# Two handed weapon wielding ranger.



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 29, 2008)

I have been frustrated with a lack of crunch to support many fantasy archetypes. Granted, I am really good at reskinning things, but I also like to find elegant house rules for things that are simple, achieve the results you are after, and don't break the game. This is something that requires communication and more than one mind to get right. So here is an idea that I came up with to fill a missing archetype.

I want a two-handed-weapon ranger. Core, using THF is weak. So I propose this simple house rule.

Rangers can use any ranger power requiring them to wield two weapons whenever they use one weapon with the versatile property used two handed.

This means that 

Mace
Spear
Battleaxe
Flail
Longsword
Warhammer
Warpick
Bastard sword

could all be used by a ranger two handed.

The effects would be +1 to damage per attack, and the ranger would only have to have one magical weapon. These are all that I could think of for effects that could be called overpowered. 

I would preemptively counter these complaints with the facts that the bow ranger only has to have one magic weapon, and at the moment, the two kings of the damage-per-round race are the warhammer wielding dwarf ranger with hammer rythm and the scimitar wielding ranger with scimitar dance. This rule would increase the average damage of the hammer wielder, but only by a few points. The upside being that more fantasy archetypes can be played and reflected mechanically (as apposed to just reskinning a hammer wielding dwarf into something else).

Comments? Criticisms? Could the master optimizers advise me as to how this would compare to core? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Starglim (Dec 29, 2008)

I've thought for a long time that there should be a spear-fighting ranger path. Add some support for the greatbow and two-handed blades (for hamstring cutting) and sneak back in some variant damage by size, and you'd have a pretty good elephant hunter.

Otherwise, though, I see a distinct lack of ranger-with-bastard-sword archetypes in fantasy. Can you suggest some examples?


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 29, 2008)

I see the ranger not as a wilderness warrior archetype but as a highly mobile skirmisher. They are the heavy weaponry martial striker, where the rogue is the light weapons striker. This means that things like martial artists should fit into the ranger class. Even katana fencers could be seen as rangers. I am looking for the mobile, THF, light armor striker. Ranger game mechanics fit this better than the rogue. This is a patch to make the ranger work for this. The rogue patch would be much harder to balance. 

For wilderness warriors, battleaxe and spear fit well. 

For martial artists, flail (three-section staff), spear, longsword, and bastard sword all fit well.

I just didn't see a reason not to include the other versatile in there as well.


----------



## inkpenavenger (Dec 29, 2008)

A ranger wielding a bastard sword...let me think...

Oh yeah! Remeber ARAGORN much?

Seriously though, I think that house rule would work fine. It all comes down to description really. I would say that if you use a versatile weapon two-handed for a two-weapon power, you don't get the +1 to damage though.

Now how about this though: How would YOU houserule a ranger that wanted to fight with two, one-handed ranged weapons like light crossbows? I've been trying to wrap my head around such a gunslinger for ages!


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 29, 2008)

Just have him use the powers as normal. Why would you have to change any crunch for that? The hard part would be reloading, but that would be the same as for only one crossbow. Sorry if this comes off snarky, as it is not meant to, but I really don't see a problem. Nothing in the powers state that they have to be use with only one ranged weapon, or even a projectile weapon, so two crossbows are fine. I have played a ranger that used two javelins, both in melee and ranged.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 29, 2008)

Another possibility would be to allow the ranger to use a 2-handed weapon as their 'main' weapon, and an unarmed punch or kick or headbutt as their off-hand weapon.

The basic ranger in this situation is making an improvised unarmed strike with his off-hand attack (so no proficiency and 1d4 damage like a dagger). This probably balances out with the extra damage he is getting on his 2H weapon on his primary attacks.

If you as a DM wanted to be kind, you could allow for a new feat "Unarmed proficiency", which nobody has by default but which makes unarmed combat equivalent to a basic weapon with a +2 bonus to hit.

I think this would be a stylish approach which sticks very closely to the existing rules and has less possibilities of accidental unbalancing.

Literary example? The Justicar from Paul Kidds "Return to White Plume Mountain" who typically uses a bastard sword with associated kicks, headbutts and punches IIRC.

Heck, having described it like this _I'd_ like to play a ranger who used a 2H weapon and unarmed combat in this way!


----------



## Revinor (Dec 29, 2008)

Put a -1 to it on top of that and it should be ok. And make sure that none of other 2h weapon specific abilities/feat will count.


----------



## Omnifarious Grey (Dec 29, 2008)

PrecociousApprentice said:


> I see the ranger not as a wilderness warrior archetype but as a highly mobile skirmisher. They are the heavy weaponry martial striker, where the rogue is the light weapons striker. This means that things like martial artists should fit into the ranger class. Even katana fencers could be seen as rangers.





I personally have seen rangers as being the mobile skirmishers, however I have not seen them to be a heavy weapons wielder. Wielding a heavy weapon almost defeats the purpose of being very mobile. I am not saying it is not possible of course. I just have never considered much of a ranger into the role of a heavy weapon wielder.

I see it as most fighters are the ones who wield the big weapons, and this goes similarly with a katana fencer. Fencers in general are not rangers, but dexterous fighters that specialize in specific blows rather than chunky weapon attacks, though heavy weapons are used in some cases.

I don't know if it is just me but I personally don't see why there is a need to skin a ranger into a pseudo-fighter role to simply wield a two-handed weapon.


If you are going to though, I do like the idea of cutting down the attack bonus in order to stop the abuse of two handed weapons when used as such. For example, ranger movement and reach weapons become a bane if they can exploit them.


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 29, 2008)

I thought of the reach thing, and that is why I figured that versatile one handed weapons would work out better. That way, rangers don't actually get to use weapons that they wouldn't otherwise, and they don't get reach. I don't think that  reach would be that amazing for a ranger to get though. They already have a huge ranged thing going. Reach is really just a weaker form of ranged.

As for the unarmed/THF ranger, it could work, but it wasn't what I was going for. Think of the wuxia archetype of the bastard sword wielder, typified by the Nameless Hero in the movie Hero. They typically stick to weapon attacks, with a few kicks thrown in here and there, and they are highly mobile. 

The versatile weapons wouldn't unbalance things any because the ranger already gets to use them one handed if they want, so the damage is only increased by +1 from versatile with two hands. Since the scimitar is 1d8, and many of the versatile weapons are 1d10, the average damage would be about the same between a versatile weapon used two handed and a scimitar weilder with scimitar dance. Actually, scimitar dance should be higher in damage output by a fair degree because an extra dex mod to damage per attack is huge. The hammer wielder with hammer rythm would be up by +1 damage from normal, but this build requires a somewhat MAD build. The +1 damage on top of their already prodigious damage won't mean much for balance. 

Looking at the ranger/pit fighter builds, this house rule would add approximately an extra +2 damage at 30th level to their already huge 141 max damage with twin strike, so we have 142 instead of 140. When talking about a really optimized character, that versatile property doesn't sound huge. 

Looking at snapshots at level 1 and level 30, we could look at the ranger/pitfighter to see what the versatile property would do to them. 
[SBLOCK=Male longtooth shifter Ranger 1 (Two-Blade Style HR to THF)]Attributes: Str 18, Con 13, Dex 14, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 8
HP: 30; Bloodied: 15; Surges: 7 (7 HP) 
AC/Fort/Ref/Will: 16/15/13/13 
Speed: 5; Initiative: +2 
Basic Melee: Battle axe (two handed) (+6 vs. AC, 1d10+5 damage) 
Basic Ranged: Javelin (+6 vs. AC, 1d6+4 damage) 
At-Will: hit and run, twin strike 
Encounter: longtooth shifting, two-fanged strike 
Daily: jaws of the wolf 
Trained Skills: Athletics (+10 in chain), Endurance (+7 in chain), Nature (+8), Perception (+8), Stealth (+6 in chain) 
Feats: Armor Proficiency (chain), Toughness (Ranger) 
Gear: 2 battleaxes, 2 handaxes, chain armor, standard adventurer's kit, 5 gp 

Damage- Twin strike 1d10 (battle axe) + 1 (Versatile) x 0.5 (Attack %) x 2 (number of attacks) = 2-11 (6.5 average, normal average is 5.5) 
Damage-Jaws of the Wolf [1d10 (battle axe) x 2] +4 (STR) + 1 (Versatile) x 0.75 (Damage on attack x Attack % + damage on a miss x miss %) x 2 (number of attacks) = 10.5-37.5 (23.75 average, normal average is 22.25) 

Level 30 damage average is Pit Fighter (+6 bastard swords, +33/+31 to hit, 3 attacks with follow up blow): 6d10+3d8+59 (68-143, average 105.5, normal average is about 103.5)
+18 (enhancement bonus) 
+9 (Strength)
+21 (Wisdom) 
+9 (Weapon Focus) 
+3 (Versatile) [/SBLOCK] 
So there you have it. Early on, rangers would get a bump in average damage by about +1 per round. This is significant because it is about a 10% increase. By level 30, they only have about a 2% advantage. Not that significant.

So from this analysis, maybe the option to go 2 hander should be a feat. Seems somewhat comparable in that it is +1 damage at heroic tier. Maybe there should be a kicker to the feat, since there are feats that grant much more than +1 damage in paragon, like scimitar dance or hammer rhythm, and the TWF feat wouldn't stack with it. 

Maybe the option to use a TWF powers with a versatile weapon with two hands but not gaining any of the benefits of the versatile property would do it, and at that point, the TWF feat loss would make it actually weaker than the normal TWF ranger. Strike out the line in the ranger powers that says "You must be wielding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon" and replace it with "You must wield a one handed melee weapon or a ranged weapon. You do not gain the benefit of the versatile weapon property." This somehow makes the THF ranger weaker than the TWF ranger. 

Coming full circle in my argument with myself , I think that allowing a feat to use a versatile weapon two handed with the ranger TWF powers would be about right. You lose the TWF feat and the two weapon defense feats, but you gain a feat that in sum total give a +1 to damage per attack. Sounds balanced to me. Lets compare.

Weapon focus- +1 damage/attack, +2 in paragon, +3 in epic
Two Weapon Fighting- +1 damage/attack with main weapon.
Two-Weapon Defense- Prerequisites: Two-Weapon Fighting, +1 shield bonus to AC and Reflex.
Scimitar Dance- +Dex damage with scimitars on a miss, requires 17 dex.
Hammer Rhythm- +Con damage with hammers on a miss, requires 17 con.
Blood Thirst- +2 damage against bloodied foes 
Dragonborn Frenzy- +2 to damage/attack when bloodied. Situational.
Dwarven Weapon Training- +2 to damage/attack, plus other benefits.
Power Attack- -2 to attack,  +2 (+3 with 2 hander) in heroic, +4 (+6) in paragon, in epic +6 (+9) 

Some of these stack, some don't. The point being that you lose the ability to get the TWF and TWD feats when you wield a weapon two handed. You are then able to better take advantage of the power attack feat. Scimitar Dance doesn't stack, Hammer Rhythm does, but takes away other options and makes the character somewhat MAD. Net effect seems like a wash. To require a feat would make this an option that is not as good as Weapon Focus, maybe slightly (maybe not) better than the TWF feat. 

Seems to me that adding another Ranger fighting style would also do it pretty well.

Two-Hand Fighting Style:Because of your focus on two handed weapon melee attacks, you can wield a versatile weapon two handed for any power that requires you to wield two melee weapons to use. In addition, you gain Toughness as a bonus feat. 

This even eliminates the Stormwarden as a paragon path, an effective nerf all by itself.

Comments on either of these two ideas?
1) Make it a feat
2) Make it a Fighting Style


----------



## Omnifarious Grey (Dec 30, 2008)

As far as damage output it isn't a big deal. It seems like this build is more of a flavor class than anything. 

I was kicking around the idea for someone being able to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand.

The the three ideas are in my thread here.

Take a look at that and see if there are any ideas for them being able to use two handed weapons in a single hand for later on and let me know. Though it seems like things are moving in the right direction for you now.


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 30, 2008)

In this thread I came up with a template for the ranger that uses a versatile weapon instead of two weapon fighting. I basically removed the Quarry feature. It might underpower this form of ranger a little, but I think that the ranger is obviously the most powerful striker at the moment, and a little nerf won't hurt it that much.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 30, 2008)

PrecociousApprentice said:


> but I think that the ranger is obviously the most powerful striker at the moment, and a little nerf won't hurt it that much.




That's interesting - round our way the current consensus is that the Rogue is the most powerful striker (based primarily on his great 'to hit' and the big sneak attack damage).

Would you say the ranger is the most powerful striker because of twin attack, or for some other reason?

Cheers


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 30, 2008)

I would say that it is because of the multiattack powers and the ability to stack static bonuses. This makes it easy to get some pretty astronomical damage. The Rogue can't keep up. Rogue is good, and generally outclasses the warlock, but the ranger is hands down more potent. Taking away the quarry feature won't even them up either.


----------



## BarkingDeathSquirrel (Dec 30, 2008)

If the +1 damage from the versatile property makes the ranger using this house rule too strong at first, then just don't let them gain the damage bonus. Add a quick feat that allows the ranger to get the versatile damage bonus back, and it's, more or less, equivelant to the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 30, 2008)

PrecociousApprentice said:


> I would say that it is because of the multiattack powers and the ability to stack static bonuses.




Basically the weapon enhancement, feat bonus and such? What else?

Cheers!


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 30, 2008)

Weapon enhancement
Weapon Focus/Dwarven Weapon Training
Two Weapon Fighting
Strength Mod (Not Twin Strike)
Pit fighters can add Wisdom Mod
Stormwarden adds some nasty damage
Scimitar Dance adds Dex on a miss (yes, you get a lot of misses if you get a lot of attacks, and it brings up the average because even your misses hurt)
Hammer Rhythm adds Constitution on a miss (same as above)

You won't have all of these things at once, but it adds up.

So two different atributes adding to a big multiattack enhanced by weapon focus and two weapon fighting can add a ton of damage each attack. At higher levels, this can be 17-20 or more damage per attack. Make that six or seven attacks in a round, with a 1d0 weapon and a 1d8 Quarry, and you got in the neighborhood of 200-300 damage. Since this is multiple attacks, it can be divided up between up to seven or so enemies, or concentrated on one. Wizards can dish out big damage as well, but it isn't this big, and it is split up between a lot of enemies.

Multiattacks are kinda broke. Just like last edition.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 31, 2008)

Thanks for the helpful breakdown. I can see Pit Fighter being attractive as Wisdom is quite an important secondary stat for Rangers (I've got a funny vision of Clerics being particularly good pit fighters though. Fear the Nuns of Fury!). 

Scimitar dance sounds better for an archer ranger than a TWF ranger in many ways, as it takes advantage of the maxed out stat. Hammer Rhythm likewise isn't a primary TWF stat, although it is desirable.



PrecociousApprentice said:


> Make that six or seven attacks in a round, with a 1d0 weapon and a 1d8 Quarry




I guess I've not looked at the ranger powers as much as I thought I had - I thought they topped out at 2-3 attacks, apart from the (erratta'd) Cascade of Blades, but maybe I'm wrong - I'd benefit from any clarification you could bring there?

For a scimitar dance TWF he is using a 1d8 weapon rather than a 1d10 weapon of course, and the hunters quarry only counts once per round so multiple attacks help to land the hunters quarry but won't multiply it up (thank goodness!).

I wonder what an average twin scimitar ranger might look like?

[sblock]
Using standard array as a base, and putting him just into Paragon levels. Elf seems a good starting choice. I've added the race and level boosts in so you can see where they go:

Str 16+1+1+1 = 19
Con 12+1 = 13
Dex 13 +2+1 = 18
Int 11+1 = 12
Wis 14 +2+1 = 17
Cha 10+1 = 11

His feats include:
Weapon focus scimitar (+2 damage)
Multiclass to fighter (so he can get Pit Fighter)
Two weapon fighting (+1 damage to main weapon only)
Power Attack (+4 damage on a hit, and if I miss I do damage with scimitar dance anyway)
Lethal Hunter (so hunters quarry does d8's)
anything else (perhaps two weapon defence?)

paragon feat:
scimitar dance (+4 damage on a miss, no other modifiers apply)

Pit Fighter:
Doesn't get his pit fighter wisdom damage until 16th level, so I'll not use that yet. He will be able to bump his Wis by another point to 18 by that time.
Every other encounter he can use an action point for 'Extra Damage Action' so he can add +5 damage to up to two standard action attacks that turn, so I'll include that as an option.

We would expect him to have a +3 scimitar at this point, and two plain +3 scimitars seem well within the bounds.

Str +4, magic +3, focus +2, power attack +4, TWF +1 on main weapon.

So, this ranger would get 1d8+14 on a hit with his primary weapon, 1d8+13 with his off hand weapon. He would do 8 damage on each miss.

His best at-will is probably twin attack, where he could do between 8 (both miss), 1d8+10+2d8 (one hit) and 2d8+10+2d8 (both hit)

His best encounter powers give him two attacks (e.g. claws of the griffon, cut and run). His best Dailies likewise (Attacks on the Run, Jaws of the Wolf)

His most damaging possible attack would probably be to burn an action point for 'Extra Damage Action' and do Attacks on the Run and then Jaws of the Wolf.

Scimitar dance doesn't come into this, because they are half damage on a miss attacks.

So if he hits he does 3d8+19 + 3d8+18 + 2d8+19 + 2d8+18 +2d8 damage.

A total of 12d8+74 (86-170, average 128, 64-ish if they all miss). More if there are any criticals in there, since the scimitar is a high-crit weapon.

Whew! That is his maximum Nova option (action point and two dailies).

By 16th level he will get an extra +1 from Str and +4 from Wis on all his attacks. His Nova would be using the erratt'd Blade Cascade (is that max 5 attacks now?) and Attacks on the Run.

[/sblock]


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Dec 31, 2008)

I guess I was thinking of Follow Up Blow. It gives you an extra attack on each enemy you hit. I was thinking that it was an extra attack on each hit, not on each enemy that is hit. That would change things I guess. I also thought that there was another one similar to that, but there isn't. So looks like max of 6 attacks against one enemy. Still good. Can still add around 120 damage or so. And you can add on a couple of powers that add Wis mod to damage as well, maybe giving an extra 40 or so damage. 

It has been a while since I systematically looked at the ranger powers. I have mostly just used the low levels since about July, and hadn't factored the eratta on the quarry or Blade Cascade. Oops.


----------



## Smeelbo (Jan 16, 2009)

I'm sorry, but perhaps I misunderstand.  If I read correctly, _Two Blade Fighting Style_ allows you to _"wield a one-handed weapon in your off-hand as if it were an off-hand weapon,"_ and all _versatile_ weapons I have ever seen are _"one-handed weapons."_  Therefore, a Ranger could wield two _versatile_ weapons, one in each hand.  I would prefer to wield two _versatile_ weapons, rather than one.  The +1 damage for wielding it two-handed pales in comparison.

Or is there something I am missing?

*Smeelbo*


----------



## PrecociousApprentice (Jan 16, 2009)

With the wording of the powers, when wielding one weapon as I described would allow you to attack twice with that weapon. And get the +1 damage. Just different description than wielding two weapons.

The thing is, there is no reason to think that wielding two weapons should let you attack more than wielding one weapon. We have just internalized that D&Dism until we all think that it must be like some law of physics or something. 

You did miss the intent. It is not your fault. It is a D&Dism that runs so deep that it seems only natural for it to be that way. I just think that we could keep most of the mechanics of the ranger the way that they are written, just allow them to use only one weapon two handed instead of two weapons one handed.


----------



## Smeelbo (Jan 16, 2009)

Okies, so you're proposing an alternate Ranger build that allows them to use all Ranger powers that require _"you must be wielding two weapons"_ with a single, versatile weapon wielded in two hands.

Hmmm....that is effectively having a built-in _Paired Weapon_ (AV74), except it can have a second power, as the _"pairing"_ is effectively _"built into"_ the alternate Ranger build. That is, you could have a _Rending Waraxe_ (AV76), and use _Twin Strike_ to hit with it twice per round? Is that your intent? If so, optimizers would almost always choose your _Two Handed Fighting Style_ over the PHB's _Two Blade Fighting Style._ Worse, light blade wielders would come to demand _Twin Strike_, arguing that if a Bastard Sword wielder can attack twice a round, then a Dagger wielder certainly can. And that opens up a whole can of worms.

I played most of my _D&D_ career using the 1970's _CalTech/MIT Warlock_ rules from the _Arpanet_, which allowed four attacks per round for daggers and fists, three for most other one-handed weapons, two attacks for what we would now call _versatile_ weapons _(hand-and-a-half),_ and one attack per round for most two-handers. It took me a while to wrap my head around mostly-one-attack-per-round when I started playing 3.5, but I have to say it does simplify combat enormously. I think opening up _Twin Strike_ and its brethren Ranger abilities to two-handed weapons is a _Pandora_'s box best left sealed.

On the other hand, I do believe _Hasbro_ already intends to sell us a book where rogues will be offered a version of at-will _Twin Strike_ with light blades.

*Smeelbo*


----------



## BarkingDeathSquirrel (Jan 16, 2009)

Smeelbo said:
			
		

> I think opening up Twin Strike and its brethren Ranger abilities to two-handed weapons is a Pandora's box best left sealed.



Not really. It's only going to be Versatile weapons, ie: the Weapons a Two-Weapon Ranger is _already_ likely to be using. Granted, it only requires one weapon instead of two (making it cheaper as the game progresses up in levels), but it really would be no worse than a Two-Weapon Ranger using a double-weapon. 

Making the ability to use a Versatile weapon two-handed with Two-Weapon powers cost a feat effectively would cost the same as taking proficiency in a Double-weapon, without the inherent silly'ness of double weapons


----------



## Syrsuro (Jan 16, 2009)

PrecociousApprentice said:


> With the wording of the powers, when wielding one weapon as I described would allow you to attack twice with that weapon. And get the +1 damage. Just different description than wielding two weapons.
> .




Wait.

So they use the same weapons, still attack twice, and get a bonus of +1 to damage on each attack.

So really you are just giving them a damage bonus. Free.

Carl


----------

