Ranger - How does a melee ranger make any sense? - Forum

" PatrickWatkins wrote: " http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/65586 Kripps LS ranger What does LS stand for? And this has a bunch of sword spec in it, whats the jist of this build? LS is Lightning Strike. It's a melee attack that shoots lighning. To be honest, it's more like a Ranged attack that happens to be usable with melee weapons but it does have a melee component to it. The build is a 2H sword "melee" ranger. Due to lightning strike being very powerful and chain being broken OP, the result is a build that annihilates screens very quickly. The melee aspect only comes into play when he 1-2shots bosses at melee range. There's a bunch of other ranger melee builds though, noticeably one of them was on the first or second page, a dual wield blood magic cleave build, very standard stuff.	Posted by PyrosEien#5602 on Jan 11, 2013, 12:20:20 PM Quote this Post
is LS a skill gem and chain a support gem?	Posted by PatrickWatkins#6513 on Jan 11, 2013, 12:52:21 PM Quote this Post
" PatrickWatkins wrote: is LS a skill gem and chain a support gem? Yes - and since LS is a projectile he gets the 50% dmg boost from the Point Blank keystone at melee range. Edit: Oh, the thread is actually about something else. Well, melee ranger - why not! Last edited by lysar42#1827 on Jan 11, 2013, 1:08:48 PM	Posted by lysar42#1827 on Jan 11, 2013, 1:04:56 PM Quote this Post
Don't let the hype fool you bow ranger is just as (or more) broken. For a starting point you could read petrov's elemental ranger build or any of the other good builds found here.	Posted by Bchad#0165 on Jan 11, 2013, 1:44:03 PM Quote this Post
" Zastrow wrote: " Mark_GGG wrote: " PatrickWatkins wrote: Does anyone else think its dumb that a good percent of people have melee rangers? Doesn't make any sense to me How does it not? Many archtipical ranger characters in fantasy fiction have been adept at melee combat. Aragon from LotR, for example, was one of the Rangers of the North. He was quite handy with a sword. He was also one of the driving inspirations behind the ranger class in D&D, which traditionally can be played as a melee weapon user, or as an archer or similar. The term ranger traditionally means someone who ranges through wild terrain or woodlands, often but not exclusively in the context of being paid to do so by the owner of the lands in question. Nothing about being a ranger implies non-melee, so I don't understand why you feel this doesn't make sense - melee combat is a strong part of the traditional concept of rangers in fiction. I don't see how it would make any sense at all to restrict melee combat from rangers. ^best answer ever ^^ great to see people from GGG first of all take their time to read these and actually provide this kind of input, also proving they are into stuff like Tolkien and D&D ^^ <3 you Mark keep up the great work! -Martin Haha yeah I haven't been here in a loong while and then I see this and it cracked me up. I still remember the time GGG kindly suggested the enemies in early Act II were not "monkeys", but apes. =) Hmmm 1.83 of 4.56 GB downloaded >_>	Posted by DeF46#3887 on Jan 13, 2013, 7:43:08 AM Quote this Post
How does a melee Witch make any sense? it just does. People come up with crazy builds that go away from their "supposed" style, ie; Ranger for ranged....Mara for melee.	Posted by naumu#5873 on Jan 13, 2013, 6:36:10 PM Quote this Post
Oh god Chris, you're awesome. xD This is why you don't make silly threads; you'll get called out for it! On a side note in reply to someone a page or so back: it's not rangers that are broken, it's simply that elemental damage is ridiculous, on any class, with almost any realistic build. In-Game-Name: Lezli	Posted by Lezli#6741 on Jan 15, 2013, 8:00:06 AM Quote this Post