Ranger Design Goals

Morrus · Jun 7, 2012

WotC continues its series of D&D Next class design goals with the Ranger. These design goals protray the ranger as a hunter and tracker, a warrior, a protector, and a friend of wild creatures. It also contains a brief reference to the - by now - "traditional" choice for rangers: two-weapons or archery.

Previously this series has covered the cleric, the paladin, the rogue, and the fighter.

You can read the article on DDI here.

Boarstorm · Jun 7, 2012

Ranger Design Goals (June 7)

I'm of mixed opinion on this, for a variety of reasons.

Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible

Plane Sailing · Jun 7, 2012

Which are?

Plane Sailing · Jun 7, 2012

Strangely, that link doesn't let me see a blog, only gives me a mandatory 'Profile Setup' page.

Have they turned off anonymous browse or something?

RangerWickett · Jun 7, 2012

Booooo.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NO MORE FORCING RANGERS TO PICK A 'FIGHTING STYLE.'

If there's one thing that is my pet peeve in D&D, it's the idea that if you go around in the woods, you have to either know how to use a bow, or swing a pair of swords. Why?!

Seriously, my blood boils. For a game that wants to be modular, can we just please cut that crap out of the description of the class? If I want a ranger who prefers to use bolas, or spears, or a single sword (like ARAGORN!), why should the rules push me to pick some other fighting style?

Herschel · Jun 7, 2012

Looks like it could be pretty solid, though sounds like it encompasses a LOT of game space. My other concern is if they're "tougher" it's easy to be a: imbalanced vs. the Fighter if they can boost dex and have more HP AND higher AC and b: extra durability on an archer is like an Easy Bake Oven in the Sahara, pointless at best, an utter ewaste potentially. .

CleverNickName · Jun 7, 2012

RangerWickett said:
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NO MORE FORCING RANGERS TO PICK A 'FIGHTING STYLE.'

I...actually don't mind the fighting style thing. I just wish it was a Fighter class feature instead of a Ranger feature. I'm cool with rangers being woodsy fighters, but the "either 2WF or Archer" thing always perplexed me. Does the forest require you to pick one over the other?

Fighting styles for the fighter, on the other hand, would be really nice. It would be a nice way to show a mastery of a particular weapon or fighting style, without the need for fifteen different character classes. Take this 3.5E Samurai, for example.

So what happens if a Fighter chooses the Ranger's themes?

hafrogman · Jun 7, 2012

RangerWickett said:
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NO MORE FORCING RANGERS TO PICK A 'FIGHTING STYLE.'

I agree with the sentiment entirely . . . but the item in question does say "They do so by using an appropriate theme". It does seem like they're divorcing it from the class itself, which is good. If archer or tempest is a theme, and you can still build a ranger who's a lurker or a slayer or whatever, then that's perfect.

Boarstorm · Jun 7, 2012

Plane Sailing said:
Strangely, that link doesn't let me see a blog, only gives me a mandatory 'Profile Setup' page.

Have they turned off anonymous browse or something?

I wouldn't know, sorry...

Anyone else having problems with the link?

In regards to the mixed feelings, well... let me enumerate in no particular order:

1) I'm not sure how I feel about the "pick-your-fighting-style" thing rangers have had since 3E. I get why its there, but the shall-not-be-named icon for it originally acquired his TWF via his racial heritage, not his choice of class. Still, dual-wielders are a really cool archetype and should be supported somewhere. With rangers? Perhaps. As I said -- mixed feelings.

2) Ranger as protector of nature feels to me like it is stepping on the druid's narrative toes. A tracker? Certainly. Protective of land he views as his? Sure. But not as the D&D equivalent of Snow White with the birds and the deer and ...

I cling more to the Ranger as rugged scout who traipses through the wilderness (and loves it, certainly), but whose ultimate priority is the community he's protecting from what lives beyond the deep woods.

Plane Sailing · Jun 7, 2012

In summary, the article says:

1. The ranger is a wilderness hunter and tracker. (stealthy, alert, good at taking down a quarry)

2. The ranger is a warrior. (light armour, tough, choose a combat style via theme)

3. The ranger is a protector. (revere/protect nature or people in the wilderness)

4. Rangers are friends with wild creatures. (good with natural beasts, can form deeper bonds)