Do Rangers Still Need Buffs?

[Nssheepster]

Personally I see no point in a Ranger without the pet (which is not the same as saying I think the pet is perfectly fine/balanced/etc...).  Basically what I think a lot of folks want is a way to multi in Ranger to pick up the ACC bonus and not hassle with anything else -- accommodating that doesn't seem like it should be the primary design concern for any class.  Besides, you can use Ghost Heart for that if you want.

 

Honestly I like the Acc buffs, but that's not why I want Ranger... I want Ranger because no other class is actually geared towards ranged attacking. Fighter is generically good for basically anything. Rogue is okay as ranged attackers, but only if you're okay with letting the majority of the stealth/backstab/invisiblity stuff go to the wayside.

 

Ranger is THE class for ranged attacking... And for some reason it has that random melee attacker linked with it, that it has to keep alive, while also attacking. When you put it that way... It really doesn't make as much sense does it?

[djinnxy]

I'm interested in the build and tactics you use for Arcane Archer/Trickster. Care to share? c:

Arcane Archer was something I wanted to try too at one point but hearing it was "bugged" made me not do it.

Wood Elf  AA/ Trickster 12, 12, 18, 19, 10, 6

Essence Interrupter (Secondary weapons Frostseeker or add single weapon fighting and Thundercrack pistol)

All points in passive to metaphysics

In my current play I needed a trapper so I went mechanics. If you're looking to optimize I'd consider arcana or alchemy.

 

Dirty Fighting

Fast runner

Marksman

Rapid Shot

Two Handed Style

Evasive Roll

Protective companion (bear)

Resilient companion

Escape

Shadow Step

Crippling Strike

Arterial Strike

Finishing Blow

 

That's the list to level 10. Note that after this point currently the aa abilities don't scale penetration and will fall off till it is patched. The Strategy is to be as mobile as possible and pump out as many and as accurate of shots as possible while falling back on control to stay away from the pack. Honestly I let the ai do most of the work while I crank out wiz and druid spells on the main character. Some fights I need the movement skills of one or the other class. If you are truly focused on this with a main I'd take a debuffer companion to put afflictions on. I'd list what I think should be the full build past 10, but i'm sure you can figure it out.

 

For gear

Head: Blackblade's hood

Neck: Precognition or Protective eothathasian charm

Cape: Mirrorback

Hands: Gauntlets of Accuracy

Rings: Ring of the Marksman and Ring of the Solitary Wanderer (also chameleon's touch for those tough to get traps and chests)

Boots of Speed

Belt: Upright Captains Belt or Gwynn's bridal garter

Armor: Devil of Caroc or Miscreant's 

[TheWeaver]

 

Personally I see no point in a Ranger without the pet (which is not the same as saying I think the pet is perfectly fine/balanced/etc...).  Basically what I think a lot of folks want is a way to multi in Ranger to pick up the ACC bonus and not hassle with anything else -- accommodating that doesn't seem like it should be the primary design concern for any class.  Besides, you can use Ghost Heart for that if you want.

 

Honestly I like the Acc buffs, but that's not why I want Ranger... I want Ranger because no other class is actually geared towards ranged attacking. Fighter is generically good for basically anything. Rogue is okay as ranged attackers, but only if you're okay with letting the majority of the stealth/backstab/invisiblity stuff go to the wayside.

 

Ranger is THE class for ranged attacking... And for some reason it has that random melee attacker linked with it, that it has to keep alive, while also attacking. When you put it that way... It really doesn't make as much sense does it?

 

 

 

Or... you could view it as it comes with this random melee attacker that you can use as a bodyguard to help your ranged attacker do its thing.  You don't have to put your pet on the front line and you can use it to engage anyone who comes to hassle you.  Again, I'm not saying that the pet, in its current form, on high difficulty settings fully achieves this goal.  But I also don't view playing a Ranger as having to endure a game long "escort mission".

 

I get that this is not everyone's cup of tea.  However, I think it would be very hard to design the class both with and without the pet.  As soon as you tried folks would be up in arms about the fact that there are 15+ powers that only make sense when you have a pet and how unfair that is.  Ghost Heart is about as far as you can go without really breaking things IMO (and even that gets folks mumbling about the summons overlap with Chanters).  I think it would be easier to create a Rogue sub-class that had ranged versions of Backstab, Riposte, and Persistent Distraction (which I think are the non-ranged powers of note) than it would be to create a pet-less Ranger.

Edited January 5, 2019 by TheWeaver

[baldurs_gate_2]

Frostseeker is probably the best bow for ranger at the moment, because of the multiple projectiles.

[Nssheepster]

 

 

 

Or... you could view it as it comes with this random melee attacker that you can use as a bodyguard to help your ranged attacker do its thing. 

 

I just can't view it like when the pets dies SO easily.

 

As for 'designing the class without it'.... What exactly do you LOSE? A few abilities, which could easily be replaced. Passives, but most classes don't have as many passive options as Ranger does, specifically because of the pet. Remove the pet passives and it looks like all the other classes, actually. You're not actually changing/losing a lot. I imagine the most difficult thing to replace would be the higher level abilities that rely on the pet, but... It's not like a 'Ranger' specifically needs a pet. It's not in the name, and it really only has that reputation because of prior fantasy games, and the attached lore that Rangers specifically love animals. There's nothing saying that Rangers LOVE animals, it would easily make lore sense if you claimed that some Rangers just HUNT animals, viewing them as prey.

 

I get that the two part character is some people's jam... But I'd really like a class meant for Ranged Attacks, that JUST does that. No pet, no stealth or within two meters stuff, no melee specific abilities.... And the closest we have in Deadfire is Ranger.

[dunehunter]

The issue with Druid is spiritshifting is pretty useless on PoTD, enemies got +2 AR while your spirit form has untuned Pen, and the Pen only scales with level.

[djinnxy]

The issue with Druid is spiritshifting is pretty useless on PoTD, enemies got +2 AR while your spirit form has untuned Pen, and the Pen only scales with level.

And they make shifting the auto default on the ai. It's like they said lets make them shift so they die unless they change ai. The absolute worst is the shark, though. That just is a pure death sentence if you don't delete that line from ai. The only reason to shift is if you can get out of the pack and use it for a quick heal and then shift back.

[Archaven]

Yes.

 

- fix the Wounding Shot DoT damage calculation

- make a new subclass, or adjust Ghost Heart dunno. But personally I'd like a ranger that can be played without animal companion, and has action speed or damage advantage over the base ranger.

 

i think there's enough subclass. what obsidian needs to do is revisit those subclasses and improve them. i find many of those subclass having very steep penalties while having mediocre benefits.

[Archaven]

Frostseeker is probably the best bow for ranger at the moment, because of the multiple projectiles.

 

if you are saying multiple projectiles, then what about blunderbuss?

[dunehunter]

 

Yes.

 

- fix the Wounding Shot DoT damage calculation

- make a new subclass, or adjust Ghost Heart dunno. But personally I'd like a ranger that can be played without animal companion, and has action speed or damage advantage over the base ranger.

 

i think there's enough subclass. what obsidian needs to do is revisit those subclasses and improve them. i find many of those subclass having very steep penalties while having mediocre benefits.

 

 

Yep, and some has huge bonus with very little malus.

[baldurs_gate_2]

 

Frostseeker is probably the best bow for ranger at the moment, because of the multiple projectiles.

 

if you are saying multiple projectiles, then what about blunderbuss?

 

There are two if i am correct. Without the modal, i got 2,5s recoverytime with frostseeker at the moment. I don't know, how much you can tune down the reload time of the blunderbuss.

[Elric Galad]

I think the ultimate power of the ranger as a single class is tied to the number of deathrings they will be able to trigger with a single Imbued shot after all balance is accomplished in the end of patch time.

 

Maybe mutli-shots will trigger multi death ring.

Maybe bounce will not trigger death ring anymore (I hope no).

 

I don't think it is currently more OP than the infamous Heart of Blunderbuss from Single Class barbarian or Whispers of Blunderbuss from Single Class Monk, so I hope it would still be ultimately be possible to trigger at least 3 death rings.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Elric Galad

[Boeroer]

Nick Carver said that:

 

- AoE weapons are not supposed to trigger multiple Imbue-spells (see mortars or blast)

 

- multiprojectile weapons like Blunderbuss and Frostseeker are not supposed to trigger multiple Imbue-spells

 

- and that jumps (including Driving Flight) are indeed supposed to trigger multiple Imbue-spells.

 

I know that because I got a response to several beta-patch reports I posted while testing Arcane Archer.

 

So I don't expect any more changes on that front. Just a fix of the spell scaling.

[Elric Galad]

Nick Carver said that:

 

- AoE weapons are not supposed to trigger multiple Imbue-spells (see mortars or blast)

 

- multiprojectile weapons like Blunderbuss and Frostseeker are not supposed to trigger multiple Imbue-spells

 

- and that jumps (including Driving Flight) are indeed supposed to trigger multiple Imbue-spells.

 

I know that because I got a response to several beta-patch reports I posted while testing Arcane Archer.

 

So I don't expect any more changes on that front. Just a fix of the spell scaling.

I remember you told that.

I trust you, but I don't 100% trust that Obsidian won't change its mind ^^.

 

By the way, is there weapons that have "guaranteed bounce" ? (bounce even when there is a single target, strike it twice) I heard that Fury elemental claws have this ability...

[Sanctuary]

Frostseeker is probably the best bow for ranger at the moment, because of the multiple projectiles.

 

While it seems like it's obviously one of the best, how is it better than Essence Interrupter or Spearcaster?

Anyway, right now my hireling Nature Godlike Evoker is dealing about 10% more damage than my Arcane Archer.  That's not a whopping amount more, but still more.  I don't yet have access to Driving Flight, Twinned Shot, Fireball, and obviously not Death Ring, so I'll more than likely equal, or surpass him later, but not right now.  Right now I'm trying to find a way to justify the class over simply being another Wizard.

[baldurs_gate_2]

 

Frostseeker is probably the best bow for ranger at the moment, because of the multiple projectiles.

 

While it seems like it's obviously one of the best, how is it better than Essence Interrupter or Spearcaster?

Anyway, right now my hireling Nature Godlike Evoker is dealing about 10% more damage than my Arcane Archer.  That's not a whopping amount more, but still more.  I don't yet have access to Driving Flight, Twinned Shot, Fireball, and obviously not Death Ring, so I'll more than likely equal, or surpass him later, but not right now.  Right now I'm trying to find a way to justify the class over simply being another Wizard.

 

Try it out, with driving flight ofc, i don't even have twinned shot, it would be faster with it. Most of the time i use aterial strike and accurate wounding shot.

 

I have metaphysics max with EI and i am still faster with the frostseeker.

[Sanctuary]

It also looks like they never bothered to fix (a seemingly simple fix, since pet damage just reads as your name in the combat log) the log tracking pet damage.  So my ranger is probably equal to the Evoker right now.

[Razorchain]

I can't say about single class Ranger. I have an Assassin/sharpshooter that outdamages my monk/cipher by far on upscale potd. I mostly use the pet to babysit her and intercept and knockdown enemies that go for the Ranger.

[MortyTheGobbo]

I used to want a petless ranger, but I changed my mind at one point. Without a pet, a ranger is just a dedicated shooting class. How do we balance it out with ranged rogues? And why shouldn't rangers be able to fight in melee?

 

Pillars inherits the D&D class list, and while it does remarkably well with it, the list itself is still pretty bad in itself. Giving rangers pets makes them less bland and awful than D&D rangers. That being said, it doesn't help if the pet itself is a liability. I agree with people who say it dies far too easily. Resilient Companion is practically a requirement.

 

And while I stand by pets being important to rangers... I don't feel like the game does. The class feels really unfocused, straddling the fence between a pet-owner and an accurate marksman, with some melee abilities thrown in.

Edited January 8, 2019 by MortyTheGobbo

[Nssheepster]

I used to want a petless ranger, but I changed my mind at one point. Without a pet, a ranger is just a dedicated shooting class. How do we balance it out with ranged rogues? And why shouldn't rangers be able to fight in melee?

 

Pillars inherits the D&D class list, and while it does remarkably well with it, the list itself is still pretty bad in itself. Giving rangers pets makes them less bland and awful than D&D rangers. That being said, it doesn't help if the pet itself is a liability. I agree with people who say it dies far too easily. Resilient Companion is practically a requirement.

 

And while I stand by pets being important to rangers... I don't feel like the game does. The class feels really unfocused, straddling the fence between a pet-owner and an accurate marksman, with some melee abilities thrown in.

Ranged Rogues are inherently defying their own class IMO. The Stealth is a major part of the identity of the class, and the stealth stuff doesn't work from range. And yes, it makes sense for both rangers and rogue to fight in range and melee.... Rogue is better in melee, and Ranger is better at RANGE, it's in the name. Being not as good when you are doing something that doesn't fit the class makes sense TBH.

 

I don't feel like the capability of other classes to fight from range needs to hold back Ranger.

 

And I agree about the pets, the game clearly cares but refuses to act like it.

[MortyTheGobbo]

 

I used to want a petless ranger, but I changed my mind at one point. Without a pet, a ranger is just a dedicated shooting class. How do we balance it out with ranged rogues? And why shouldn't rangers be able to fight in melee?

 

Pillars inherits the D&D class list, and while it does remarkably well with it, the list itself is still pretty bad in itself. Giving rangers pets makes them less bland and awful than D&D rangers. That being said, it doesn't help if the pet itself is a liability. I agree with people who say it dies far too easily. Resilient Companion is practically a requirement.

 

And while I stand by pets being important to rangers... I don't feel like the game does. The class feels really unfocused, straddling the fence between a pet-owner and an accurate marksman, with some melee abilities thrown in.

Ranged Rogues are inherently defying their own class IMO. The Stealth is a major part of the identity of the class, and the stealth stuff doesn't work from range. And yes, it makes sense for both rangers and rogue to fight in range and melee.... Rogue is better in melee, and Ranger is better at RANGE, it's in the name. Being not as good when you are doing something that doesn't fit the class makes sense TBH.

 

I don't feel like the capability of other classes to fight from range needs to hold back Ranger.

 

And I agree about the pets, the game clearly cares but refuses to act like it.

 

 

I ran a fighter/rogue and never used stealth once. I'm running Ydwin as a pure ranged rogue now (she was a cipher/rogue in my previous playthrough) and don't use stealth either. So it may be a major part, but hardly obligatory.

 

Still, though, I think we can agree that the game wants to make pets a key part of ranger but doesn't really follow through.

Edited January 9, 2019 by MortyTheGobbo

[Nssheepster]

It's not obligatory, no, it's clearly viable to be a ranged rogue... But the stereotype class identity is that of a sneaky, thief/assassin, strike from the dark kind of guy. Using a bow in plain sight really doesn't fit the style that's intended. It works in the game, in fact Rogue is probably the best ranged attacker as it stands... But it's not really what the class was meant for IMO.

[Elric Galad]

When you pick multiclass, optimizing one class is usually less important than optimizing synergies.

 

One might go Ranger/Skald to pile up accuracy for melee crits and just ignore the ranged stuff.

 

However, when going Single Class, it's a different story. SC Ranger worths it for Heart Piercer and Imbue Deat, so you have to go ranged. SC Rogue worths it for Vanishing Strike so you have to go melee.

[Retro1210]

This is why I use mods. The Deadfire tweak turn the Ranger into a pretty great class. Really wish Ranger stances were in the base game.

[MortyTheGobbo]

It's not obligatory, no, it's clearly viable to be a ranged rogue... But the stereotype class identity is that of a sneaky, thief/assassin, strike from the dark kind of guy. Using a bow in plain sight really doesn't fit the style that's intended. It works in the game, in fact Rogue is probably the best ranged attacker as it stands... But it's not really what the class was meant for IMO.

 

I really don't care about stereotypes and I appreciate it when they're broken.

 

Anyhow, the main issue is really that "attacks at range" is a poor class identity. Ideally, rogues, rangers and other classes would attack at range differently. Fighters aren't a "fight in melee" class, they're a durable class with interrupts. Which is if different from the barbarians' AoE-heavy debuff style.

 

The non-caster classes are very skewed towards melee, with rogues, rangers and ciphers (who are sort of half-casters) being the only three that can rely on ranged weapons. I know there's specialized builds to have the others do it too, but I'm talking about what most players will use. And rangers are sort of stuck as the one ranged-focused class, but not really.