Best core race for a ranged fighter

[Eternalknight]

G'day all

Simple question really. What do you think? My opinion would be the Halfling. Reason? +1 to hit for size, +1 to hit with thrown weapons, and +2 to Dex. Most people I know say Elves, but I don't think they quite stack up to a halfling.

Your opinion? Rembeber, this is just for a fighter specializing in ranged weapons.

 

[Gez]

Yeah, the halfling also. I won't make comments as long as the ones for the melee fighter.

Dwarf: actually, a better choice than one would expect. No bonus to Dex, but the slow speed drawback is nearly cancelled when making ranged combat. And giants can hurl rocks as ranged combat.

Elf: +1 from Dex, low-light vision. No special bonus to archery or other ranged combat, since the automatic bow proficiency is redundant with the base fighter proficiencies.

Gnome: +1 from size, +1 against common foes, low-light vision. In FR, access to firearms. Drawbacks: short bow or light crossbow only, no bonus to Dex.

Half-Elf: duh, not really any more interesting than the half-elf melee fighter. Only asset, low-light vision is interesting for ranged combat. But go bard or rogue if you want half-elf.

Half-Orc: a good choice for melee, a poor one for distance. Except with mighty bows, the half-orc's Strength is going to be near useless, and Darkvision, so lovely for close combat, is not really interesting in ranged combat. Low-light vision would be better.

Halfling. +1 from size, +1 from Dex, +1 with thrown weapons. Drawbacks: short bow or lightcrossbow (less damage or less attack than longbow), poor sight.

Human: exactly the same assets and drawback as for the melee fighter.

So, Dwarf, Elf, Halfling and Human are valid choices for ranged combat.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I would say elf.

Elves gain +2 to dex and have low-light vision. The -2 con hurts them but a ranged fighter can live with a 12 con. After all, they shouldn't end up in melee where the bad guys tend to dish out the really heavy duty damage. The elven bonus to saves vs. enchantments also helps to shore up the fighter's weakness in will-saves.

Close seconds are humans and dwarves.

Humans gain a bonus feat which is very very useful at low levels (the only way I know of to get point blank shot, rapid shot, and precise shot with a longbow or composite longbow at first level is to be human).

Dwarves have darkvision which is even more essential in ranged combat than in melee (in melee, torchlight will illumine your foes or at the worst you can use blindfighting).

I personally don't think that halflings make very good ranged fighters (unless they're fighter/rogues relying on sneak attack damage). Their small size prevents them from using mighty composite longbows and thus keeps them from every gaining more than a +2 strength bonus to damage. The strength penalty and the d6 damage die make this even worse.

 

[Eternalknight]

The Halfling's -2 Strength penalty makes it undesirable for a halfling to use mighty bows anyway. But, +1 to hit for size, +1 to hit (Dex), +1 to hit with thrown weapons. I do agree that a halfling fighter/rogue would make a pretty kick a$$ archer tho

 

[Darklone]

Well

Depends... Halflings are good, but halfelves are underestimated... Lowlight vision and not the Con penalty for elves (not the dex bonus either, but ranged fighters usually hit well!)

 

[Rashak Mani]

Humans are better overall... ranged fighters need an awful lot of feats... and skills help too. +2 Dex is neat but not essential.

 

[maddman75]

Agree - Humans are the race of choice whenever your concept needs lots of skills or is racing to complete a feat tree.