test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Wheres the archer???
nehjjhen
Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 16 Arc User
In neverwinter nights 1 and 2 I always played a night elf archer, so where is it already lol
Post edited by nehjjhen on
0
Comments
Also, night elf?
UNACCEPTABLE!
And yes, very quickly it should be there somewhere already.
Edit: Sorry, just to explain, I don't know much of anything about 4E yet, so these classes are all somewhat new to me. I'm guessing classes in Neverwinter are more akin to subclasses, or class profiles.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19645334/The_Ranger_Handbook_How_to_strike_them_where_it_hurts
I share your exact desire to play a ranger but I am thinking we will both be disappointed.
So far, Cryptic has kept to a policy that each build released will only equip weapons of one archtype. For example in 4e, the cleric whether a devoted cleric or a battle cleric, can wield a mace. In NWO though devoted cleric can not, and I assume eventually a battle cleric will drop, who can.
In 4e any Ranger, regardless of specialization, can wield a bow and a sword. In NWO however, unless they break pattern, eventually 2 ranger builds will be released, one a dual sword wielder (no bow), and the archer ranger wielding a bow (no sword).
I very much hope I am wrong and would love to be corrected. Its a class breaking development decision for this class ( for me not speaking for others).
Instead of a ranger main I am starting to think maybe scourge warlock, and archer alt. Just don't want to play the 5 they are releasing, will fool around with rogue til these others appear.
A Ranger, incapable of shooting an arrow with a bow. In a D&D game. Who woulda thunk it.
But... I'm kinda doubtin it. Like others have said, there will probably (eventually) be a dual-wielding ranger and an archer ranger, distinct from each other.
For what its worth, there *were* archery based NPC's in CBWE2, both mobs, and NPC's who would fight along side your character, so this bodes well for an eventual inclusion as a playable character. Just show a little patience...
Not exactly. The specializations you describe actually came from 3rd edition rules, not 4th. As to the basic ability/inability to 'switch' between blade and bow we don't know for certain. With the TR's ranged abilities its technically possible that there *could* be an at-will that would be a close range melee attack with a 'blade' (which would be purely cosmetic and *not* an actual weapon in inventory) for an Archery based Ranger, and vice versa with a basic ranged 'bow' at will for a TWF based Ranger with an equally cosmetic 'bow'. Will this be the case? Nobody who knows is saying.
Balancing the above possibility with what I actually saw in CBWE2 , with bow using mobs and NPC's, I don't think so, as those kept using their bows all the time, no matter the distance of what was threatening them. I never saw either 'switch', although I was looking to see if they did.
Final analysis... Your guess, right now, is as good as mine...
Otherwise, yes patience. A bit of info about potential timing would be nice too, I mean this is not the Manhattan Project we are talking about.
As far as a role the archer seems a bit one trick, can't wait to see how they build it. Striker, single target DPS, maybe some buffs for proximity based on the ruleset. A squish who needs to be close range to max damage and who will be pinned while doing so. Or maybe it will be all evasiony and stealthy. Ah well I'm sure they will get it right. I still would like to build one myself.
With the example of the cone attacks from the skeletal archers on Sleeping Dragon Bridge, there may well be some AoE cone attacks involved, so not necessarily *always* single target DPS. I can envisage several different types of cone AoEs for an archer, such as pinning down by a rapid fire cone encounter ability with a slow, or even a short hold component, a Flaming Arrow cone with a bit of DoT attatched, well you get the idea. They can do quite a bit with just cone attacks, and then there's GTAoE to consider as well. For mitigation, I expect to see a dodge-roll similar to the TR...
I cant see why it wouldnt - ranger without a pet is like a dwarf without a beard
Not in 4th edition. There are three kinds of rangers, and they follow Cryptic's method of class implementation the most accurately. The Archery Ranger, focusing on ranged attacks, The Two Weapon Ranger, focusing on melee with two weapons, and the Beastmaster, which doesn't have a weapon focus but does have the traditional pet.
All pretty obvious by the names of course, but 2/3rds of the Ranger types have nothing to do with pets as a staple mechanic. I would miss that facet of my eventual 2 weapon ranger, but everyone has access to companions. Lets just hope for some real companion fixes and improvements.
The classes that they have are literally dumbed down versions of this. You get a handful of the abilities of the class itself, and rather than customizing, you get pre-set abilities that you can change between, giving you SOME customization, but not complete. Personally, I'd rather see it opened up, changing between 2 builds on the fly, leaving it so I couldn't have all 3 classes, that or having it so you had to level all 3 possible classes by switching between them (think PSO2's sub class system).
Hardly! Blood Elves are where the action is, nothing like being a female belf and laughing like one of those rich ivy league prep girls at someone after you mutilated them as a rogue or ranged class.
In fact the is a 4th type of ranger in 4th edition : the skirmisher ranger. He uses a combination of melee attacks and ranged attacks made with thrown weapon (javelin, throwing axe, etc...). An that one has nothing to do with pets either.
Specifically in groups my experience is that ranged AOE's are generally an no no. You tend to aggro mobs the group wants left alone, or releasing mobs from mezz/roots etc ticking off controllers, or drawing a bunch of mobs to you ticking off tanks and healers. Much griefing can ensue so in many games those skills are just avoided in groups.
If there are CC aspects to AOE's they can be very valuable for battlefield management in solo play however.
I think I am hoping for a mostly single target spec, with some type of moderate utility added like a self heal or group buff or something, also recognizing that this is a striker not a controller or leader.
- Titania Silverblade, the Iron Rose of Myth Drannor (Lvl 60 GWF, Destroyer)
- Gwyneth, the Cowardly Cat Burglar Drowling (Lvl 60 TR, Saboteur)
- Lady Rowanne Firehair, Heartwarder of Sune (Lvl 33 DC)
- Satella, Sensate (LvL 44 CW, Renegade, Non-Active)
Check Steppenkat's Foundry Quest Reviews!
With the short durations of CC in game, CC disruption is going to be less of a factor than you might think. CC in game tends to be on the 1 to 1.5 second side. Very little is of longer duration than that, at least currently.
As far as AoE goes, managing your AoE properly (such as learning when to AoE, and how to position the area field of the damage) is part and parcel of learning to play a class. Also, consider this, might not an archery based class' 'Tab' ability be an ability which takes a given damage ability and turns it into an AoE version? This would be kind of like a cross between the DC's 'Tab' ability and the CW's 'Tab' ability, as *they* are at present.
At any rate, a lot for us to consider, with what is already known about the subject in general. We need to keep in mind a few criteria, first, that an archer class needs to be balanced with the currently available classes in game, needs to be useful in goups, and lastly, but not leastly (for all three criteria points have approximately equal value) be fun to play.
It will be interesting to see how this is to be accomplished, and may be the reason that there has been nothing said about such a class to date.
You played a Night Elf Archer?
What's a Night Elf?