Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I think ranged characters are quite fun in this game. Rangers even get an animal companion at level 6, which they can use to tank. Tip: speak with your animal companion out of combat, and select the feed option. It will instantly and completely heal your animal companion back to full health, without having to waste healing potions or healing kits.
Actually the origin of the word Ranger doesn't have to do with using ranged weapons. It originally referred to royal game wardens who would "range" or roam over the land and in military parlance it refers to a close combat specialist. It was the former definition that Tolkien was thinking about when he created Aragorn, who became the archetypal Ranger for the early editions of D&D.
The idea of a Ranger as a ranged combat specialist comes from World of Warcraft.
That said, the 3.0 (NWN) Ranger is a horrible ranged combatant (the 3.5 and Pathfinder Rangers are better ranged combatants). If you want a Ranged combatant, you want an Arcane Archer or Divine Might archer (although those are really not new player friendly).
The main thing about the official content is that it's not friendly to dex characters at all. Strength based characters and casters have a much easier time than dex characters. The problem is, in 3.x dex characters don't get to add their ability modifier to damage with their weapons. It might not sound like much, but consider the following example:
- Human fighter with a longsword and 20 strength: He deals 1d8+5 points of damage a hit or 9.5 points of damage on average. Against an opponent with 5 points of damage reduction he deals 4.5 points of damage on average.
- Human fighter with a rapier and 20 dexterity: He deals 1d6 points of damage a hit or 3.5 on average. Against an opponent with 5 points of damage reduction he deals no damage.
Now, I'm leaving out other sources of damage like weapon enhancement bonuses and feats like Weapon Specialization, but dex fighters always deal less damage than their strength based counterparts and you really notice it against opponents with damage reduction (there are quite a few of them in the official campaigns). Normally, if I'm making a dex character, I try to multiclass to Wizard or Cleric so that I can add Flame Weapon or Darkfire to my weapons to add some damage.Good point about Aragorn, he's an awesome ranger.
Ok, let's see if im understanding this.
Basically, it's like a strength based melee character says to a dex based archer, "Any damage you can do, i can do better by a good +5 points. Because, strength modifier adds to damage, while dexterity does not."
And going for a variation like rogue with sneak attacks, or increasing critical chances with keen and feats, does not give any advantage to ranged/dex based weapons, because strength based can do it too.
Essentially. There are a couple of other things like the 1.5x strength bonus for two-handed weapons etc. but that's the gist of it. Sneak Attack does do good damage, but critical hit immune enemies are pretty common (e.g. undead), so you need a way to deal with them. NWN doesn't have the abilities that let you do 1/2 sneak attack damage against critical hit immune enemies. E.g. there's a mummy in act 1 that's quite the nightmare for most dexterity based characters.
There are two (2) mummys in act 1