|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 7:48AM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2011
|
Suppose I should have mentioned this: the "legendary" weapon is the only weapon our character would want to use/is allowed to.
Would those two be better? I just figured Snow Tiger because it gave a straight bonus to daggers whether you're throwing them or not.
Yeah, I really wish there was something to be done about that. (Honestly I wish the restriction on superior weapons wasn't there, but what're you gonna do?) Technically I can forgo taking the weapon, but we're going to be a campaign where magic items are slightly rarer, so this would save time and money. And eventually it's going to be better than any other similar weapon I could get.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 7:52AM
#12
|
|
|
OK then, I would strongly recommend taking this up with your DM, because you are playing a class whose melee-capable incarnations are all based around two weapon fighting, and he's basically shutting your concept down as a result.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 7:54AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2011
|
Not completely. I went with the hunter-style ranger, the one that can move between melee and ranged.
I could always use a different character that would be able to use a better weapon, even with the restrictions. I just picked this one because we were about even on melee and ranged. We have a wizard, sorcerer, pacifict cleric, fighter (defender), pursuit avenger, and a rogue. As long as it's not boring, I'm pretty much open to any suggestions. Looking at it now, it looks like we might need another defender or leader...
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 7:57AM
#14
|
|
|
Yes, and that one's also based around two weapon fighting. Either swapping between bow and swords, or going rapier/dagger, or gythka.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 7:59AM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Which still is based completely around Twin Strike, and if you don't do that you won't be even remotely close to optimized.
If you can manage to remove the superior weapon restriction (really would recommend this...kindof screws over any weapon-using class, especially the strikers), then you can go with Spiked Chain Training and get a good double weapon. Market it as a unique weapon being even more legendary as a result and only you know how to use it properly.
There are some basic facts, though:
- You will not be able to get one weapon that's equally good for melee and ranged (other than the dagger, which sucks for rangers).
- Rangers, more so than most other classes, are generally expected to use more than one weapon.
- Your DM's conditions put an undue burden on you. Try to discuss them a little to find something that works, otherwise you really can't do your concept.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 8:02AM
#16
|
|
|
Which still is based completely around Twin Strike, and if you don't do that you won't be even remotely close to optimized.
Well, to be fair, they initially had another option, but then they over-nerfed Throw & Stab.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 8:03AM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
True, but even pre-nerf T&S used two weapons.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 8:09AM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2011
|
Y'know, the more I think about it, the less useful this character seems in this party. We have a wizard, sorcerer, pacifict cleric, fighter (defender), a melee dagger rogue, and a pursuit avenger joining once Winter Break starts. Looking at it, it seems we need a defender or leader more than a melee/ranged striker. And the dagger rogue can basically do what this character can, but is meant to do it with a dagger, and thus can get better results.
Should I just scrap this ranger? And if so, suggestions on someone else to put in?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 8:12AM
#19
|
|
|
CHA Paladin, possibly?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 16, 2011 - 8:13AM
#20
|
|
|
Full offense Killswitch variant, or maybe an Illusion of Hope style build.
t~
|
|
|
