Better Party

[mike_arnold_1975]

What would you prefer?

Ranger - Dual Wield - non-light weapons after lvl 4
Paladin - Tiramar - Greatsword
Cleric - Battle
Wizard - Loremaster

or

Paladin - Tirmar
Cleric - Battle
Ranger - Ranged Attack
Wizard - Loremaster

Now on the first group my Ranger can use Longswords and Rapiers with Additional damage from Frost or whatnot depending on the weapons build.

The second group I can used the Bracers of Archery and focus on giving the ranger a good bow.

The cleric usually gets the +3 Dwarven Thrower that comes cheap at the Danatar contact later in the game.

The mage a +2 staff, also cheap with the Danatar contact.

[Carog the Fat]

neither i prefer rogues over rangers, stealth expertise turns him into a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ninja

[Blackmage]

Same as Carog. Rogues are superior to Rangers. Sneak Attack is in fact reliable if you know how to Rogue properly. (Cunning Action: Hide = Sneak Attack Crit Kill)

Granted, Solasta's Ranger is improved, as their Favored Enemy deals a slight bit of bonus damage based on your characters' knowledge of those creatures. But...
1) you can't pick Humanoid because Soraks are Humanoids.
2) Meta-knowledge of the campaign dictates you'll always pick Undead and Beasts. So it's like, "what's the point of having a choice in the first place?"
3) The improved damage ain't game-changing, whereas a Rogue's Sneak Attack is racially unbiased and hits with the might of a Fireball on a crit.

My other problems with the Ranger are
4) A Ranger in melee range of enemies risks taking damage and losing their precious Hunter's Mark over a failed concentration check. Might as well just use a Fighter with heavy armor for the AC. They'll last longer.
5) we don't know if TA has fixed any of the Ranger's 6-10 features. They probably won't, meaning the class's usefulness will sink like a rock at those mid-tier levels like it does in the core D&D 5e game.

The best Paladin archetype is Motherland, because it lets you blind all enemies in 60ft for 1d4 rounds if they fail the save. This ability can completely turn around a battle you're losing in an instant, or turn a battle you're winning into a slaughter.

Battle Cleric and Sun Cleric are always good.

I'm shocked I'm not the only one who likes the underdog Loremaster subclass. But Wizards are the most powerful class in any D&D game, so it's not like their specialty matters nearly 'that' much, because any Wizard can Fireball, Polymorph, or Banish.

[Acadiantri]

Like you, I prefer the ranger. (Mainly that's a reaction to near-starvation a few times when I first played.) I get the TWF fighting style. Can still use longbow if need to. I use point buy, so I get uncanny accuracy to get 18 dex at 4th lvl. Don't find either TWF feat particularly meaningful, yet. If it turns out that there are much better longswords or other non-light weapons in the game, that may change. But if the swords are equal (in terms of enchantment), longswords do +1 average damage compared to a shortsword. With 3 swings per round that's +3 damage (if they all hit). Rather have +2 dex. Gives the same +1 damage to each swing. Also gives +1 to hit, +1 to initiative, and +1 to AC (maybe). In addition if you go with longswords, you need strength as well as dex. (If you get strength instead of dex, go with fighter.) Items can help there, but with only 3 attunable items, prefer to save for something else.

[Kasa]

Nether:
2 shock wizards, 1 with spy background, and 1 with lowlife background
2 Clerics of battle
all 4 characters dex based elves.

Covers all important skills and laguages, has high AC, initiative, damage, full casters that are perfectly capable in melee, can sneak if you wish and utility spells for exploring.
Sylvan elven clerics also means easy rations even if you don't go green mage.

[mike_arnold_1975]

I already had a DEX of 19 so TWF was good since it brought it to 20 and added the option of using heavier weapons. I have a Doomsblade Rapier and will get a Frost one to go with it.

[wolschou]

I had the most fun yet with four wizards, one green, three shock, and one of them with lowlife background. There really isn't any problem that can't be solved with four well placed fireballs. (Actually, sometimes it takes five or six...)

[Kasa]

Originally posted by wolschou:

I had the most fun yet with four wizards, one green, three shock, and one of them with lowlife background. There really isn't any problem that can't be solved with four well placed fireballs. (Actually, sometimes it takes five or six...)

Violence, if it doesn't solve your problem you're not using enough of it.

[EdrickV]

Most of my characters use both ranged weapons (or spells) and melee weapons, and switch them frequently in battle. (Can't get close enough to the next enemy to do a melee attack? Do a ranged one instead, then get into melee range the turn after.) The only ones that don't use a ranged weapon, and may not use a melee weapon much, are the wizards. They use spells instead.

[76561198007484948]

I have found through trial and error that it is possible to get by without a specified rogue. Instead have a character with the 'Lowlife' background and they automatically get to use Thieves Tools and break in to things.

[bbii]

Originally posted by EdrickV:

Most of my characters use both ranged weapons (or spells) and melee weapons, and switch them frequently in battle. (Can't get close enough to the next enemy to do a melee attack? Do a ranged one instead, then get into melee range the turn after.) The only ones that don't use a ranged weapon, and may not use a melee weapon much, are the wizards. They use spells instead.

Though an elven green mage gets bow and long sword and leather armor.
Just in case.

[Who?]

Greataxe dwarf champion fighter, 4 or 6 hits with haste mean boss die in 1 turn. Reasons over paladin is not need char or wisdom and better visual model.
Battle cleric dwarft for being meat shield and haste buff.
Dual shadow tamer for food, shoot and melee when need.
Shock sellsword elf wizard for magic, indentify, craft spell, craft magic item and not be killed easily.

[EdrickV]

Originally posted by sunseekers_:

I have found through trial and error that it is possible to get by without a specified rogue. Instead have a character with the 'Lowlife' background and they automatically get to use Thieves Tools and break in to things.

My current party has a halfling lowlife Ranger who's taking the part of a Rogue. (Traditionally, back in 2e, Rangers got access to some of the same skills Rogues used.)

[Revener]

Originally posted by EdrickV:

Most of my characters use both ranged weapons (or spells) and melee weapons, and switch them frequently in battle. (Can't get close enough to the next enemy to do a melee attack? Do a ranged one instead, then get into melee range the turn after.) The only ones that don't use a ranged weapon, and may not use a melee weapon much, are the wizards. They use spells instead.

I use a green wizard with longbow and two-handed sword. :)

[76561198007484948]

Rangers in this game seem to make pretty good burglars/thieves to the point where if you can get their dex to 18+ intiailly when you start, then you don't need an actual thief/rogue in the party as the Ranger can do the job. And be a better fighter too!

[Something completely different]

I think the green mages benefits will quickly peter out after level 5 as he doesn't get additional attacks as far as I know.

So you're back to spells or having half the attacks of the others.