Who should I design?

challenge me

So far I have her as a Revenant and an Arcane Archer I am currently trying the Ranger / Artificer hybrid method

So, when you say "Arcane Archer", is this a home brew class or PP?

skwyd42 wrote:

So, when you say "Arcane Archer", is this a home brew class or PP?

for me it might be a seeker, it might be a ranger with something else like the artificer ...  (could be an archer bard)

Garthanos wrote:

skwyd42 wrote:

So, when you say "Arcane Archer", is this a home brew class or PP?

for me it might be a seeker, it might be a ranger with something else like the artificer ...  (could be an archer bard)

Ah, yes. I think that flavor-wise, the Seeker represents most accurately what I see as an Arcane Archer (even though it is the Primal Power source). I always liked the Arcane Archer PrC from 3.x. In fact, the last character I played in a 3.x campaign was an AA. Although, we did customize the class because as written, it seems a bit underpowered. I'm going to digress for a moment. In the 3.x framework, it looked like the designers had originally intended for characters to advance up to around level 9 or 10 and then take their first level in a PrC at 10 or 11. But, given how gamers are, many of the PrCs had a more "direct path" where you could take your first level of the PrC around 7th. For the AA, one could meet the requirements most directly by taking 6 levels of fighter or ranger (to meet the +6 BAB) and then 1 level of wizard (to be able to cast arcane spells) and then the rest were AA. The problem was that the AA was then stuck with only a 1st level wizard allotment of spells. The AA PrC didn't progress the spell casting ability. The AA really seemed to be designed for a character to take 10 levels of core classes (typically fighter or ranger and wizard) and then at 11th, jump into the AA class. If you did Ftr5/Wiz5, you would have the BAB requirement and a nice assortment of spells (including Fireball) when going in to the AA progression. Of course, doing this would mean that most other characters would be well into the "cool abilities" of their chosen PrC before you started being an AA. Anyway...

I think the Seeker, being a controller, really does fit that "feel" of a "spell casting archer". The only "problem" is that the title indicates "Arcane" while the power actually is Primal. I don't know if one would want to reskin the Seeker and just call it an Arcane Power source (the powers do have a bit of a Primal feel to them, not too much, though). Or perhaps just change the name of the class? Call it an "Eldritch Archer"? I think that in 4E, there was a bit of a shift in the traditional themes of the races. Prior to 4E, elves were considered "masters of the arcane arts". But in 4E, the Eladrin came in and took that title. Elves were shifted to be more "nature-y" (therefore "primal"). I don't have a problem with this thematic shift at all. It just requires a couple other shifts. Either, the Arcane Archer concept would have to become something that the Eladrin do (because of the Arcane connection); or it sticks with the Elves and shifts to be more Primal. And, given that the Seeker is a Primal class, I think that it makes sense to make the concept of the Arcane Archer something that is for the Elves of the forest (besides, Eladrin already have the Bladesinger).

I haven't considered using a Ranger/Artificer combo. I'm thinking to fully realize the magic side of it would probably need the hybrid rules rather than just a Ranger with Artificer MC feat and a couple of power swap feats. The only thing that puts up a warning flag to me on this is that the AA has always felt more controller-ish to me. Maybe a controller/striker blend. Ranger and Artificer would be a striker/leader blend and I don't know if the Artificer powers lend themselves to feel enough like a controller. I'd like to see how it turns out though. I think that it could make for an interesting character.

Of course, one could always just forego any preconceived concepts of what "Arcane Archer" means and just decide what "feel" they want for a character, drop any "names" and just build something that matches the intended concept. If one just wanted an archer that also had arcane spells, then a ranger/artificer could be just fine. It seems to be more a matter of preference at that point. In any case, I'd love to see character concepts and/or builds as well.

Another option would be to use the Moonbow Dedicate feat, which grants a 1/2/3 bonus to both weapon and implement damage rolls with shortbows, and it allows you to use a shortbow as an implement for divine and arcane powers. Using this method, just about any arcane class could be reworked as an arcane archer. The only catch is that the feat requires that you worship Sehanine, but that's easily reskinned if you're working with the character builder.

Well in the case of this character she is like the matriarch leader of undead... going with a divine class might involve ye old no not undead ... demonic

[quote="skwyd42"]

Garthanos wrote:

I haven't considered using a Ranger/Artificer combo. I'm thinking to fully realize the magic side of it would probably need the hybrid rules rather than just a Ranger with Artificer MC feat and a couple of power swap feats. The only thing that puts up a warning flag to me on this is that the AA has always felt more controller-ish to me. Maybe a controller/striker blend. Ranger and Artificer would be a striker/leader blend and I don't know if the Artificer powers lend themselves to feel enough like a controller. I'd like to see how it turns out though. I think that it could make for an interesting character.

Yes I was thinking hybriding I think I agree the character in question as an actual leader but lots of her techniques seem like they might include some controllery shoot enemy and root them (if she healed it would be with potions/elixirs)

One of the things going for this kind of character build is that the Arcane Power source, in general, has a controller-ish feel to it. There seem to be a few more area powers (even for non-controller Arcane classes) and powers with status effects and such.