feat that functions as the current bow strength does (So that it doesn't lose its current primary purpose).

I like your example reworking of the Favored Enemy list.

Thanks, i do too

I'm glad that you like my ideas

I really did. I also approve of ranger-only spells that have a DC being changed in some way so that your average Ranger can make *some* use out of them (more than "Well, it'll work if they roll a 1" kinda way). Snare kind of already has this, in that it targets a strength check instead of a save. However, the DC is still so low that it doesn't really matter.

Rogue's Opportunist, Paladin's Zeal, Wind-Stance Monks and Warchanter's Inspire Recklessness also give doublestrike. 3% is the same that a rogue gets for their unique feat, while all others are higher. I don't dislike the idea of doublestrike, i actually think its a great idea, I just believe the number needs to be slightly higher (Maybe 1.5% or 2% chance?)

To me the question boils down to, why is a +14 damage not enough to allow them out-dps, say, Kensai vs their favored enemy.

Fighter only get +3 STR from enhancements over Rangers.
Twf Fighters get 110%/80% mainhand/offhand procs.
Kensai gets a total of +8 damage from weapon specializations and signature weapon with a +1 crit range.
Kensai get another +4 damage from Power Surge.

You forgot haste boost, which is huge when combined with Power Surge (And they get 8 of each, with potential for AP and items to bring it up a few more!), and the +4 stacking seeker bonus. Also Fighters have significantly higher "To hit", for when it matters, which often lets them keep Power Attack on when a Ranger would have to turn theirs off.

Rangers get +14 vs Favored Enemies
Tempest get 105%/100% mainhand/offhand procs.

And Rams Might.

So, as far as the procs are concerned ranger get 5% less double-strike, but 20% higher offhand proc. In other words, for every additional double-strike the Kensai gets, the Tempest gets 4 off-hand procs.
Kensai (without Power Surge) get +9 to +10 damage vs the Tempest Rangers +14. That's a difference of 4-5 points of damage a swing. The increased crit range closes the gap again. Power Surge finally makes the Kensai pull ahead.

Keep in mind that offhand hits are only using half the strength bonus. Also, make sure you factor in the situational Haste Boosts. And finally, although you did mention it, I think you underestimate the power of the extended critical range, especially combined with the inherent seeker effect, bonus seeker items, and a high crit multiplier weapon (Like Daxe, Kopesh, or Heavy Pick). I think even without boosts, the two are comparable. With boost, the fighter outpaces the ranger so badly it's absurd. AND THIS IS AGAINST THEIR FAVORED ENEMY. If you remove favored enemy from the equation, which happens often enough to be significant, you drop the Ranger damage by 14 points, making it *so* inferior that there's no point in even comparing the two. Frankly, in a non-Favored Enemy situation, a ranger would have to use on-hit/on-crit effects to even compete (Though Tempests are great with vorpals, i will give them that)

I do agree that Rangers could use a little something, but so far am not convinced that - all other things equal - the difference between a dps specced Tempest is as far behind as some people would like make it out.

I obviously disagree

That said, my personal favorite solution would be to change the Tempest Pre to stances. (...)

This is an interesting idea. Stances seems like an interesting and complex solution. My question to you: Would +2 damage be worth going for tempest III, when you could take 6 levels of fighter instead, get the same benefit from Weapon Specialization, as well as haste boost, bonus strength, more hitpoints, and Kensai I?

(...) Can you use that big brain of yours to propose a way to make zen archery a good idea so my cleric can use a bow like a big girl.

Yes I can First and foremost, full ranged overhaul. Speed increase or whathaveyou so that even character who don't have enough feats to invest in the large number of ranged feats will still see some benefit. Second, change the prerequisites on ranged feats to be "# Dex, or Zen Archery AND # Wisdom" (eg. Precise Shot would require 19 Dex, or Zen Archery and 19 Wisdom).

Currently, the biggest flaw in Zen Archery is that Archery requires a significant amount of feats to be any kind of good, but those feats have a minimum base dex requirement. If you are going to meet the dex requirement for those feats (especially by having a base 19 dex for improved precise shot) then you usually have more than enough dex to make Zen Archery unnecessary. The benefit of Zen Archery is supposed to be that a high wisdom character can ignore dexterity, and still be good at ranged combat. The current mechanics of ranged combat and ranged feats, however, make this not true.

I suggest asking this in the Cleric sub-forum, or starting another thread here if you want to make a suggestion on that build. This is a suggestion thread specifically based on improving the Ranger class.

It is atleast tangentially related, and is a good opportunity to again point out the flaws in Ranged combat. Besides, shes a friend of mine who I pestered to come show her support ^_^

Tempest III does need looking at, as currently there is no way I'd push 18 levels of Ranger for that as it is currently. There also needs to be a melee capstone, or at least a non-ranged capstone which competes with a single level of rogue for better UMD, and/or a level in monk or Fighter for an extra feat.

Fully agreed.

please dont take away my bush!!! I like my bush!!!!!

I have so many responses to this... but most of them are completely inappropriate for this forum. On a serious note, no one is advocating the removal of Spike Growth, but i would like to see it "Adjusted" to be less awful when cast by a ranger.

*PHEW* Another giant response thread down! Thank you all for contributing. Even more and better ideas are being brought to the table! If you feel that any of these suggestions are worthy of implementation, please keep coming back and commenting to keep this thread alive so that it will hopefully get some kind of attention from the DDO staff.

[Alabore]

Yay!
Red.

Having Monstrous humanoid stay the same and combining Gnolls, Goblinoids and Orcs would make both groups rather unattractive.

I guess problem basically boils down to: each group should encompass a fair share of boss, tough and fodder foes - just the way you said.

Since most medium sized humanoids tend to lack significant DR, and allegedly share similar anatomy - which is what I guess makes a ranger more effective at killing them - a large class of easier foes should be reasonably well balanced against a smaller class of tougher creatures.

Also, favoured groups should be balanced against Undead - which is the benchmark category with boss, tough and fodder-class enemies.

However, your suggestion that some enemy types might be able to straddle two different Favored Enemy Categories...

To be fair, it is not my suggestion, it is just the way DDO works: unless memory is playing tricks on me, I recall some foes shared more than one type class.

If Rangers are going to be doing more damage than anyone else to 75% of the game content, that would make them unbalanced versus fighters and barbarians, I'd say.

We could argue it is the other way around: they do 25% LESS on the rest of the enemy crowd.
I am not a number cruncher, but I'm fairly sure some players claim Favoured Enemy barely puts Ranger on par with Fighters/Barbarians.
Raising the line to 60-75% simply reduces the perceived gap.

However, this is a point that could use some discussion: Where do we draw the line, for the sake of balance?

I tend to draw my lines on paper, and my blades at foes.

[hermespan]

I'd like to see a 20% increase in base ranged speed, drop the capstone boost to 5% and have it apply to both melee and ranged attack speed.

This would make it worthwhile to drop that level of rogue and monk and make the capstone as useful to melee rangers as it is to ranged rangers.

That would make the most sense to me... I think they over did it with the U5 speed nerf. -5% would have put rangers in line with everyone else, somewhere near the middle of the top dps list, -10% *emasculated* Tempest III.