Community

My old nostalgic love for bow rangers has come back... It's been a while since I've seen a ranged build from you, so this is really exciting for me to see. Seems strong and interesting (like they always are). If I ever get the opportunity to try this (or a variant of it) out, I most certainly will.

Quick couple questions:

I assume Noble Adept is for the super awesome skill you get just for taking it? Don't think I noticed anything else taken from there (And I certainly wouldn't expect it).

How did you make the snapshots? Was it by hand, or via one of the character builders, then adding on to it?

And Treetop sniper? Is it really worth spending a feat to use sneak attack once an encounter? (or is there some way to increase this as well). I suppose it is moreso about the characteristic of your build to be a balls-to-the-wall dps machine as opposed to spending the feat to increase defenses or something?

And Treetop sniper? Is it really worth spending a feat to use sneak attack once an encounter? (or is there some way to increase this as well). I suppose it is moreso about the characteristic of your build to be a balls-to-the-wall dps machine as opposed to spending the feat to increase defenses or something?

Need it to use Snap Shot

Ah right. For some reason I always skip over the second part of Treetop Sniper. My bad :3

Sorry, but this thread fails to deliver, just as the last one did !

(my mental equivalent is an elf chick with a shotgun )

Where's the promised piczzz ?!!!?!?!?





On a more serious note - is your accuracy so maxed out that you don't think you need Destined Scion anymore, or do you worry about your defenses ?

On a more serious note - is your accuracy so maxed out that you don't think you need Destined Scion anymore, or do you worry about your defenses ?

Maybe it is supposed to be Destined Scion?  The level 30 snapshot shows Destined Scion as the ED, and level 26 shows Epic Recovery.

It looks like LDB was a bit up in the air about what ED he wanted to settle on.

Nice work dude, as always.  Love the name.

Instead of Sneak of Shadows at level 6, why not pick up Predatory Action and enjoy that for a couple levels, and retrain to Sneak of Shadows at level 8 when you pick up Tree Top Sniper?

Bah, gotta do everything yourself here...

This chick should be appropriately metal:




PS: There's a distinct lack of good hits when searching for "elf chick gun" on the nets. Not even some good old Shadowrun stuff it seems...

If you want something a little... simpler.

Definitely like the new build LDB, great work as always. Not trying to be a bother, but would you kindly give me a hand with the Sehanine's Radiant Starfall build? I can't seem to make it come together in the way I'd like, at least not in its full potential. Thanks.

After seeing the newly selected title picture - I want to play this character.

In the summary it is said "Destined Scion (PHB)" but I was not able to find a description for this ED neither in PHB nor anywhere else (compendium, CB...). Where is it from ?

You are normally keen on superior x-bows for ranged builds, what prompted greatbow?

You are normally keen on superior x-bows for ranged builds, what prompted greatbow?

Can't Sneak Attack with a superior crossbow anymore.

You could sneek attack with a  Rocket Launcher,


Player - Ye Mr Kobold can I talk with you?
Kobold look at player seem kinda happy to meet a Not Hostile PC  wish talk to him.

Kobold - yup what up?

Player - I try to see the moon with my Telescope but seem is malfonctionning. Bluff roll succeed.

Kobold  looking at the huge Telescope  wondering what's player trying to talking to.

Player - Can you look into the Hole and tell me if you can see the Moon ?

Kobold give a try..

In the summary it is said "Destined Scion (PHB)" but I was not able to find a description for this ED neither in PHB nor anywhere else (compendium, CB...). Where is it from ?

It's from Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms, which hasn't hit the compendium or the CB yet.

Can't Sneak Attack with a superior crossbow anymore.

But we can with a greatbow?  I love this game!  

But we can with a greatbow?  I love this game!  

If you take a particular feat, yes.  Treetop Sniper or something like that.

Elf racial feat.

Ah, that's why I can never remember it.

Bah, keep your guns out of my fantasy (game)



Also relevant: randomfunnypicture.com/wp2/wp-content/up...

It's good to see not much changed through Paragon from my friends Battlefield Archer, except the MC Rogue, where he has a few more defensive feats earlier since he likes Called Shot, which is honestly going to provoke most of the time.  I am honestly surprised Lethal Hunter wasn't taken earlier and the Rogue stuff later (DPR vs Nova), and that Predatory Action didn't make it in there, given Battlefield Archer practically guarantee's an AP every encounter.

Love the build.  I take it there was no room for Hunter's Advantage?  With almost constant CA from frost, and Hunter's quarry through Battlefield Archer, it would be an almost constant +2 damage.  Granted it's only +2 when applying Quarry damage, but everything adds up.

Also, I was looking at going Raven Knight as my Epic Destiny, and taking Running Shot . . . for the very nice defensive capabilities near end game.

Keia

I realize that what I'm about to say goes against the Twin-Strike religion, but here I go anyway:

I believe that at very early levels, when the amount of static damage dealt is still small, there is a way to get more average damage than Twin Strike: Careful Strike + True Arrow Style. This basically increases your chance of hitting significantly, both because of Careful Strike and because True Arrow's second chance to hit. Twin Strike's damage at early levels is frustratingly pitiful without many bonuses (since the main DEX mod bonus is missing, and that's significant).

Of course, I firmly agree that one should retrain to Twin Strike at a relatively early level, and also switch the feat out to something more useful. This recommendation is really only made for characters that are actually played through the lowest levels. My version is actually a Ranger/Seeker hybrid, so the freebie RBA is actually even better since that is the Seeker's specialty, but this still holds true for normal Rangers as well.

Another tiny two-level change for eking out the last bit of extra damage is to use Shadow Initiate instead of Sneak of Shadows for the two levels where you haven't yet picked up Treetop Sniper. It takes an extra round, but at least you get a benefit for the two levels where you couldn't have used Sneak Attack 'cause you're wielding a big bow.

*Covers head waiting for twin stones to be thrown at it.*

I realize that what I'm about to say goes against the Twin-Strike religion, but here I go anyway:

I believe that at very early levels, when the amount of static damage dealt is still small, there is a way to get more average damage than Twin Strike: Careful Strike + True Arrow Style. This basically increases your chance of hitting significantly, both because of Careful Strike and because True Arrow's second chance to hit. Twin Strike's damage at early levels is frustratingly pitiful without many bonuses (since the main DEX mod bonus is missing, and that's significant).

Of course, I firmly agree that one should retrain to Twin Strike at a relatively early level, and also switch the feat out to something more useful. This recommendation is really only made for characters that are actually played through the lowest levels. My version is actually a Ranger/Seeker hybrid, so the freebie RBA is actually even better since that is the Seeker's specialty, but this still holds true for normal Rangers as well.

Another tiny two-level change for eking out the last bit of extra damage is to use Shadow Initiate instead of Sneak of Shadows for the two levels where you haven't yet picked up Treetop Sniper. It takes an extra round, but at least you get a benefit for the two levels where you couldn't have used Sneak Attack 'cause you're wielding a big bow.

*Covers head waiting for twin stones to be thrown at it.*

Level 1 DPR of Twin Strike with a Greatbow counting crits, misses, chance for quarry to activate, against an even level enemy, with 20 starting Dex: 12.24.

True Arrow Style+Careful Attack with a longbow but otherwise the same assumptions (you had to spend a feat on True Arrow Style): 12.76

So barely, at level 2 Twin Strike wins with a Magic Weapon+Expertise (vs Magic Weapon+Greatbow Prof, remember you're a feat behind). 15.59 vs 15.32, Twin Strike wins. This is only DPR, the reality is because Greatbow Profiency effects all your powers it wins at level 1 for the total average damage for your character.

For a Ranger|Seeker it goes down further, because the granted RBA will not trigger quarry.

Hmm.... okay... my calculations came out differently, but I admit that I am not aware of the standard assumptions that are made for these calculations. I felt like I was ahead with Careful Strike until level 4 or so.

Not triggering quarry is okay 'cause the Seeker RBAs lay down extra riders, so I think that evens things out. 

Hmm.... okay... my calculations came out differently, but I admit that I am not aware of the standard assumptions that are made for these calculations. I felt like I was ahead with Careful Strike until level 4 or so.

Not triggering quarry is okay 'cause the Seeker RBAs lay down extra riders, so I think that evens things out. 

You're welcome to download the DPR calculator and check.

dndcalculator.blogspot.com/

It is very accurate when used properly.

The only assumption in question is that you are fighting an even level monster (level+14 AC, level+12 NADs). Everything else is just statistics based on character stats. Note that higher armor benefits Twin Strike more.

Not triggering quarry is not OK for a striker, heh. I think the chance of triggering a rider (still have to hit after all) when you happen to miss with an at-will is pretty questionable as well.

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out. In terms of accuracy, I'm sure it is extremely accurate in a sterile environment, though most such tools have some amount of disconnect with more organic conditions.

I'm confused about your comment about the chance of triggering a rider. The way your sentence is structured you're implying that the chance of triggering the rider is "pretty questionable" because you've missed with an at-will. I'm not following that logic, nor do I think that's what you mean since you seem like a logic-driven individual.

In terms of not triggering quarry, I definitely respect your opinion on that (but there's no need for the derogative "heh"). I happen to think that it's not so black and white. E.g., there are times when it makes sense to shoot at something that isn't your quarry. There are times when the rider might be more important than the damage. The very fact that the character is a Ranger/Seeker to begin with means that she isn't ultra-optimized anyway; I'm just trying to "optimize in a box," if that makes sense.

In any case, thanks for your responses - I appreciate them. 

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out. In terms of accuracy, I'm sure it is extremely accurate in a sterile environment, though most such tools have some amount of disconnect with more organic conditions.

I'm confused about your comment about the chance of triggering a rider. The way your sentence is structured you're implying that the chance of triggering the rider is "pretty questionable" because you've missed with an at-will. I'm not following that logic, nor do I think that's what you mean since you seem like a logic-driven individual.

In terms of not triggering quarry, I definitely respect your opinion on that (but there's no need for the derogative "heh"). I happen to think that it's not so black and white. E.g., there are times when it makes sense to shoot at something that isn't your quarry. There are times when the rider might be more important than the damage. The very fact that the character is a Ranger/Seeker to begin with means that she isn't ultra-optimized anyway; I'm just trying to "optimize in a box," if that makes sense.

In any case, thanks for your responses - I appreciate them. 

I always find it odd when people say that... math is math, it isn't somehow "less true" in real play. If you know you're fighting a level 3 monster and you're level 2, you know AC is probably one higher then the even level DPR calcs you made. Therefore you know Twin Strike is outright better, because Twin Strike has higher DPR against higher AC targets. The variables in "real play" are the same, the fact that the values of those variables flucutates is irrelevant since they effect all powers near equally and especially since with a relatively easy monster knowledge check you know what the values are anyway.

I mean that the Seeker attack still has to hit. So hit > yay I hit. Miss > I attack again > hit yay a rider I didn't initially plan on applying to anyone and may not be an optimal choice or I probably would have done this in the first place or miss > I got nothing from this standard action. I just don't see that as much of an upside.

"Heh" wasn't deragtory. Heh is defined as an expression of amusement, I find the idea that having quarry and not triggering quarry when you wanted to (as evidenced by the fact that you used a Ranger at-will on a hybrid to begin with) amusing. That is just a bad situation without a real upside imo.

Again, if hitting a non-quarried target with a Seeker rider is more important then damage... why you are you trying to trigger quarry initially and hoping to miss? You'd just use the Seeker at-will to begin with. True Arrow Style with a Seeker means Careful Attack has a consolation prize. My point is the prize isn't good, because if it was you would have just done that initially anyway. And it costs you a feat, one of the best At-wills in the game, and the ability to do consistent DPR (which as a 1/2 striker should be something you pay attention to). Opportunity cost is to high for to little.

[LONG UNNECESSARY QUOTE HERE]

math is math, indeed. but the complexity of math necessary describe most situations that do not occur on a chalkboard is significantly more complicated than something like the DPR calculator.

could the following situation not occur? "Hmm... what I'd really like to do is simply hit this monster and do as much damage as possible. But giving it -2 on its next turn of attacks would be good, too. In order to increase my chances of doing something useful, I'll first just try to pommel it. And if that fails, I'll try again, doing a bit less damage and applying a helpful rider." Even if applying the rider is optimal, you might still choose to attack without the rider first if it increases your overall chances of doing damage and/or applying a rider. Most people, you included I'm sure, are smart enough to see several steps ahead and plot several possible "good" outcomes that could come from a certain action, not all of which have to be "optimal." If a monster is half-dead and you're not going to kill it this round, then doing an extra 4.5 points of damage or giving it a -2 to-hit are both "good." You might be able to write a formula for which is "better," but that would get situational pretty quickly. You also might not have the information available to know which is better. In summary, I think it would be very hard to argue that getting one result instead of the other is "bad," or as you put it, doesn't have "much of an upside." In this case, the upside is very simple: the monster now has -2 to-hit. That's certainly an upside.

considered more abstractly, if it was really possible to reduce the game (or one part of the game, like combat, or even a single attack) to straight up no-arguments/no-opinions math, then the game wouldn't be very interesting. we could all sit around all night and roll dice to see who rolled higher. whee!

so in my personal opinion, your argument overly simplifies the actual situation. but of course, that is just my opinion, and from your responses so far, it seems very unlikely that it'll have any impact on your opinion. nonetheless, you've made some interesting points and definitely given me some things to think about, so i thank you for that.

re your last paragraph, remember that i only intended this for the first few levels. so it doesn't "cost me a feat" nor "one of the best At-wills in the game;" it just delays them somewhat. I'm going to have Twin Strike my whole career - why not use this other thing for a few levels since it can produce comparable results just to mix it up a bit and keep life interesting?

lastly, re "heh" etc... i'm so glad to provide you so much amusement! but honestly, if you think that the way you're writing is not derogatory, then you don't spend enough time communicating with people in real life to know what goes over well and what doesn't. you can't pretend that saying things like "you always find it odd" and "amusing" isn't derogatory. the implication is clear, and in general the author of such comments is exhibiting a need to express a feeling of superiority.

so my prediction about what's going to happen next is that you will write yet another reply, perhaps stating your points in a manner that is thinly guised as cordial, but that you can really only get away with online. and then i won't respond because i don't really see the point.

or you won't, which is fine, too. but my over-simplified response-calculator indicates that won't be able to resist...

[LONG UNNECESSARY QUOTE HERE]

First: Brevity, soul of wit.

Second, the herioic tier Seeker|Ranger is best played like this: "Do I have a Seeker power that can apply a meaningful effect this round? Something that needs its movement hampered, or something that really needs to miss? No? Twin Strike."