Ranger vs. Wizard

[Platymus Pus]

I don't even know where to begin with this.

First off, if the ranger is an archer, Windwall. wham, bam, done.

Windwall has quite a bit of flaws to take advantage of, I don't think the wizard will like the possibly of ballista sized bolts going through it and into his face or ones made of force energy.

Of course people are assuming the wizard has prep, in a wizard vs ranger fight occurs it's likely between party members and it was probably because the wizard was being a jerk. Stupid wizards always full of themselves *mumbles*

[Gwendol]

Archery is deadly at low levels, and allows the ranger to engage at long enough range to be safe from most of what the wizard can throw at him. That will not hold true past the first few levels though, and in general the ranger is not a very powerful class. Versatile yes, but not very powerful.

[animewatcha]

Celerity + feeblemind at a save DC the ranger ain't gonna make especially with poor will save + ray of stupidity . All usable in 1 'round.' Ranger has?

[Somensjev]

ok, i'm not good at optimising, but i'll give this a try

Spoiler

Show

level 7 ranger, let's give him the elite array, now, we'll assume he's a ranged attacker, since melee stands no chance, we'll also make him an elf, for that little bonus to dexterity
so, we'd get stats somewhat like this
dex 18
str 13
con 12
int 10
wis 12
cha 8
that seem fair?
now, we'll give him the bow with the larges range increment i could find, the composite greatbow 130ft (there's probably better ones) so, you can shoot 130ft without penalty
let's enchant it
the ranger has what 20-30 thousand gold?

now, since someone says force is required let's use that, i can't find it online, so i'll assume it's a +1 enchantment, apparently seeking is also required, i could find that, and it's a +1, so that's a total +2 for about and extra 8000gp for the bow, now a composite greatbow is 200gp, and you have to make it masterwork so there's a nother what, 300 gp?

so the ranger had about 30000gp and spent 8500gp on just his bow

Spoiler

Show

now, for the wizard we'll also give him the elite array, i'll make him a gray elf, for the same +2 bonus that the ranger got

so the stats are
dex 15
con 12
str 6
int 18
wis 12
cha 10

so, he's level seven, giving him access to 3rd level spells

spells are

spell level	0	1	2	3
spells per day	6	6	6	4
bonus spells per day		1	1	1

so, let's write up a little spell list for this wizard, now, this is just stuff he should have prepared each day

0th: any
1st: alarm, shield, grease, mage armour, obscuring mist, truestrike
2nd: summon monster 2, web, darkness, invisibility, mirror image
3rd: wind wall, displacement, fly

now, the wizard has yet to spend any money, and is already a pretty good threat, especially if they go out and get a bow

[Snowbluff]

The Wizard should be a Diviner. He should also have 4th level spells.

[Killer Angel]

a ranger at the end of a hard day of adventuring will murder a wizard in the same situation and barely break a sweat. A ranger without spells is a sub-par fighter, but a wizard reduced to their cantrips is a joke.

I would like to know in what conditions is the ranger, at the end of an adventuring day that reduced the wizard to cantrips only.... probably at a point, in which also the wizard's familiar could kill him with a single hit.

without counting that, if the wizard got only cantrips, is because the last spell was Rope Trick.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Wait... I have to ask...

How does the Paladin threaten T1's outside of complete cheese (pun pun y'all). Heck I wouldn't say Paladins are non-casters, they have plenty of spells, spell-like, and supernatural abilities that disqualifies them as non-casters whereas Rangers have one source of non-casters (spells).

I would say the Ranger has a better chance at keeping up with the Wizard in an all around setting than the Paladin.

Ranger versus Paladin

Social: Paladin is (normally) LG, sure the Paladin has Diplomacy but all those restrictions based on his alignment hampers a lot. Rangers get more skill points and don't have restrictions on what they can do. That LG Ranger can deal with and work with CE, LE, and NE people quite easily (or take jobs from the NE king...etc).

Battle: They are both about the same in battle. Not quite great but good enough to fill a slot if they specialize. Both specialty (charging and archery) can be shut down quite easily.

Skills:Ranger wins hand down. Number of points and class list. To bad the Paladin can't see squat.

In an AMF the Paladin is a Fighter without Feats while the Ranger a Fighter with some feats + animal companion.

When you bring in optimization... (Outside of major cheese) Paladins hit tier 4 and Rangers hit tier 3.

So I doubt the Paladin will fair better than the ranger.

(Note: I'm not so sure about Pathfinder but things didn't change all that much for classes in pf relative to other classes)

[The Insanity]

If he's talking about the two classes fighting each other, then it's completely irrelevant. Classes weren't designed to fight each other, they were designed to go on adventures and overcome challenges.

Do you never fight NPCs?

[toapat]

*Mace'd*

Underdark Knight ACF for paladin gives Earthglide at lvl 11

Barring Mindsight (And **** no does that actually work through walls) and arguably tremorsense (earthglide is described as not making noise nor displacing the earth and stone), there is no way for the Wizard to see the paladin, giving the paladin the chance to kill them before the contingencies pop. there are only a small handful of not useful ways to hit the paladin, and at level the paladin should be able to defeat any earth elementals.

If the contingencies need to be negated, the paladin can scrollcast Greater Celerity, then Forcecage + Dimensional Anchor to keep the wizard pinned.

Also, i said barring fullcasters, not barring casters.

THe only way that a Ranger competes with Wizard is by becoming a half powered wizard. Paladins compete by finding tiny holes that wizard cant exploit.

Also, at full optimization, Paladin hits High T3, while ranger becomes T1.5 because full optimization turns Ranger into a Wizard/Druid with 6 feats.

[ryu]

Do you never fight NPCs?

And do none of his BBEGs have class levels? Really?

[Gwendol]

Wait... I have to ask...

Ranger versus Paladin

When you bring in optimization... (Outside of major cheese) Paladins hit tier 4 and Rangers hit tier 3.

So I doubt the Paladin will fair better than the ranger.

(Note: I'm not so sure about Pathfinder but things didn't change all that much for classes in pf relative to other classes)

Say what? Paladin is typically on par with a Bard when optimized, and thus high T3. A well-built paladin will outperform the ranger in melee combat, and thanks to Inspire Courage (and spells) may be competitive in the archery dept.
Rangers can also be optimized thanks to mystic ranger and SotAO, wildshape, etc, but my bet would still be on the paladin. Bringing up the Code in an optimization discussion is beside the point.

[animewatcha]

Is this paladin 20 or at same level point of level 7 and 14? Also IIRC, scrollcast is minimum standard unless longer, unlike wands that get the swift action clarification. Despite the action change, the paladin needs to negate the dazing that happens from using greater celerity ( wizards have spells for this or can turn into something for this ). The 3 scrolls ( I am assuming scrolls for those 3 since I do not see dimensional anchor as a paladin spell ) are 3 UMD checks that paladin is doing cross-classing AND has to devote resources to make all 3 checks if the wizard 'lets them happen'.

-sidenote before continuing- paladin is using wizard to defeat wizard and therefore it is not really 'paladin vs wizard.'

I also looked up earthglide. The ability by itself on SRD for earth elemental doesn't allow vision normally beyond own body ( assuming that tremorsense/earthsense/whatever earthy is doing this for said creature ). Despite this, what reason is the wizard traveling on the ground at this point? Also, contingencies happen exactly when the condition happens ( for better or worse, wizard likes or not ). There is no 'timing before they pop off' unless said timing bypasses the conditions in some way ( i.e. wizard didn't prepare for that way. good luck with that ).

Since you get to bring in scrolls of 9ths, wizard gets to bring in scrolls of 9ths. Like scroll of mage's disjunction ( bye-bye forcecage and dimension anchor and the paladin's stuff if he is close enough ). There is also scroll of alter self into a solar to cast as a 20th level cleric if not just beat you down. There is also the gate-solar loop. More shenanigans with scrolls with other spells ( Like say timestop ). Also, the paladin would need to be making consistent UMD checks while the wizard doesn't. Paying for scrolls at full price at minimum ( barring things like diplomacy ) while wizard can make them himself at fraction of cost.

Paly also has that nasty code to abide by. Wizard doesn't. Also, whose to say that you aren't just dealing with a clone, astral projection, etc.

[CombatOwl]

Actually, the contingency is easy: If I am attacked by a missile weapon, Wind Wall.

Read the rules for contingency. Wind wall does not effect a person, it is placed in an area and therefore not a legitimate spell for contingency. Fickle winds would work, but is that *really* the single contingency that wizard wants up all the time? You only get one, after all. Its not like 3.5e where you can craft contingent spells.

[ryu]

Read the rules for contingency. Wind wall does not effect a person, it is placed in an area and therefore not a legitimate spell for contingency. Fickle winds would work, but is that *really* the single contingency that wizard wants up all the time? You only get one, after all. Its not like 3.5e where you can craft contingent spells.

Is ice assassin still a thing in pathfinder? If so unlimited contingencies are still a thing.

[Vhaidara]

Read the rules for contingency. Wind wall does not effect a person, it is placed in an area and therefore not a legitimate spell for contingency. Fickle winds would work, but is that *really* the single contingency that wizard wants up all the time? You only get one, after all. Its not like 3.5e where you can craft contingent spells.

Actually, OP never stated 33.5 or PF, and I believe the default is 3.5. PF came up because someone mentioned that PF ranger is slightly better than 3.5 ranger (vanilla for both).

[CombatOwl]

In Pathfinder, a Wizard has the option to always act in the surprise rounds with a huge initiative bonus.

If they play a diviner. Otherwise, no. That is the most OP choice, but the question was rangers vs. wizards not rangers vs. diviners. There are, after all, other schools.

At level 20 the Wizard has had Simulacrum for a while now. That's a really simple example of a spell that would give a Ranger trouble in a "solo fight" with little to no effort.

Again, rocket tagged in two first round. Even if the simulacrum was out to start with, that's only a perception or sense movie check to figure out, and any ranger worth their salt will have enough bonuses in other by level 20 to figure out which one to rocket tag. Clone is more of a problem.

I would consider Archery worse in PF. Less stuff to work with. Deadly Aim isn't really impressive to people with Teeth of Leraje and Splitting Hank's Energy Bows.

Archers in general have more options because they have more feats (one every other level, not one every third) and archetypes and better martial classes. Its not just Deadly Aim.

[The Prince of Cats]

Do you never fight NPCs?

Probably not alone. A ranger supported by a wizard and a cleric can take on NPCs...

[Snowbluff]

If they play a diviner. Otherwise, no. That is the most OP choice, but the question was rangers vs. wizards not rangers vs. diviners. There are, after all, other schools.

Again, rocket tagged in two first round. Even if the simulacrum was out to start with, that's only a perception or sense movie check to figure out, and any ranger worth their salt will have enough bonuses in other by level 20 to figure out which one to rocket tag. Clone is more of a problem.

Simulacrum would all have their own special senses, initiative checks, and abilities. It's not "hey it's a party of that one wizard," but more of "this 'singular' enemy is a lot more diverse that I would have guessed." And that's just one good spell that a wizard can be using on his down time, even if it's banned.

I think the odds of having the wizard as a favored enemy are probably similiar to the odds of a wizard being a diviner.

Archers in general have more options because they have more feats (one every other level, not one every third) and archetypes and better martial classes. Its not just Deadly Aim.

When you count flaws, having more feats isn't really true until much later. It's literally an extra feat. Pathfinder feats are pretty much terrible on the same level as 3.5 PHB feats, save for a couple. Archetypes aren't that useful, and there are much better classes, feats, spells, and items for archery in 3.5, like factotum, devotion feats, Hunter's Mercy, and wand chambers.

[The Insanity]

Probably not alone. A ranger supported by a wizard and a cleric can take on NPCs...

Um... that's cool. I don't see the relevance to what I said, though.

[CombatOwl]

Simulacrum would all have their own special senses, initiative checks, and abilities. It's not "hey it's a party of that one wizard," but more of "this 'singular' enemy is a lot more diverse that I would have guessed." And that's just one good spell that a wizard can be using on his down time, even if it's banned.

That's like saying "hey, we're forgetting that ranger's animal companion and his army of helpful woodland creatures!" Strictly true, but not relevant. So what if you have the simulacrum out? You're still getting rocket tagged in one round. Maybe you make two initiative checks; but unless you're a diviner you're still going to be slower on average. Even with two tests. Even if you were a diviner, your simulacrum wouldn't go before the ranger, in all probability.

I think the odds of having the wizard as a favored enemy are probably similiar to the odds of a wizard being a diviner.

There are *mildly optimized* characters, right? The odds of having a maximum favored enemy bonus against that wizard is damn near 100% because human is the obvious choice. Or maybe that ranger used their "not useful" archetype choice to pick up something like freebooter that replaces their racial favored enemy with a swift-action universal bonus.

When you count flaws, having more feats isn't really true until much later.

Flaws are an optional rule, not something that can be assumed.

Pathfinder feats are pretty much terrible on the same level as 3.5 PHB feats, save for a couple.

You don't play many archers in Pathfinder, do you? Even with that extra feat(s), you have to make hard choices because there are so many options.

Archetypes aren't that useful,

For an archer?! Who are you trying to kid? Admittedly, the ranger archetypes are at best a mixed bag for archery but there are a lot of good archer archetypes.

and there are much better classes, feats, spells, and items for archery in 3.5, like factotum, devotion feats, Hunter's Mercy, and wand chambers.

That is definitely a debatable claim.

[eggynack]

You don't play many archers in Pathfinder, do you? Even with that extra feat(s), you have to make hard choices because there are so many options.

Isn't that mostly because all of PF's combat feats are locked up in massive feat chains, where each individual feat is worse, and where the end of a given feat chain occasionally overwhelms the power level of a shorter 3.5 feat chain? I know that's how it is for some combat styles, but I'm less sure for archery. Either way, the point is that lotsa options doesn't necessarily mean not-terrible.

[Coidzor]

That's like saying "hey, we're forgetting that ranger's animal companion and his army of helpful woodland creatures!" Strictly true, but not relevant. So what if you have the simulacrum out? You're still getting rocket tagged in one round. Maybe you make two initiative checks; but unless you're a diviner you're still going to be slower on average. Even with two tests. Even if you were a diviner, your simulacrum wouldn't go before the ranger, in all probability.

How's the Ranger determining which creature to attack first? What's limiting the Wizard to a single Simulacrum?

[Snowbluff]

That's like saying "hey, we're forgetting that ranger's animal companion and his army of helpful woodland creatures!" Strictly true, but not relevant. So what if you have the simulacrum out? You're still getting rocket tagged in one round. Maybe you make two initiative checks; but unless you're a diviner you're still going to be slower on average. Even with two tests. Even if you were a diviner, your simulacrum wouldn't go before the ranger, in all probability.

If you're a diviner, you've won initiative. People who take it are putting work into their initiative scores. Wizard have additional options for an improved initiative with their familiars. If/when a wizard wins initiative, he Wind Walls, teleports, dominates the ranger, or Time Stops to consider his options.

Simulacrum can soften a surprise round by spotting or sensing a Ranger, then alerting their wizard.

Animals really can't compete. At all.

There are *mildly optimized* characters, right? The odds of having a maximum favored enemy bonus against that wizard is damn near 100% because human is the obvious choice. Or maybe that ranger used their "not useful" archetype choice to pick up something like freebooter that replaces their racial favored enemy with a swift-action universal bonus.

There are a lot more factors for race choices in PF. Human isn't always the right choice, depending on what you're doing.

Freebooters are not able to use Master Hunter. No rocket tag.

Flaws are an optional rule, not something that can be assumed.

You don't play many archers in Pathfinder, do you? Even with that extra feat(s), you have to make hard choices because there are so many options.

True, but the option is there.

"Argh, I can't have precise shot and rapid shot at level 1!" I really hate these options. Too often I can't get something interesting or something else to do with my actions. Even Obtain Familiar has a feat tax.

For an archer?! Who are you trying to kid? Admittedly, the ranger archetypes are at best a mixed bag for archery but there are a lot of good archer archetypes.

Other than Zen archer, you have things like "finally, my fighter can makes a spot check!" I'm thoroughly not impressed, but that would be off topic.

That is definitely a debatable claim.

It's fact, bro. Point Blank Shot is way worse than Knowledge Devotion. That's the sort of comparison you're looking at.

Isn't that mostly because all of PF's combat feats are locked up in massive feat chains, where each individual feat is worse, and where the end of a given feat chain occasionally overwhelms the power level of a shorter 3.5 feat chain? I know that's how it is for some combat styles, but I'm less sure for archery. Either way, the point is that lotsa options doesn't necessarily mean not-terrible.

And then there is this. Eggy, the archery feat chain is more or less the same, but with Deadly Aim (some damage at the cost of accuracy) or Clustered Shots (count DR once for a build that could easily ignore it at all times). So it's still pretty feat starved.

[Story]

Considering a level 1 Wizard can kill a level 3 party of four "standard" characters with a reasonable success rate, we can probably extrapolate that down to a level 1 Ranger.

To be fair, the level 1 Barbarian did almost as well.

[toapat]

To be fair, the level 1 Barbarian did almost as well.

thing is though, very few other mundanes compete with the number of options barbarian has. Paladin is the only other class that really got the good stuff, and they have no chance in hell of matching the barbarian's success at that challenge.

[Haldir]

Say what? Paladin is typically on par with a Bard when optimized, and thus high T3. A well-built paladin will outperform the ranger in melee combat, and thanks to Inspire Courage (and spells) may be competitive in the archery dept.
Rangers can also be optimized thanks to mystic ranger and SotAO, wildshape, etc, but my bet would still be on the paladin. Bringing up the Code in an optimization discussion is beside the point.

Melee combat is the least efficient way to do any killing. Saying a Paladin is stronger than a Ranger because it can do melee better than Ranger is like saying a hammer is better than a blender for finely crushed ice.

Paladin would be destroyed by a good Ranger.

[Platymus Pus]

Melee combat is the least efficient way to do any killing. Saying a Paladin is stronger than a Ranger because it can do melee better than Ranger is like saying a hammer is better than a blender for finely crushed ice.

Paladin would be destroyed by a good Ranger.

If dex and perception is high enough a Ranger could pick off a Paladin by a good 10 miles or so easily.

[Coidzor]

To be fair, the level 1 Barbarian did almost as well.

Now to see how a level 1 Ranger fares, I suppose, if we wanted to be thorough. I believe the Barb'd edge 'em out though.

[Snowbluff]

Can I point out to you guys something about tiers? They don't assume optimization. A paladin isn't "Tier 3" because of how you chose your feats.

[toapat]

Melee combat is the least efficient way to do any killing. Saying a Paladin is stronger than a Ranger because it can do melee better than Ranger is like saying a hammer is better than a blender for finely crushed ice.

Paladin would be destroyed by a good Ranger.

IIRC the full range increment of the bow is 2 miles when fully built for range.

Thing is, the shear penalty for indirect fire isnt overcome at that point. the entire reason people have done that, is because AoE spells that wizard gets and that ranger cant get and that will destroy enemies.