Guide: Getting started

The reason I was asking is because I was thinking of replacing my cleric with a ranger, I have never played a game without a cleric and felt a change was in the air. I played with a druid but it wasn't really my thing.

My Party is;
sorceress human female (evocation)
fighter giant (human) male (great club)
monk werewolf (halfelf) male (unarmed)
rogue dwarf male (nimble fingers)
¿ranger? Human Male (longsword, longbow)

I wasn't planing on multiclassing anyone.

 

:-| Giant? Werewolf? I think you really hacked the game sucesfully.
Anyway, I don't know what to tell, except: nitewolf, how were you able to get a critical on 13+? Did you take improved critical for great cleaver that should be alread a keen weapon so that they should not stack together?
If so, it is a kinda of "cheat", but since the game offers it, let's use it!
Anyway, I agree about that having 4 or 5 attacks per round is a great thing but still it is not a ranger unique ability. A fighter or any melee warrior with enough dexteritry could do the same. I like the ranger because it is one of the melee classes that you may customize more!

 

I'm not claiming that the Ranger class is so poorly designed that it cannot contribute. What I'm saying is: in most reasonable situations a different class will perform better. The Ranger is not ineffective; he is inefficient.

Of course you can give a Ranger a ton of great gear and he'll fight well. And you can ask him to perform what he's been designed to do, and he'll accomplish it. But that doesn't really tell us much. You have to compare.

Survival is a useful skill, but you hardly need a Ranger to take advantage of it. Barbarians and Druids (both better classes) offer it as a class skill. And really, you don't even need it as a class skill anyway. Just have one of your other characters drop a few points into it and you'll be set. I had my Fighter drop a few points into it and I haven't had any problems.

Rangers get the two weapon fighting or archer feats for free... and that suckers a lot of people into thinking that they'll be the best archers or dual-weilders. But they're just free feats. Fighter, Rogues, and Fighter/Rogues can acquire them just as easily. What's more important is how well those feats will work with the other class abilities. Fighters contribute tons of bonus feats and Rogues bring Sneak Attack. Ranger offer Favored Enemy. The Fighter and Rogue contributions are far more valuable to dual-weilders or archers.

Speaking of Favored Enemy... abilities should always be devalued when they only work selectively. Sure, +4 to damage against fire elementals is great. But what about the other 98% of the time when you aren't attacking fire elementals? On the other hand, Weapon Specialization's +2 damage works all the time, and is far more valuable. And Sneak Attack's larger damage bonus works most of the time and is far more valuable. Having an extra feat to choose Improved Initiative is far more valuable. It's hard to see how Favored Enemy could be worth it when you consider what you are giving up. (And I'm not sure the skill bonuses are all that useful either.)

In summary, if you are willing to give up the minor Druidic abilities (animal companion and spells) you will always improve a Ranger character by making him a Fighter/Rogue instead. What you gain (feats, Sneak Attack, Uncanny Dodge, skills) is far more valuable than what you lose (Favored Enemy, tracking, BAB). If you compare -- which is essential to power-gaming -- then the Ranger becomes obviously inferior.

 

I think you're devaluing the ranger's abilities a bit too much.

The usefulness of favored enemy depends on what you pick. In ToEE, if you pick human (obvious), goblinoid (goblins, hobgoblins and bugbears) and giant (ogres, hill giants, ettins and trolls) you'll be getting those bonuses in almost every single battle, without having to catch an opponent flatfooted, without having to flank, and without having to use a particular weapon.

While tracking isn't super-useful in ToEE, it's still nice to know what enemies are in your immediate area.

With Livonya's mod, Survival ranks become more important because it determines how far away from your party random encounters start. It's nice not having your sorcerer standing nose-to-nose with a troll.

While their fighting styles are they end-all, be-all, the one advantage they have is you don't have to meet the prerequisites for the feats they duplicate. Which means you don't need to have a 15 Dex for TWF or 17 Dex for ITWF, for example. Which is especially helpful if you're using point-buy or at least not rolling repeatedly/using the console to get perfect scores.

Is it a good idea to have a ranger as your primary warrior? No. But they make a good 5th member as someone who can both deal out damage when neccessary and can accompany the rogue on scouting missions.

 

On Monks

This is one class I've never used. How about a rant from someone more experienced on how to take advantage of the monk's specialties?

I have to agree with asipmkins on rangers - saying they make a great 5th slot PC is like trying to convince your friends to pick your retarded younger brother for the team: "C'mon guys! He'll stay out of the way, promise!"

 

I think it's a matter of play styles. I almost always have a ranger in my party and have never had a problem with them being too weak.

Monks I only bother with when I feel like having a monk along. Their assorted special abilities don't translate as well from PnP into the game, IMO.

 

That is a far better use of Favored Enemy... but I still don't think it's worth all the feats, Weapon Specialization, and Sneak Attack you have to give up. It will dramatically expand the frequency that you can take advantage of the bonuses... but "almost every single battle" is still an exaggeration.

I don't find the need to flank or stick to a particular weapon all that restrictive. These are things I generally do anyway. If your experience is different, then perhaps Ranger is the class for you.

There's also the reality that you don't get all these favored enemies at once. You start off with a +2 damage to humans. For a good portion of the game, that's all you have. At 5th level you can add goblinoids. Then you go another good portion before adding giants near the end of the game.

Of course, you aren't getting Weapon Specialization until 4th level, but then you have it against everybody. Sneak Attack is immediate against most creatures if you are tactical enough to flank, feint, or get initiative. Sneak Attack also outpaces Favored Enemy when it comes to damage. An average of +3.5 at 1st level, +7 at 3rd level, +10.5 at 5th, +14 at 7th, and +17.5 at 9th. Favored Enemy is something like +2 at 1st, +4/+2 at 5th, +6/+2/+2 at 10th. That's a huge difference.

Even if we grant that Favored Enemy and Weapon Specialization or Sneak Attack are approximately equal, we still have to deal with the fact that the Fighter/Rogue gets more feats, Uncanny Dodge, and a far superior skill set.

It's a minor ability and not worth choosing a class for.

Another minor ability. Like I said, Barbarians and Druids can be just as effective, and ANY character can be an adequate substitute. I've been playing Livonya's mod and I've done just fine with my Fighter and his few points in Survival. Throwing away game spanning benefits so that a Troll doesn't start too close to your Sorcerer one or two times is not a worthy trade off. It's about proprotion.

True. But there's much more to this. The Ranger's combat styles don't work with medium or heavy armor. So you can circumvent the requirement, but then you have an AC deficiency on your hands due to low DEX and light armor. That doesn't seem like much of an advantage to me. (And obviously, this is even worse if you choose the archery combat style. What use is getting free archery feats if your DEX is low?)

The low-DEX Ranger doesn't make much sense. Unless you're fortunate to get lots of high rolls, Rangers are usually high-DEX with mediocre Strength scores. This means you probably have to pick up Weapon Finesse, using up another one of your scarce feat selections, so you can hit people. And it's generally understood that TWF, particularly coupled with low Strength, pales in comparison to a high-STR character using a two-handed weapon. The TWF Ranger is just set onto the path of melee mediocrity.

Of course, the Rogue is the one good exception to this. Because of his huge Sneak Attack bonuses, he actually benefits from the extra attacks TWF provides. This is the main reason that the best TWF have a good portion of Rogue levels.

Again, I'm not trying to say that the Ranger doesn't work. But I still believe that you could swap almost any class into the 5th-man spot and get some improvement. You can make a better archer. You can make a better melee warrior. You can make a better scout.

 

To clarify: Rangers are not "too weak". I have never made that claim. But that doesn't mean you can't make something better.

 

I'm planning on giving a Monk a try on my next play through, so this is mostly speculation. It's probably best avoided by beginners, who should pick something simpler, but it could make a reasonable 5th man candidate for a more experienced player. I certainly prefer it to the Ranger as the Monk can play a unique role that isn't well covered by another class.

While a Monk can make an adequate 2nd or 3rd melee character... it seems it's specialty would be to quickly move around the battlefield and take out enemy spellcasters. He's got Tumble, enhanced movement speed, great saving throws, Evasion/Improve Evasion, multiple attacks, Stunning Fist, Combat Reflexes, and Improved Trip. (Those last three feats are free, which means you still have 4-5 feats to further strengthen your Monk.)

The problems are that you'll want good ability scores in four stats -- STR, DEX, CON, and WIS -- which might be hard to come by. And a lot would also depend on what kind of Monk equipment is available in the game.

 

You'll also have a lower BAB and weaker saving throws, particularly Will. It also depends on how you balance your class split. If you go for a straight 5/5 split you end up with one more feat than a ranger (if you count the weapon style feats) and 4 less skill points by 10th level. Obviously leaning more towards one class or another will change the equation, but it won't truly make the character any "better" than the even split, just different.

Monks are great for taking out mages (even more so in PnP when they can actually grapple) but while they have a whole lot of options, they don't really excel in any one thing. Also creatures with DR give them a hard time unless you craft them weapons to deal with it, but said weapons will do less damage than their unarmed strike against most opponents, so you'll want to give them Quick Draw so they can make use of their large number of attacks. Making use of improved trip requires a high strength or limiting it's use to obviously physically weak opponents like mages. Likewise, stunning fist rarely works against anything that wouldn't go down from a round or two of concentrated pummeling anyway.

There also really isn't much in the way of monk equipment in the game, though I believe Liv is working to change that with her mod.

 

5/5 wouldn't seem to make much sense. I think 6 Rogue/4 Fighter would probably be the best choice. And yes, you would be down -2 BAB. It seems to me that Will saves would be the same, and you'd be -1 on Fortitude and Reflex saves. So there are some slight loses there.

You would get less slightly skill points, but I think what's more important is how many class skills you would gain. Having all these class skills will cause your skill points to go much farther, and that's why I think the Rogue/Fighter has a clear advantage to the Ranger when it comes to skills.

 

I have started to really enjoy playing ToEE with a monk, because of the large amount of skill points they get at creation they make a good diplomat/party leader. Also with my monk I used weapon focus unarmed strike, which turned out awesome, when I was Clearing the moat house I decided to fight the Gnolls and almost killed every one single handedly, because of the AOOs the he got and the damage that he was doing was about the same as my fighter, weapon focus great axe. Later when I had killed Lareth I gave him Lareths staff of striking and it took this attack bonus down.

I tryed a ranger with longbow and greatsword they were ok but the fighter and monk made them alittle redundant on the melee side. Really I need some one with good ranged attacks.

 

Archers can have problems with accuracy and damage compared to melee characters. These are the basic things you'll want to do minimize those problems.

1. High Dexterity. Start with 18 or 20, depending on your race, and boost it every chance you get -- bonus ability points, spells, equipment, etc.

2. Get 16 in Strength and pick up the best composite longbow as soon as possible. This will significantly increase your damage output.

3. Acquire Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, and Rapid Shot as soon as possible. Use Rapid Shot constantly. After that, look into getting Weapon Focus (longbow) and, if you're a Fighter, Weapon Specialization (longbow).

 

wow, so many responses.

I wanted to point something out. someone mentioned stealth classes, stealth has been made -almost- useless in this game (and in most dnd computer games). Why? because while normally you get XP for bypassing a situation, in the computer game you only get xp for KILLING an opponent, that means non leathal attacks and sneaking past enemies (while stealing their stuff) leaves you behind on the XP curve.

Someone asked about monks. Monks start out as average fighters, and end up very very interesting.
Their specials abilities make them immune to poison, disease, anything mind affecting, and can heal with a thought (twice their level in HP per day divided any which way they choose)... they could survive falls from orbit, climb mountains unaided, break adamantium with their bare hands, and run on the ceiling. Ofcourse, they can't use that mobility and cool stuff in computer games, only in the table top version.
In the game, they will later on become the hardest character to hit. At higher levels their AC is so high that practically nothing can hit them. But their AC is too low to hit anything. As a result you end up with a fight where you only hit on a critical. At level 10 they are still hitting often enough, but their DAMAGE is way too low.
In this game monks weapons were programmed correctly (mostly) and a monk can use his abilities with conjunction with his weapons. This is the key to making them effective. Get a masterwork quarterstaff or some other monk weapon, and magic the hell out of it. Yes the monk hands will be treated as +X lawful adamantium weapons at level 20... but its just not enough on the treck there (and the game is normally capped at 10, in which you only get a +2 enhancement without the specials). A +5 flaming holy staff of frost goes a long way to making the monk more effective.
Alternatively, give them an amulet of mighty fists +5.
Another good item for them is +5 braclets of AC.

Basically the best strategy with a monk is to run them up close to the enemy at the very begining to catch the enemies attention. They will try and fail to hit the monk, who will try and fail to hit them. Then you run up there with your crazy damage dealers and slay the things... A powerful archer, a warrior weilding scather, and a mage blasting with area effect spells do the trick.

 

As far as I've seen,
1. the keen ability dosen't work
2.You can take any feat for any weapon, regardless of compatability, and
3. I'm not sure the exact 'to hit' number, but I know the cleaver has the best range,
and my ranger was one of my best warriors, except the fighter with the spiked chain of Thorns and whirlwind attack (and great cleave, of course).