Guide: Getting started

best crit range a weapon has is 18-20... ie 3 out of 20.
keen can raise it to 6 out of 20. which is 15-20

If he made improved crit stack with that he would have had 9 out of 20. 12-20.

To get 13-20, or 8 out of 20. he would have to take a weapon that had a range of 19-20, and stack 3 different doublings on it (ie. keen enchanted, keen spell, and improved crit... where they all stack somehow).

There is no way to stack so many of those legally, so it has to be a bug... and btw, if its only on 13+ then you are not using the best weapons for criticals, but a standard bladed weapon. (almost all bladed weapons have a range of 19-20/x2 a rare few have a better range. The scimatar is one of them)

 

May I add one thing about ranger and monk matters?
They are classes that fits quite well alone, they are among the most self-dependant. The advantage is having so many bonuses together and don't forget that not all classes except human and half elf may dualclass with no penalities. If you play ToEE without the cap remover, you are quite lucky because you don't exceed the limit, but without it the trick of rogue/fighter won't work. More, I want to keep my rogue as a pure class, maybe with a single fighter level for war weapon proficiency and shields, but I need my rogue to be a rogue with all skills at top. If I start multiclassing with a fighter, I'll loose many skill points and I don't want this to happen. More, Sneak attack does not always work, both because you failed initiative or because you are trying to fight a barbarian with uncanny dodge or because you are fighting an elemental or undead. Instead you are sure that ranger won't offer any bad backdraw except of not being specialized but in hunting.
About monks, I agree with the fact that they are great defenders and that there is the problem that they need 4 important stats instead than 3, like other classes. But, even if they are not great attackrs, they really have a huge Spell Resistance in ToEE too. I always hated them before of Liv's mod because I was forced to play them with a druid since he was the one that was able to craft Braciers of Mighty fists or whatever. That item allows a monk to be really proficient. Without magic items - gaunlets or staffs of your choice, he sucks just because he has the +15/+10/+5 hit progression and, even with weapon focus and weapon finesse on unharmed strike, he just isn't good enough to hit enemies alone. Definitely another great 5ht member but not somebody that may replace a real frontman in a party of 4.

 

You can use a Human, Half-Elf, Dwarf, or Halfling... or you can stay under 10th level. I think this covers most cases for most players. But yes, if you want to be an Elf and go higher than 10th level, then Rogue/Fighter will have some drawbacks.

It doesn't work all of the time, but it works most of the time. And when it does work, it's VERY effective. When it's not working, the Rogue/Fighter is much less effective in combat. In fact, a Rogue/Fighter without Sneak Attack pretty much resembles the Ranger.

 

Absolutely nothing to complain: different game styles. IMHO, ranger is still more balanced and better works as 5th man and offer some variety to the game. But I still wish to thank you for that: now we have a more complete vision of the classes

 

Actually the Will saves would be worse because you've got two poor Will save classes stacking together, which really slows things down.

Well, it depends on what skills you're looking to take. I don't really need someone to pick locks or disable traps or whatever, I already have a Rogue. The only real useful class skill for the Rogue/Fighter in this case that the Ranger is going to have to buy cross-class is Tumble.

 

i would like to point out monks DONT need 4 stats... they BENEFIT ALOT from 4 stats.

I played monks with only one high stat, its not that hard.
Its like how clerics don't NEED alot of stats really high, they just benefit from them. A cleric benefits from high str ALOT MORE then a wizard does. etc


and yes, a ranger is really self sufficient, it makes a good class for playing by oneself, or in a two people party (one DM, two players). In larger parties though, you want specialists.

 

Not in this case. A Ranger will have a +3 Will save at 10th level. A 6/4 Rogue/Fighter will have a +3 Will save at 10th level. You take the +2 from the six levels of Rogue and the +1 from the four levels of Fighter.

Of course, if you made a 5/5 build it would only be +2. But there's really no reason to make a 5/5 build. It's not very persuasive to criticize an inept character build.

I can't force you to acknowledge the value of the wide range of skill abilites that Rogue offers over the Ranger -- but I suppose I can reiterate them for everyone else.

1. Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information, Intimidate, Sense Motive. The Rogue is the only class that offers all these skills as class skills -- the Ranger offers none. Perhaps you don't talk to NPCs or you are satisfied with the basic options, but most people will find these abilities very useful. Besides being an effective combat option, the Rogue/Fighter can double as your party spokesmen, leaving the rest of your party to focus their abilities on different things.

2. Open Lock, Disable Trap. Perhaps you aren't curious what's inside chests and don't mind being zapped by the occasional trap, but most players will find these abilities useful. Yes, there are other ways around some of these obstacles, but if you have a character that can handle if for free, isn't that a benefit? Why waste spells, hit points, money, and experience?

3. Tumble. This one you acknowledged, and it is a huge advantage, particularly for the secondary warrior role this character will play. It's necessary to reach good flanking points, sneak behind enemy lines to disrupt spell casters, and escape dangerous situations. The Ranger's mobility is much more limited.

4. Use Magic Device. Rogues can use nearly any equipment and cast spells from scrolls and wands. This a huge advantage. In tough situations, the Rogue/Fighter can use this skill to become another spell caster, firing away key spells that will change the nature of the battle. The Rogue can use those scrolls that on one else in your party can access. The Rogue can open the battle with a fireball. The Ranger has little of this versatility.

5. Appraise, Sleight of Hand. The Rogue can save you money and procure other valuable items. The Ranger offers none of this.

I find it hard to believe that anybody could dismiss all these abilities at not very helpful. But, I think, even if we grant that line of reasoning, I still believe that the Fighter/Rogue is a better melee or archer build. All these skills are surplus.

 

I just noticed that I misinterpreted your argument. Your argument was that most of the Rogue skills were unnecessary because you already had a Rogue -- not that they were innately unnecessary.

(This still leaves Tumble and Use Magic Device though, and I think that's still a large advantage.)

However, I would then argue that a Ranger is largely redundant if you already have a Rogue in the party. Use the Rogue you already have like you would use the Ranger -- have him scout, and flank, and fire arrows. Use that 5th spot for something more beneficial: another front line fighter, another spellcaster, or a Druid. If you already have a Rogue then a Ranger seems to offer you very little more flexibility beyond another guy with a sword.

 

My mistake. I was trying to recall the saving throw progression from memory.

I was throwing that out there randomly as an example. I wasn't saying this was the only way to build a Fighter/Rogue. In my intial post I even mentioned you could skew it more heavily toward Fighter or Rogue for different results.

What I do with my rogue is irrelevant, as he's already a given. I never build a party without a rogue.

My arguement has been that the Ranger makes a good 5th party member, not that he can replace the functionality of one of the core 4 (Warrior, Priest, Mage and Rogue). The debate then became which was better a Ranger or a Fighter/Rogue. All I was saying was I don't see the Fighter/Rogue as being innately superior as you claim. However, I do agree that if you don't already have Rogue in your party, then the Fighter/Rogue is a better choice than the Ranger simply because of the access to the thieving and social skills.

 

or you can do like me i use a ranger/rouge cause thier skills overlap and a sneak attack on a fav enemy does awesome damage and by the time i get the elven chain she has the best ac in the party and just kicks ass all around

 

Fair enough. Let me try to clarify my arguments.

1. The Ranger makes a poor substitute for the Rogue as one of the four core classes -- I think we both agree on this.

2. The Ranger is one of the weaker choices for the 5th spot in a party that already contains a Rogue. This is because there's a lot of redundancy in how the two classes work, and out of the four archetypes the Rogue is probably the least valuable to double up on. You are usually better off bringing another Warrior, Priest, or Mage.

3. The Rogue/Fighter is more effective combat class than the Ranger anyway. It makes a better Ranger than a Ranger does. As far as combat goes, it basically divides up like this:

Rogue/Fighter
*Additional Feat
*Access to Weapon Specialization
*Sneak Attack
*Uncanny Dodge
*Tumble & Use Magic Device as class skills

Ranger
*Favored Enemy
*Slightly more HP (+4), BAB (+2), and Fortitute & Reflex saves (+1)
*Animal Companion

I've already discussed previously why I don't think Favored Enemy stacks up well against Sneak Attack & Weapon Specialization. The Animal Companion is not that big of a deal. And the HP, BAB, and saving throw penalties seem a small price to pay compared to everything else you receive. And besides, if those penalties seem troublesome you could diminish or eliminate most of them by taking more levels in Fighter instead -- this would also give you more feats. Either way, the Rogue/Fighter seems superior.

It was from this perspective that I advised anyone approaching the game from a power-gaming perspective to avoid the Ranger. You can always do something better.

 

a rogue archer beats both of these... especially because in toee they DO add their sneak attack damage to their bow attacks.. I just love sneak attacking an enemy for 40 damage with my rogue archer.

Fighters should be big and strong and tanking (and dressed like a tank)... anyone else has no business on the front lines. (except monks, which can ALSO be big and strong and instead of being armored like a tank just being monk dodge machines that cannot be hit).

 

The Ranger also has spells (Entangle at 1st level and Prot f/Energy at 2nd level are nice to have.) and there's no restriction on what race to use to avoid multiclassing XP penalties.

Is the Ranger optimal? Probably not, but I still think he's a useful addition to a party. If the point was to be as efficient as possible then every run through the game would involve the same party composition and the same feat progression, which is no fun at all. All I'm arguing is that taking a ranger is not shooting yourself in the foot.

You only get this extra damage against opponents you catch flat-footed and within 30'. After that you've got an archer with a short bow and less accuracy.

 

Yes, I considered mentioning the spells. But I didn't think they were that big of a deal. If anything they are nearly offset by the cost of having to put extra points into Wisdom in order to use them. The Rogue/Fighter can focus on more important ability scores and do much more via Use Magic Device.

I don't consider the racial restrictions to multi-classing to be a very compelling point. There are plenty of valid options for the Rogue/Fighter that avoid experience penalties. But if you're someone who only uses Gnomes -- well, then you know who you are and my points aren't very applicable to you.

I can agree with most of that... except for the identical party composition part.

 

indeed asimpkins. There are many powerful character progressions, they are diverse.

There are many not so powerful ones.

You don't have to use the same feats and classes to maintain the same level of power.