Ranger Wizard?

[Inquisitor Tremayne]

Anyone have any opinions on this?

Something I just thought of.

Animal Companion and a Familiar?

I'm really just trying to come up with a good fighting wizard build that utilizes the core books.

[Karui_Kage]

Using core, you could do a Fighter/Wizard/Eldritch Knight, I believe that's one of the new prestiges in the 3.5 DMG.

I wouldn't advise a Druid or Ranger/Wizard or Sorcerer. Using a hybrid druid/fighter and a full arcane caster would result in too many skills, not enough focus. You'd need to have a lot of good stats too. Good Int for the Wizard, good Dex for the Ranger, and probably good Str and Con too. You'd also need Wis if you wanted to spellcast as the Ranger.

[starfalconkd]

My highest level character, played in 2nd edition and converted into 3.5 was just this. I converted him to Ranger 4th/ Wizard 6th/ Eldritch Knight 11th. He was fun to play for a long time.

[Inquisitor Tremayne]

Yeah. I think that is the way to go.

Stick with ranged combat style so as to have a high dex for protection and just be ranged support.

[Karui_Kage]

That actually could work, now that I think about it. Ranged combat style would be nice. I always just thought of Eldritch Knight as a meleeish character, but I suppose he could work ranged as well. I don't have the abilities in front of me, so I can't say for sure though.

[Inquisitor Tremayne]

They just get a bonus feat at 1st EK level selected from the fighter list then full base attack and spellcasting after that.

[starfalconkd]

If you are going to go the ranged route why not play an Arcane Archer?

[Inquisitor Tremayne]

Oh!

Ranger/Wizard/Eldritch Knight/Arcane Archer!

[Karui_Kage]

Eh, too many classes for my tastes. That, and I'm not a big fan of Arcane Archer. No spellcasting whatsoever, and the abilities are sub-par.

[shilar]

Arcane Archer is a decent class if you keep fighter levels to a minimum. Without spellcasting levels they are at a disadvantage over spellswords, bladesingers, and eldritch knight but lots of neat abilities. I caution against the EK because he only gets a d6 for hitpoints. You can qualify for AA with a 4 fighter(or ranger)/4 wizard.

[Inquisitor Tremayne]

Thats right!!! I knew there was a reason I wasn't keen on EK and its that d6 hit points.

I don't have my Complete Warrior handy what are some benefits of the Spellsword and the Bladesinger? Aside from the ignore arcane spell failure.

[Karui_Kage]

Actually, if you're willing to go away from Core, just make a Duskblade from the PHB 2. Class that incorporates arcane caster and warrior reasonably well.

[shilar]

Bladesinger=+1 caster level every odd level best BaB progresion d8 hit die
dodge bonus to AC=class level up to intelligence bonus
plus one of these in order every even level
take 10 on defensive casting
1/day quicken one spell
ignore spell fail of light armor(including those with special properties or materials that are considered light)
bonus attack at highest bounus(-2penalty to all hits for round)
spellsword=+1 caster level every even level best BaB d8 hit die
ignore spell fail every odd level starts at 10%+5% every increase
at 2nd level bonus fighter or metamagic feat
at 4th level channel spell starts at 3/day goes up by one at levels 6 and 8 puts spell in sword next attack triggers it
at 10th level multiple channel spell puts 2 spells in weapon uses 2 of his channel spells uses

[Inquisitor Tremayne]

I am fairly certain our GM wouldn't allow any "new" classes in his games, only those from the PHB. However he will allow some races and almost all PrCs.

So Duskblade is out.

I'm checking out Spellsword and Bladesinger now. *edit* I can access them, so no I'm not checking them out.

[Karui_Kage]

But it *is* the PHB....2

I think every DM should make use of this book, along with Tome of Battle, and add them into their new "Core" setup. They're both great resources, with nothing overly powerful or underbalanced in either. And the variants from the PHB2 are great.