Question about a d20 Ranger

[LAN8]

Okay, maybe this is a lame question but I'm trying to construct a believable Ranger that fights werewolves, only my choices of Favored Enemies include Humanoid (Human), Magical Beast, Monstrous Humanoid whereas the MMI calls a werewolf Humanoid (Shapechanger) and there isn't a Favored Enemy for that. Should I just add in the Humanoid (Shapechager) as a missing Favored Enemy (with DM approval) or should I choose something from the list and if so, which one? I'm assuming here that, say, a half-elf, could indeed become a werewolf and therefore choosing Humanoid (Human) probably wouldn't cover my bets, plus, might not do anything as far as trying to catch a human who was in his wolf form. Unless, perhaps, the only solution is choosing Humanoid (Human) and Animal and letting the half-elf werewolves get away?

[Tilenas]

There are no lame questions.

As I see it, "shapechanger" is just another subtype of the humanoid type, and thus a viable option for the ranger's favored enemy. It's not included in the table PHB pg. 47, but since that list covers ALL types, it should be amended.

[Herobizkit]

Also, only an Evil Ranger may choose his own race as a Favored Enemy... so if you're human, Humanoid (Human) might be out...

[ValhallaGH]

Originally Posted by Herobizkit

Also, only an Evil Ranger may choose his own race as a Favored Enemy... so if you're human, Humanoid (Human) might be out...

That was 3.0. 3.5 acknowledges that basically good humans might become rangers that specifically target human bandits, allowing non-evil characters to choose their own race as a favored enemy.

One of the 3.5 changes that I really approved of.

[Sammael]

I think Lycanthropes is a perfectly valid choice for Favored Enemy.

[Nebten]

Only humanoids and giants can become lycanthropes (typically). The standard werewolf are humanoid (human). But that doesn't mean there are elven, orc or even halfling werewolves.

If you want to make sure you have your all your furry bases covered, you would have to ask your DM to allow Humanoid (shapechanger) to your list of favorite enemies.

[ValhallaGH]

Originally Posted by Nebten

If you want to make sure you have your all your furry bases covered, you would have to ask your DM to allow Humanoid (shapechanger) to your list of favorite enemies.

If it's good enough for enchanted weapons (and it is; just check out the Shifter's Sorrow magical weapon) then it should be good enough for a Ranger. Talk to your DM, and make sure to point out the weapon, and see if he'll allow it.
I would.

Combined with Giants, you'd have just about every were-creature ever covered.

Good luck.

[Dannyalcatraz]

Originally Posted by ValhallaGH

If it's good enough for enchanted weapons (and it is; just check out the Shifter's Sorrow magical weapon) then it should be good enough for a Ranger.

And that is located in which sourcebook?

[Kerrick]

Originally Posted by Dannyalcatraz

And that is located in which sourcebook?

Try the DMG.

Lan: May I also recommend the Lunar Huntsman PrC? It's a custom class I made for a book that never got published, one of my favorites. It's predicated on "lycanthrope" being a favored enemy.

[ValhallaGH]

Originally Posted by Kerrick

Try the DMG.

Gratsi.

[Arkhandus]

3.5 is stupid and specifically indicates you have to choose from the stupid little list that it gives. In 3.0 you just had to specify a subtype if you chose humanoid or outsider, but in 3.5 it actually lists the specific subtypes of each that you're supposed to choose from. It's retarded and is based on the assumption your games will never include a creature that isn't one of those core subtypes. Even though they stupidly forgot to include several core subtypes among that list. And that list of favored enemies doesn't include later creature types like Deathless from Eberron. Never mind such non-core subtypes as those in the Expanded Psionics Handbook and the "Races of Stone/Destiny/the Wild/whatever" books.

Humanoid (Shapechanger) should be perfectly acceptable as a favored enemy selection. It just explicitly requires DM approval due to 3.5's bad redesign. They couldn't just stick to fixing the small number of things that actually needed it......noooooo.......

It is so incredibly stupid how they limited it for no particular reason, when it was perfectly clear in the 3.0 write-up of the ability that you could choose any creature type and, for humanoids or outsiders, any subtype.

Just one of many idiotic, pointless changes implemented in 3.5 to confuse people just as much as the 3.5 revisers were confused when they went into a flurry of changes for the sake of change alone.

[Jeff Wilder]

What an odd omission.

Personally, since I'd be house-ruling anyway, I'd go even farther and allow the ranger to choose the entire Shapechanger subtype.

[Kerrick]

Originally Posted by Arkhandus

3.5 is stupid and specifically indicates you have to choose from the stupid little list that it gives. In 3.0 you just had to specify a subtype if you chose humanoid or outsider, but in 3.5 it actually lists the specific subtypes of each that you're supposed to choose from. It's retarded and is based on the assumption your games will never include a creature that isn't one of those core subtypes. Even though they stupidly forgot to include several core subtypes among that list. And that list of favored enemies doesn't include later creature types like Deathless from Eberron. Never mind such non-core subtypes as those in the Expanded Psionics Handbook and the "Races of Stone/Destiny/the Wild/whatever" books.

Humanoid (Shapechanger) should be perfectly acceptable as a favored enemy selection. It just explicitly requires DM approval due to 3.5's bad redesign. They couldn't just stick to fixing the small number of things that actually needed it......noooooo.......

It is so incredibly stupid how they limited it for no particular reason, when it was perfectly clear in the 3.0 write-up of the ability that you could choose any creature type and, for humanoids or outsiders, any subtype.

Just one of many idiotic, pointless changes implemented in 3.5 to confuse people just as much as the 3.5 revisers were confused when they went into a flurry of changes for the sake of change alone.

Gee, Ark, tell us what you really think.

But seriously, I've never seen the point for every single humanoid subtype either - it's needlessly complex.

[pawsplay]

It's not even clear to me why humanoids need to be subdivided in the first place. Magical beasts covers a huge range of creatures, and humanoid opponents are hardly the mainstay of D&D.

[ValhallaGH]

Originally Posted by pawsplay

It's not even clear to me why humanoids need to be subdivided in the first place. Magical beasts covers a huge range of creatures, and humanoid opponents are hardly the mainstay of D&D.

Given that the designers apparently felt that humanoid races (humans, orcs, goblins, drow, etc.) and extra-planar creatures (outsiders) would be the most common foes in a campaign, building in subdivisions makes a sort of sense.
It's easier to remove than it would be to introduce. If the DM says "You don't have to pick subtypes when you choose Humanoid or Outsider as a Favored Enemy" then the DM looks like a nice guy. If the DM said that you had to choose subtypes when you didn't then the DM would look like a jerk. So, from that perspective, the design choice makes a lot of sense, providing a level of granularity that can be stripped out as desired.
In many settings, humanoids are the primary antagonists. Both as the major villains (dudes with class levels), and as sword-fodder for major organizations (cults, armies, city guards, etc.). This means that DMs who have multiple humanoid races can swap up the races used and limit the impact of PCs with humanoid favored opponents, giving the DM better control over the course, pacing, and fun of his campaign. For that point, subdivisions almost make sense.
Further, there may have been some sort of historic perspective involved (I don't know, I came in at 3rd Edition).

Favored Enemy is powerful. If you don't agree, just ask any DM that's run an undead campaign and had a ranger (or two) in the party. That said, it's not unbalancing.
Killing golems and killing lions is probably pretty different, and I haven't run into many people who would argue with separating Constructs and Animals. But is killing elves and killing orcs really that different? According to the rules, yes; according to common sense, no.

My advice, which I do follow, is to compress Humanoid into a single category, and Outsider into a single category. This makes them as useful and appealing as Undead, Animal, Magical Beast, Aberration, or any of the other big categories.

Good gaming, all.

[Arkhandus]

3.5 is full of stupid changes and omissions that had no reason and served no purpose.

Humanoids and outsiders are divided into subtypes for Favored Enemies, Bane Weapons, and such because there's a lot of different in their cultures, tactics, weapons, and such. Humans don't generally fight the same way as goblins and don't behave socially like goblins; nor do they behave and fight the same as elves, or whatever. A demon will fight and act rather differently from a devil, who will fight and act differently from a rilmani or genie or guardinal or whatever. While magical beasts, for example, are quite varied, they're often fairly simple and animal-like in behavior or tactics, and generally have little or no culture. Only a few have actual societies or the like. It's not a perfect explanation, but it's the most reasonable.

[ValhallaGH]

I'm confused how this:

Originally Posted by Arkhandus

3.5 is full of stupid changes and omissions that had no reason and served no purpose.

Is related to this:

Originally Posted by Arkhandus

Humanoids and outsiders are divided into subtypes for Favored Enemies, Bane Weapons, and such because there's a lot of different in their cultures, tactics, weapons, and such. Humans don't generally fight the same way as goblins and don't behave socially like goblins; nor do they behave and fight the same as elves, or whatever. A demon will fight and act rather differently from a devil, who will fight and act differently from a rilmani or genie or guardinal or whatever. While magical beasts, for example, are quite varied, they're often fairly simple and animal-like in behavior or tactics, and generally have little or no culture. Only a few have actual societies or the like. It's not a perfect explanation, but it's the most reasonable.

Huh. I can sort of see that.
It doesn't explain Aberrations, Giants, or Undead, but it is an almost viable explanation, in world, for why it would have the divisions.

[Thanael]

+1 for fav enemy humanoid(shapchanger).

Also check out this thread for ideas:Werewolf Hunter Help Needed