should I ditch my ranger?

[StarVid]

This is my first time starting a game from scratch on the hardest difficulty (I think insane, definitely not HoF). I notice that not only are the enemies tougher, but there are a lot more. In the orc caves I faced 4 ogres instead of just one.

This is the party I have now, they are around level 4, I think:

Paladin (Long Swords**, Maces**, Axe*)
Elven Ranger (Bows**, Long Sword**, Flail*)
Dwarven Cleric (Mace, Missle, Hammer)
Human Fighter to dual to druid at level 6 (Dagger***, Scimitar**)
Human Thief to dual to mage at level 7 (Bows, Shortsword, longsword)
Half-elven Bard (Halberds, great swords, xbows)

The ranger is a pretty tough archer, and it's nice to have the extra attack (though only with a one handed weapon and no shield). Howeve,r even with good armor, it's not a good backup tank. My cleric could probably do a better job and she's pretty weak too. With this party, (once I dual the druid), I won't have a solid backup tank. I was thinking of ditching the ranger in exchange for a demihuman (either dwarf for the resists or the gnome because I don't have one) fighter to go for 3*s in bows, GM in Axes, and Flail specialization. It'll still be a good archer, but I lose all the ranger perks (of course). That extra attack won't mean anything once I have grandmastery (as the fighter will only be 1/2 attack behind but I have an extra +2 to hit, +3 damage and faster leveling)

So what should I do? And if I pick the fighter, should I go with a dwarf (better in combat), or gnome (just to be different)?

Also, I don't think the Helm of the Trusted Defender is a good enough reason to pick a gnome. It's not much use to me to have only one party member that doesn't get fatigued.

Thanks.

[Larry_OHF]

I personally like the Ranger, although he only gets two proficencies, unlike the fighter. It is basically a cross between a druid (for spells), a light-handed fighter, and a thief. He has alot of potential for me.

However, if the ranger is the one that you are questioning...then I wold say go with what your first instinct is, and do not question it nor ponder too much on it. YOu obviously have some doubt about the ranger's ability. So, I would dump him, and try another class. You'll be happier. That is the purpose of the game, right?

[--Twilight--]

Hello,
just my opinion, but, (1) do whatever you want, (2) drop him like a rock into a lake. A half-elven ranger/cleric might be a good alternative for you, if you still want a ranger (sling, flail, hammer). A pure fighter might be better, because I wonder at how many tanks you have that you can really rely upon. Paladin, a tank; bard, a "half" tank (although he could be a very good archer); cleric, mage, druid (even dualled) are primarily spellcasters. Still, you have to create your own party balance. Try something wild.

- Twilight

[--Twilight--]

Hello,
I could be wrong, but when I experimented and dualled a fighter into a druid (and passed prior rank), the druidic weapons restrictions WERE applied. Reading the manual, I expected a druid with a crossbow and bastard sword, but the game would not let me. Maybe because I used Shadowkeeper to do the experimenting with?? I was suprised.

- Twilight

[Micah Foehammer]

You shouldn't have been surprised. Both Ranger/Clerics and FIghter/Druid BOTH suffer from weapon class restrictions whether they are dual- or multi-classed. I think the manual clearly states that Clerical weapon restrictions apply to such characters.

[Ervain Blackshealth]

at what level can the Ranger learn spells?