How do you think rangers compare wit the other fighter classes, personally id rather hav a paladin.

The Ranger is quite a strong, fun, and balanced class. (The Paladin is, too, of course.) His Stealth skill is comes in very handy, even if he can't Backstab like the Thief can, and while his selection of spells is pretty meager, he makes a decent support caster (Casts Doom right before your <u>real</u> Priest casts Greater Command, thus achieving in 1 round what would have taken you 2, etc).

Their 2 free points in Dual-weilding are also a strong bonus: Your Armor class does not matter in BG2 as much as it did in BG1 (since there are quite a few creatures whose THAC0 is so ridiculously low that they're going to hit you no matter what), which means using a Shield loses some allure....which means Dual-wielding looks like the way to go. In order to Dual-wield 2 different types of weapons at his maximum proficiency, a Ranger only needs to spend 5 proficiency points, meaning he can be at 100% potential right at the beginning of the game. A Fighter, however, would have to spend 13 proficiency points, meaning he has to wait until Level 27, well into the ToB range. (Okay, so the Fighter can eventually Dual-wield much better than the Ranger can, but look at the time difference.)

And then there's the Ranger/Cleric, quite a powerful combination. With both the Druid and Cleric halves of the Priest scroll open to you....hoo boy. A Tank under Ironskins, Righteous Magic and Armor of Faith is not someone to be taken lightly, especially when he can counter your PfMW with an Insect Plague or three.

I like rangers, especially the archer kit. It helps having a character who can deal as much damage from long range as some people can from in the melee, thus not taking as much damage...They can hide in shadows too, and that helps out...Also charming animals isn't really key in this game, but its a cool thing to have.

IMO, rangers and paladins are about equal in their power, if you know how to use them...but neither one is as powerful as the versatile Kensai ;)

I had a lot of fun taking my Archer through the game. In addition to the obviously exceptional ranged abilities, they make good scouts and can hold their own in melee.

And don't forget that the Stalker can backstab while having a significant better THAC0 than a regular thief. And that the racial enemy bonus can make some quests (e.g. the Keep) very easy early on.

SixOfSpades, notice that although you say 'maximum proficiency', reality is that Grand Mastery versus Specialization is nothing that big. I mean, who really care about 1 to damage and 1 to hit.

Really, Rangers are just as good as Fighters. However, IMO, Fighter kits are better than Ranger kits (except for the Archer).

If you download the Grand Mastery fix (the one that resets it to the true 2nd edition values), then it does make more difference. But even then, the ranger ends up being more versatile than the fighter does. The fighter can be good with a couple of weapons, while the ranger can easily do more than that. Thus, if you want your fighter to be good with bastard swords later in the game (after level 1), you can put 5 stars in it, but that is 15 levels of advancement to get that good, as compared to 6 levels for the ranger to "max out" on the skill; the ranger can max out 2.5 weapons for every one the fighter (though this does not take into account the slower advancement or the lower max level; considering those it should be more in the range of 1.5:1 or even 2:1). The fighter will be better overall with their one weapon, but the ranger can be better at multiple weapons. I guess my point is that I have always considered the fighter to be right there with the sorcerer as classes better to play after going through the game at least one time. If you put 5 stars in a weapon where you will not find many good weapons until near ToB, then you are shooting yourself in the foot. Meanwhile, you can make this mistake with the ranger and then "recover" (get max slots in another weapon more "useful") much more quickly than the fighter. They also can wield a greater variety of the good weapons you come across, and are easier to switch weapons with when better ones come along. Combining that with the two slots in dual-wield, and they can hold their own right along with the fighters.

Oh, and I think your consideration of the fighter kits are clouded by how good they are when dualed with another class. Admittedly, I think the beast master sucks, but both the archer and stalker are great kits. The kensai pure class is very hard; great offense, but major downside on the defense. Same with the wizard slayer; great abilities, but not using much in the way of magical items hurts. The berserker is probably the best rounded kit, with the least downside. Thus, I actually think that the ranger kits are about even with the fighter kits, if just evaluated as a pure class character. However, there is no comparison with a dual class , as the ranger can only dual with cleric, while the fighter kits have great dualing (i.e. kensai/mage, kensai/thief, berserker/cleric, wizard slayer/thief, etc. etc.).

Final point: I think Paladins wipe the floor with both if they belong to one of the kits. All 3 kits are solid, and since the game really doesn't implement the "law v.s. chaos" aspect in the game, it is easy enough to do the "good path" through the game and face no real moral dilemmas. Of course, if you are roleplaying correctly, you will still follow up on those things (no pickpocketing good items or stealing from shopkeepers ;) ). But even then, I think paladins kits have very few downsides as opposed to the other two classes.

[ 09-25-2003, 11:00 PM: Message edited by: Nerull ]

Nothing whatsoever wrong with a good Paladin... or a good Fighter for that matter. As compared to Fighters and Paladins, Rangers are generally more versatile, giving you more options than being a straight-up tank character, while still being able to fill the straight-up tank role. The free two points in dual-wield is definitely a huge benefit. The ranger kits allow you to delve a little further into their various alternate roles... Archer for ranged combat, Stalker for stealth, and Beast Master for more animal/nature affinity. I have nothing to add to Six of Spades's discussion of the Ranger/Cleric multiclass; keep that in mind as another solid Ranger option.

Keep in mind that there are two NPC Rangers available in the game, one a straight Ranger and one a Stalker. So if you want to try the class out a bit without making your PC a Ranger, feel free to invite one or both of them into your party and see how you like them. There's one NPC Paladin (Inquisitor), and there's four NPC Fighters (Fighter, Berserker, Fighter/Cleric dualclass, Fighter/Druid multiclass).

One more note: several posters have painted the Fighter's ability to put 5 proficiencies in a single weapon rather oddly. In the straight unmodded BG2 game, yes a Fighter can put 5 proficiencies in a single weapon, but it really adds very little over the same basic 2 proficiencies that Paladins and Rangers can do. It's certainly not like a Fighter is forced to pick a weapon and put 5 slots in it. In fact, I never allocate more than 2 proficiencies to any weapon my Fighters are using until they have 2 in every single weapon and weapon style that I ever want them to use. Even if you do want to go with the Fighter that is the grandmaster of one weapon and dual-wield, you can have that Fighter dual-wield two weapons of the same type (say 2 Long Swords)... and you can reach perfect mastery of that fighting style with only 8 proficiency slots (5 in one weapon, 3 in dual-wield) at a much more reasonable 12th level. If you have no mods installed, the bottom line is that although technically the ability to put 5 proficiency slots in a weapon is a Fighter-only advantage, in practice it's not a very big one and, at least in my opinion, not worth choosing a Fighter for over a Ranger or Paladin.

[ 09-26-2003, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Klutz ]

Just a bit of trivia; Archers do not have the Charm Animal ability.

As Nerull pointed out, installing the Grandmastery fix does mean that putting 5 stars into a weapon makes a heck of a lot of difference. As well as the -1 THAC0 and +1 Damage, it lowers the Speed Factor and (this is the important bit) adds more attacks per round. A Level 13+ Fighter, Dual-wielding 2 weapons in which he has Grandmastery, has 4.5 attacks per round. Cast Improved Haste on that guy, and you've got a whopping *9* attacks per round. Characters that can only put 2 stars in a weapon (Rangers, Paladins, Barbarians, Multiclassed Warriors) are capped at 3 attacks per round (I think), or 6 when Improved Hasted.

Oh yeah, and Beast Masters well and truly suck. If you play a Beast Master, I will come over to your house and hit you.

You sure? Jim played one solo and completed SoA-ToB. You might also find that his Beastmaster will hit harder... with a certain stick. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

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.)