My breakdown of ranger kits:

Ranger pure class - they make fine tanks, I use Minsc all the time because he is so lovable and funny and I set him up with 2 armor of faiths and a doom spell, 2 slow poisons and a resist fire/cold spell and 2 dispel magics a summon insects spell. You can never get enough dispel magics! He carries red dragon armour and shadow dragon armour, dual wields with his plate mail on and uses 2 handed sword/composite long bow with his shadow dragon armour. I just use studded leather/full plate till I get the dragon gear. Most of the time he is in the leather, it is only for tough combat he is in plate mail. A very flexible tank.

Archer - this guy does far more physical damage than any other class to most enemies in the game. Nuff said really. He is a ranger so can hold his own in melee combat too. They make excellent scouts and have such a low thaco with missiles, that they just about never miss.

Stalker - Better thaco than a fighter/thief, a few spells too. Don't underestimate priest spells of any level. Armour of Faith and Doom rock. When you get him in some heavily enchanted leather or shadow scales/elven chain he can tank upfront without much problem. His backstab rocks.

BeatMaster - Never played one, not my sort of character when I look at the kit description.

I don't think a fighter could beat a ranger in melee to be honest. Perhaps a zerker could, but I doubt it. Armour of faith at level 34 + Hardiness is like 85% physical damage resist or something crazy. Then the doom spell too, -2 thaco with no chance to save.

I don't see how any paladin could beat a ranger either.

Armor of Faith caps at 25%. So... AoF + Hardiness = 65%.

Why can't a Paladin defeat a Ranger? They get more spells (one level more and more slots), can summon Skeleton Warriors and a certain ToB summon, have better saving throws, etc... ...

ADD] They get better spells too... Not only can they cast AoF and Doom, but Draw Upon Holy Might, Cure Light/Medium Wounds, Free Action, Protection from Evil 10' Radius, etc... The icing on the cake? They can Turn Undead and cast Lay on Hands.

Inquisitors blow the competition away when it comes to Dispel Magic and they have multiple zero-casting-time True Sights to boot too. They are naturally immuned to Hold and Charm.

Cavaliers are immuned to Fear, Poison and Charm, have innate resistances, have a pseudo-racial-enemy thingy against Demons and Dragons, can cast multiple Remove Fears like nobody's business.

No comments on the Undead Hunter... since the Cavalier can beat them stat for stat.

All in all... the Paladins are a very, very blessed class.

[ 09-26-2003, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: Dundee Slaytern ]

Just a bit of trivia; Archers do not have the Charm Animal ability.</font>[/QUOTE]of course they don't...thank you Six for catching that...and if we're talking about spells, then rangers definately have the offensive edge over the paladins. But paladins are more useful than rangers in the healing department and are good backups for a multiclassed cleric who may spend more spell slots on other things.

Fair enough Dundee, now I see how a Paladin can beat a Ranger [img]tongue.gif[/img] I don't know a lot about Paladins, since the lawful good alignment has meant me never playing one.

*blink* *blink*

You might want to elaborate on this point. I fail to see how.

People seem to tend to forget that with a certain fix that should have been implemented in the game(grandmastery fix), fighters blow any other fighter type away. They can easily get to 5 attacks per round (with certain magicalitems/weapons) NORMALLY, meaning, no need for GWW, meaning, critical strike with improved haste. Even when a ranger uses two things to get his resistance up to 65%, don't you think this fighter will hit him so much it does not really matter anyway? :D Think of the devastation a kensai will bring with this.

And think of the uselessness of mages when Mazzy hits them with Gesen Bow at 10 attacks/round :D

Erm... A normal, level 13 Ranger that's dual-wielding with Specialization in the on-hand has 3 1/2 attacks per round, or 7 attacks Improved Haste.

SPOILERS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Sure, the fighter will win with their one or two weapons they eventually become good at. That's why I made that point about knowing the game before playing a fighter; if you know where all of the good weapons are, and know which ones you get right away v.s. having to wait for, you can make an intelligent choice about which weapon to get grandmastery in. However, if it is your first time through the game, and you think that you are just going to find two awesome katanas lying around for your dual-wielding kensai, then you are in for a surprise. Sure, you'll find Celestial Fury, but then what else are you going to use? Dak'kon's Zerth Blade? Not very good unless you are a kensai/mage. Hindo's Doom? ToB. Of course, you can always add the item upgrade mod, but if it is your first time through I don't think most players would be doing that.

Rangers don't have that problem that much, because rather than becoming excellent with a couple of weapons they become good with a bunch of weapons. Can't find a good second katana? Then use flails instead. That's why I would recommend rangers over fighters to beginning players, then fighters over rangers for players that have been through the game before. However, without the grandmastery patch, rangers do not lag all that far behind fighters, and with their additional options (stealth, spells, etc.) actually become more useful overall.

And the fighters ONLY real advantage is being able to put 5 slots in a weapon. Not doing so means that you might as well play a ranger or paladin (unless neutral or evil, of course, then you have no choice). That's why I think multiclass fighters are messed up; they only get two slots, but if they were human and dualclassed they can get all 5 slots. Either restrict the dualclass to only putting in two slots in a weapon after they dual over (can put 5 before that if they choose), or give multiclass the ability to go to 5 slots (not the optimal solution, as this can be overbalancing).

Just because the game can be soloed with a certain class does not mean that the class does not SUCK. Especially when you take into account that the man behind the mouse was Jim, who knows the game inside & out and is also renowned for soloing Improved Ilyich with a pure Kensai. And there's also the fact that, given such things as game foreknowledge and infinite Reloads, any character could Solo all the way through.

Very few things suck in this game. Beast Masters are one of them.

Things that a Beast Master can do that an Archer cannot do better:</font>

• Archers don't get the B.M.'s piddling +15% Stealth bonus</font>
• B.M.s can put a whopping 2 points in Club and Staff</font>
• B.M.s can cast Animal Summoning 2 or 3 more times per day than an Archer can. Whoop-dee-frickin'-doo.</font>
• And let's not forget those extra 12 hitpoints from having an otherwise-useless Familiar.</font>

Actually, due to the game mechanics, it doesn't even matter if you're proficient in your offhand weapon or not. Whether your left hand is fortified with Grandmastery in the +8 Vorpal Sword of Cutchamuch, or if you don't even have a single proficiency point in the Meager Twig of Impotence, it will still add only a <u>single</u> attack to your ApR. Only the proficiency points invested in your on-hand weapon adds to your ApR. (All that proficiency in your offhand does for you is increase your offhand THAC0, damage, and Speed Factor--and since the offhand always strikes last, Speed Factor isn't even relevant.)