lack of GM and the free pips in DW let them specialize in many weapons, so if they loose from one side they gain from the other as they can pick whatever weapon is best in a given situation with a big chance of having 2 pips in it.
when they are DW they can benefit of the bonuses of 2 weapons, being them more damage against a creature type or an immunity to what that creature can cause, fear, level drain and so on, and at high levels they can gww dragons with the anti dragon halberd, they can slow with the FoA, vorpal with the silver sword , do massive damage with impaler or ram.
you can equip them with the best armor to let them tank better or use their stealth, and even if their attack from shadows don't get multiplier if done with impaler or ram hurts, with the anti undead hammer has a chance to take out the enemy in one hit. hasted or with boots of speed they can retreat, hide again and repeat.
the not kitted ranger is not the most powerful class, but has its own unique capabilities, that i suspect only few of us use at best , and a great versatility as they can tank, flank, use at best the weapons that are situational but the fighters with gm have no pips into, hide and scout and even cast some druid spell, few of them are level depending and in end game become quite useful.
sadly there are too many classes that the ranger con not dual into, but to play a ranger charname is possible, he will not lack power, even if is not the best PG choice, the stronghold is not bad, good rp content and some battles, the racial enemy bonuses and the chance to finally learn how to use at best the "not useful" hide in shadows and low level druid spells.
we tend to focus more on charname for some reason, even if minsc has good superminmaxed stats and is as good as charname.
at worst the next run we will be more capable to use minsc at his full potential and not only as an iferior fighter as i usually see in YT videos and read in threads.
Having fighter thac0 and ability to specialize in and use all weapons and armor makes rangers an amazing class till late ToB.
Why use one instead of fighter? Your own post answers it: you got a cool portrait and a roleplaying reason to play one.
Dont get me wrong, archers are one of the best warriors, and stalkers are fun, but except rp reasons, why choose vanilla ranger instead of fighter, or kits. Faster progression, same armor, weapons but with gm. Yes the stronghold is fun, i love with an archer.
I consider armor of faith (AOF) as a rather nifty spell.
The favoured enemy (demonic/fell) is also notable.
GM is nice, but AOF turns the tables a bit. Making the ranger a better tank. With all the other kits the ranger isnt unique anymore, but its has merit. A tanky demon slayer?
Dont get me wrong, archers are one of the best warriors, and stalkers are fun, but except rp reasons, why choose vanilla ranger instead of fighter, or kits. Faster progression, same armor, weapons but with gm. Yes the stronghold is fun, i love with an archer.
as i had already told the druid spells, and i was thinking mainly at AOF that coupled with hardiness and items can give a huge damage reduction at high levels and with end game equipment.
but also versatility in weapons, versatility in tactics with the hide in shadows option always there, racial enemy, a better stronghold, both as rp and as battles involved, and the fact that to be a ranger is cool, to be a fighter... is less cool.
is the unkitted ranger powerful as his kits or as a kitted warrior? surely not.
how he compares to a not kitted one? probably on the same level of power, but only if all the factors that i mention are actually used, if used as you would use a fighter, always with the best plate mail, the same weapons and forgetting his spells is less effective as he looses 1/2 attack and some damage from not having gm.
is optimizing charname every time for the maximum power every time so important?
only for some of us, other ones like to play different classes, or even use charnames with low not so minmaxed stats and the hp dice roll leveling up, as the game becomes less forgiving and more challenging.
and going for the maximum power possible i would anyway avoid both the not kitted warrior and ranger,
F->M, FM, RC (with access to high level druid spells, but also without it, 25 str at will alone is a crazy bonus), FT, F->C seem to me much better choices PG wise.
my FM can take down an enemy only a little slower then korgan, the best npc warrior in game, using his weapons, but can haste himself, can protect himself much better and has other options, ie throwing in a sequencer, a trigger and a pre set CC in 2 battle rounds only and taking very little time to his weapon usage, at lower levels can use wands for the same effect, having the spike of damage.
and my F->M, even a F9 dual, is effective with his weapons until late tob, if crom is used OH to boost his thac0 and dmg, but late game this is only his lesser power, what the mage part can do triumph, up to the power version of the infinite spell strategy that let him unleash 2 spellbooks under time stop recharging the spells used for the combo in the process (for EE at the cost of a lev 1 spell and after extracting improved alacrity and renaming as aaaimproved alacrity).
still to play a plain fighter has his fun value, and play a plain ranger is almost as effective having more fun value, as you can use spells, change weapons to suit the enemies, equip a lesser armor and scout or use skirmish tactics like hit from the shadows, run away luring some enemies far from their support mages, hide and hit them again then kill them with regular attacks.
those rogue like tactics can make a lot easier battles like the one against tarnor, if you have cleared the rakshasa and his helpers before, the sunia ambush, the oasis, the battles in sendai lair before the boss, the yaga sura stronghold, where placing your party in the right spot and using a ranger and his hide in shadows to move the enemies where you want can be much more important then few ac points more or a little less damage made by the ranger himself.
a ranger can, and should, hide in shadows in so many situations in the game. if he does not do it is only a player's fault, not a class limitation. this is true well beyond the missed stab multiplier that the stalker has, the main point of doing it is the tactical value, control over the battle and better use of the battlefield features, not the damage of the stab, that is welcome if present but at the cost of some limitations, ie impossibility to go for the better ac when it is the better choice, and in some battles it is the winning strategy, so the stalker has to invent something, like having mages making him invisible or waste invisibility potions, to lend some stabs during the battle, to keep up as usefulness in the situations where he and his stabs can not kill full dungeons almost alone.
Vanilla ranger has the fun value equal to vanilla fighter, but with slower advancing. Using its weak stealth is not much in a party, always some who can do better. Minor druidic spells are nor even worth to mention. Racial enemy is a low level feature because there is no advancement of it. But not compare vanilla fighter to fm, fmc, f-m or any other op multi, dual classes because its another story.
I just thinking about, how should be powering a little rangers to be worth the slower xp rate.
Tanky demon slayer is cavalier. Aof is not that gamebraking to equal the cons unfotunately.
I get your drift, but I consider the “Tanky Lawful Good and must abide the paladin code demon slayer” is the cavalier.
The BG and IWD sagas give much leeway to playing a paladin, and that they fall at the same point as a ranger is perhaps one of those.
But if playing PNP or just role playing a bit, the differences come to life. A ranger is another take on the good figther, just less bound by honour and code. I see the unkitted ranger as a fighter type jack of all trades. It is not an expert, but can do many things well. It has its perk, but doesn’t stand out in just one category.
When compared to a paladin, the paladin should be (and is) better. But the paladin is just that much more of a hassle to play - when roleplaying.
Tanky demon slayer is cavalier. Aof is not that gamebraking to equal the cons unfotunately.
I get your drift, but I consider the “Tanky Lawful Good and must abide the paladin code demon slayer” is the cavalier.
The BG and IWD sagas give much leeway to playing a paladin, and that they fall at the same point as a ranger is perhaps one of those.
Maybe a witch hunter type ranger should be good, like wizard slayer abilities and minor druidic spells.whatever.
Btw the ranger is hardly a jack of all trades, all it can do, a fighter can do better (except stealth).
up to 25% of damage reduction from aof, 3 rounds + 1round/level is not bad, stacking it with the flail gives a 45%, almost as doubling the ranger's hp if he is taking only physical damage, not game breaking but useful.
if we weight the the less damage taken by a ranger against the more damage output of a fighter probably the ranger has more chance to survive as survival for fighter types is equal to doing more damage then the damage that is taken.
and it is true that a thief can also hide in shadows, if in the party there is a proper one and not an imoen like one. also the thief, if is not a FT or FMT, can stab the casters, but lacks the thac0 to consistenly hit well armored foe, even with the bonus from hitting when invisible, while a free attack from a ranger with impaler or the staff of the ram has much more chance to be successful against a well protected character, with str bonuses is always a good way to start a battle. also having a thief able to stab nothing prevents to have 2 toons that do it at the same time, the thief can focus on a mage and the ranger on a well protected helper.
is completely up to the player to use effectively the stealth skill of a plain ranger, but if he doesn't it is only his choice, his play style, and doesn't make the ability less powerful, because in other hands it can be so.
i agree that the racial enemy is situational and late game less important, but it can be useful earlier.
if you prefer to use a fighter instead of a ranger feel free to do it, maybe with your play style it is the right choice, i find them both on about the same level of power, maybe the ranger even more useful, because i use the stealth in a tactical way, to place the enemies where i want, driving the fighters far from the mages, and because in the game there are a lot of situational weapons that are effective and that i use with my multi or my plain rangers, while with the fighters i always go for the weapons where they have invested more pips into. a ranger, with the free pips in DW, can specialize in a lot of weapons while still getting 3 pips in dw and 1 in 2H weapon style.
But not compare vanilla fighter to fm, fmc, f-m or any other op multi, dual classes because its another story.
i was thinking about it and imo it is not.
as long as we consider the grand scheme of all the possible builds in the game.
it that grand scheme most of the multi and dual are on the power side, together with some classes and kits, monk for the late game, sorcerer, wild mage.
most of the kits are in the high side of the middle part of the scheme, a berseker is more powerful then a not kitted warrior but outside of few demilich battles not so much.
the warrior type classes, unkitted, sit right in the middle of the scheme, and ranger and fighter are really close if we look to the whole figure.
to bring multi and dual to this discussion is to tell that comparing the power of a plain fighter vs a plain ranger is arguing on details, that to beat the game are quite not relevant at all.
if in a scale that goes from 0 to 10 one is at 5.0 and the other is at 5.1 after all there is almost no difference, some classes and multi/dual builds are anyway well ahead and few classes and some wrong dual builds are well behind both of them.
The ranger is pretty darn similar to the fighter. Having 5 pips in 2-3 weapons is almost as good as having 5 pips in one weapon (at least in EE, which buffed Grandmastery); Armor of Faith is cast at 8 levels below the ranger's level and therefore is shorter-lived and weaker than the description might suggest; racial enemies are very good against a very small number of critters; stealth is useful but conflicts with the armor that both classes will usually be wearing; and trading slightly slower level progression for free pips in dual wielding is a good deal.
The real advantage of the fighter is that you can play as a halfling, dwarf, gnome, or half-orc, all of which enjoy distinct advantages over the other races. I'd say that gives the advantage to the fighter simply because +5 to saving throws from the shorty save bonuses is extremely useful in a game where saving throws can make or break a fight. I play no-reload, so those save bonuses outweigh all of the ranger's collective bonuses, but for a regular run, the pendulum could swing either way.
yes the fewer races that a ranger is allowed to be and the fewer classes he is allowed to dual into are his main weakness, even more as his kits have further limitations, while every fighter kit can dual in all the classes a plain fighter can.
also a ranger can fall, and has alignment limitations, while a fighter is more free to play as he likes.
about the stealth and the armor the stalker is tied to less protective ones, the plain ranger can use them to scout, land a free high damaging hit, then he can run away, change armor and fight with the same protection that a fighter has, and this tactic is possible in every situation where the area is large enough.
when it is not possible to swap the armor the ranger equip the best one and does not use stealth.
i don't see the problem, he can not do it in every situation, it is true, but it is something that he can do, while a fighter can not, unless he waste a potion, a ring charge or a mage's spell.
Comments
when they are DW they can benefit of the bonuses of 2 weapons, being them more damage against a creature type or an immunity to what that creature can cause, fear, level drain and so on, and at high levels they can gww dragons with the anti dragon halberd, they can slow with the FoA, vorpal with the silver sword , do massive damage with impaler or ram.
you can equip them with the best armor to let them tank better or use their stealth, and even if their attack from shadows don't get multiplier if done with impaler or ram hurts, with the anti undead hammer has a chance to take out the enemy in one hit. hasted or with boots of speed they can retreat, hide again and repeat.
the not kitted ranger is not the most powerful class, but has its own unique capabilities, that i suspect only few of us use at best
sadly there are too many classes that the ranger con not dual into, but to play a ranger charname is possible, he will not lack power, even if is not the best PG choice, the stronghold is not bad, good rp content and some battles, the racial enemy bonuses and the chance to finally learn how to use at best the "not useful" hide in shadows and low level druid spells.
we tend to focus more on charname for some reason, even if minsc has good superminmaxed stats and is as good as charname.
at worst the next run we will be more capable to use minsc at his full potential and not only as an iferior fighter as i usually see in YT videos and read in threads.
Why use one instead of fighter? Your own post answers it: you got a cool portrait and a roleplaying reason to play one.
The favoured enemy (demonic/fell) is also notable.
GM is nice, but AOF turns the tables a bit. Making the ranger a better tank. With all the other kits the ranger isnt unique anymore, but its has merit. A tanky demon slayer?
as i had already told the druid spells, and i was thinking mainly at AOF that coupled with hardiness and items can give a huge damage reduction at high levels and with end game equipment.
but also versatility in weapons, versatility in tactics with the hide in shadows option always there, racial enemy, a better stronghold, both as rp and as battles involved, and the fact that to be a ranger is cool, to be a fighter... is less cool.
is the unkitted ranger powerful as his kits or as a kitted warrior? surely not.
how he compares to a not kitted one? probably on the same level of power, but only if all the factors that i mention are actually used, if used as you would use a fighter, always with the best plate mail, the same weapons and forgetting his spells is less effective as he looses 1/2 attack and some damage from not having gm.
is optimizing charname every time for the maximum power every time so important?
only for some of us, other ones like to play different classes, or even use charnames with low not so minmaxed stats and the hp dice roll leveling up, as the game becomes less forgiving and more challenging.
and going for the maximum power possible i would anyway avoid both the not kitted warrior and ranger,
F->M, FM, RC (with access to high level druid spells, but also without it, 25 str at will alone is a crazy bonus), FT, F->C seem to me much better choices PG wise.
my FM can take down an enemy only a little slower then korgan, the best npc warrior in game, using his weapons, but can haste himself, can protect himself much better and has other options, ie throwing in a sequencer, a trigger and a pre set CC in 2 battle rounds only and taking very little time to his weapon usage, at lower levels can use wands for the same effect, having the spike of damage.
and my F->M, even a F9 dual, is effective with his weapons until late tob, if crom is used OH to boost his thac0 and dmg, but late game this is only his lesser power, what the mage part can do triumph, up to the power version of the infinite spell strategy that let him unleash 2 spellbooks under time stop recharging the spells used for the combo in the process (for EE at the cost of a lev 1 spell and after extracting improved alacrity and renaming as aaaimproved alacrity).
still to play a plain fighter has his fun value, and play a plain ranger is almost as effective having more fun value, as you can use spells, change weapons to suit the enemies, equip a lesser armor and scout or use skirmish tactics like hit from the shadows, run away luring some enemies far from their support mages, hide and hit them again then kill them with regular attacks.
those rogue like tactics can make a lot easier battles like the one against tarnor, if you have cleared the rakshasa and his helpers before, the sunia ambush, the oasis, the battles in sendai lair before the boss, the yaga sura stronghold, where placing your party in the right spot and using a ranger and his hide in shadows to move the enemies where you want can be much more important then few ac points more or a little less damage made by the ranger himself.
a ranger can, and should, hide in shadows in so many situations in the game. if he does not do it is only a player's fault, not a class limitation. this is true well beyond the missed stab multiplier that the stalker has, the main point of doing it is the tactical value, control over the battle and better use of the battlefield features, not the damage of the stab, that is welcome if present but at the cost of some limitations, ie impossibility to go for the better ac when it is the better choice, and in some battles it is the winning strategy, so the stalker has to invent something, like having mages making him invisible or waste invisibility potions, to lend some stabs during the battle, to keep up as usefulness in the situations where he and his stabs can not kill full dungeons almost alone.
I just thinking about, how should be powering a little rangers to be worth the slower xp rate.
The BG and IWD sagas give much leeway to playing a paladin, and that they fall at the same point as a ranger is perhaps one of those.
But if playing PNP or just role playing a bit, the differences come to life. A ranger is another take on the good figther, just less bound by honour and code. I see the unkitted ranger as a fighter type jack of all trades. It is not an expert, but can do many things well. It has its perk, but doesn’t stand out in just one category.
When compared to a paladin, the paladin should be (and is) better. But the paladin is just that much more of a hassle to play - when roleplaying.
Maybe a witch hunter type ranger should be good, like wizard slayer abilities and minor druidic spells.whatever.
Btw the ranger is hardly a jack of all trades, all it can do, a fighter can do better (except stealth).
if we weight the the less damage taken by a ranger against the more damage output of a fighter probably the ranger has more chance to survive as survival for fighter types is equal to doing more damage then the damage that is taken.
and it is true that a thief can also hide in shadows, if in the party there is a proper one and not an imoen like one. also the thief, if is not a FT or FMT, can stab the casters, but lacks the thac0 to consistenly hit well armored foe, even with the bonus from hitting when invisible, while a free attack from a ranger with impaler or the staff of the ram has much more chance to be successful against a well protected character, with str bonuses is always a good way to start a battle. also having a thief able to stab nothing prevents to have 2 toons that do it at the same time, the thief can focus on a mage and the ranger on a well protected helper.
is completely up to the player to use effectively the stealth skill of a plain ranger, but if he doesn't it is only his choice, his play style, and doesn't make the ability less powerful, because in other hands it can be so.
i agree that the racial enemy is situational and late game less important, but it can be useful earlier.
if you prefer to use a fighter instead of a ranger feel free to do it, maybe with your play style it is the right choice, i find them both on about the same level of power, maybe the ranger even more useful, because i use the stealth in a tactical way, to place the enemies where i want, driving the fighters far from the mages, and because in the game there are a lot of situational weapons that are effective and that i use with my multi or my plain rangers, while with the fighters i always go for the weapons where they have invested more pips into. a ranger, with the free pips in DW, can specialize in a lot of weapons while still getting 3 pips in dw and 1 in 2H weapon style.
as long as we consider the grand scheme of all the possible builds in the game.
it that grand scheme most of the multi and dual are on the power side, together with some classes and kits, monk for the late game, sorcerer, wild mage.
most of the kits are in the high side of the middle part of the scheme, a berseker is more powerful then a not kitted warrior but outside of few demilich battles not so much.
the warrior type classes, unkitted, sit right in the middle of the scheme, and ranger and fighter are really close if we look to the whole figure.
to bring multi and dual to this discussion is to tell that comparing the power of a plain fighter vs a plain ranger is arguing on details, that to beat the game are quite not relevant at all.
if in a scale that goes from 0 to 10 one is at 5.0 and the other is at 5.1 after all there is almost no difference, some classes and multi/dual builds are anyway well ahead and few classes and some wrong dual builds are well behind both of them.
The real advantage of the fighter is that you can play as a halfling, dwarf, gnome, or half-orc, all of which enjoy distinct advantages over the other races. I'd say that gives the advantage to the fighter simply because +5 to saving throws from the shorty save bonuses is extremely useful in a game where saving throws can make or break a fight. I play no-reload, so those save bonuses outweigh all of the ranger's collective bonuses, but for a regular run, the pendulum could swing either way.
also a ranger can fall, and has alignment limitations, while a fighter is more free to play as he likes.
about the stealth and the armor the stalker is tied to less protective ones, the plain ranger can use them to scout, land a free high damaging hit, then he can run away, change armor and fight with the same protection that a fighter has, and this tactic is possible in every situation where the area is large enough.
when it is not possible to swap the armor the ranger equip the best one and does not use stealth.
i don't see the problem, he can not do it in every situation, it is true, but it is something that he can do, while a fighter can not, unless he waste a potion, a ring charge or a mage's spell.