3.5 Ranger Combat Styles

Merlion · Mar 15, 2003

Mercule said:
Right, because there is such a track record of _only_ the fighter having bonus feats. If you ignore several classes in non-core, books. Psy-Warrior, Epic Classes, Woodsman. Oh, yeah. Wizards and even high-level Rogues from the Player's Handbook.

I used to have a problem with non-fighters getting bonus feats, but then I realized that what was special about fighters wasn't that they got some extra feats, but that they got _boatloads_ of feats.

Some abilities make the most sense as class abilities. Some make more sense as feats. Barbarian abilities are the former. Fighter abilities are the latter. Rangers are a bit of both. Get over it and move on.

Regardless, virtual feats are _never_ a good solution. IMHO, giving a class virtual feats ranks right up there with giving a race an odd ability modifier as an indicator of bad design. I'd say the idea of "paths" isn't much better, either.

Just for the record, I actualy agree with you...people whine about fighters getting their toes stepped on to much. I was just saying I CAN see where wotc is coming from. I have no real problem with virtual feats...however I am going to be a bit pissed if they do only get the 2 paths...if that happens and I decide to play a ranger it'll just be Monte Cooks variant(it looks like the revised ranger is going to be almost identical to it but with virtual feat paths instead of bonus feats)

Steverooo · Mar 15, 2003

Olgar Shiverstone said:
Useful combat styles:

Two weapon
Archery/crossbow
Double Weapon
Unarmed
Reach weapon
Thrown weapon
Sword-and-shield
Two-handed weapon

I'd like the range to be a good all-around wilderness warrior/scout-type, who can survive well in the woods alone. He's the fighter/druid/rogue to the paladin's fighter/cleric. I think that includes:

- 6 skill points per level
- Good Fort saves (reflex a bonus)
- Light or medium armor
- d10 hit die (gotta be tougher than the druid)
- Favored terrain is better than favored enemy (FE needs tweaking)
- Spellcasting? Yes or no. If yes, focused on wilderness skills, sneaking, and hit-and-run fighting.
- Combat Styles? As long as it has some options (and archery must be one), sure, why not? Then the fighter is the most flexible, the barbarian has rage and mucho HP, the paladin has holy skills/lay on hands/spells, and the ranger has a feat path.
- Virtual feats? Nah, make 'em real feats. Just spread 'em out for no front-loading.

Getting rid of the Virtual Feats, there really is no difference between the Two Weapon/Double Weapon, nor the Archery/Crossbow/Thrown styles (the latter also including Slings, etc). But we agree, as far as you went... This WOULD make a better Ranger.

The problem is, it still does not lead to a stealthy, perceptive woodsman. The "flavor" is still lacking. He is still just a weaker Fighter who can track, and has more skills. It's a great START, but doesn't SOLVE the problem.

Merlion · Mar 15, 2003

The stealthy and percpetive parts pretty much fall in with the skills...

Steverooo · Mar 15, 2003

Vrylakos said:
I don't think some more skill points and an Archer/DualWielder toggle switch is enough to make the Ranger appeal to more than Robin Hood and Drizzt/Darth Maul fans.

But that may just be me.

Vrylakos

It aint just you, blue girl...

(I want some red roses, for a blue lady...)

Steverooo · Mar 15, 2003

Merlion said:
I ferverntly hope their will be at least 4 Combat Styles. If not, I will just be staying with Monte Cooks original variant ranger most likely if I ever play one.
I do understand to a point why they do virtual feats instead of real ones...so all the people who think fighters are so darn downtrodden wont complain. and so we dont have rangers in platemail to much which would be weird

There is nothing "weird" about a Ranger in platemail, if he is going into combat. He is trading his DEX Bonus and Ranks of Stealth Skills for AC. That's his choice. Maybe he has chosen to go the Mounted Combat Feat Path, and doesn't HAVE Hide/Move Silently. Perhaps he has Improved Charge, or some-such. That is his choice, and a perfectly valid one. He is "The Paladin of the Woods", thundering into combat with his trusty lance and steed. If he prefers that character concept, there is nothing "weird" about it.

If he loves "Tor", he can ride his tyrannosaur, instead. If he likes Tarzan or the Beastmaster, he can fall out of the trees (no Balance skill!), and attack hand-to-hand.

Of course, none of these concepts can be easily done with the current rules!

Droogie · Mar 15, 2003

Steverooo said:
I think Rangers should have MORE than two paths, and free choice between them, with REAL Feats, not virtual ones.

Agreed.

I think Rangers should have D8... but I think they should get TWO at first level, maxing one, and ROLLING the other. I also think that at every level where the Fighter's average HP would equal or exceed the Ranger's, they should get another extra one. By my calculations, that works out to: 1rst, 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th levels.

Nah. Just give them their d10. Easier, simpler, more intuitive. We want to refine D&D not make it more complicated.

I think ALL Classes should get a Class Bonus Feat at 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th levels, just like the Wizard, and from a specific list, just like they do.

Disagree. Sounds like power inflation to me. And like I said, we're after refinement here.... this would slow down character generation. Creating NPCs is a pain already.

As for Weapon Specialization, I think that only the Fighter Classes should get it....

Thats fine by me. It gives the fighter something special.

Bugaboo · Mar 15, 2003

Re: Re: 3.5 Ranger Combat Styles

Zaruthustran said:
... Archaic combat styles are usually organized into the following: weapon & shield, two-handed weapon, pole weapon, single weapon, two weapons, thrown weapons, archery. There are wacky cases (weapon & cape, etc.) but those are the most common categories.

Interesting generalization. "Are usually organized," eh? ... Says who?

Droogie · Mar 15, 2003

Steverooo said:
There is nothing "weird" about a Ranger in platemail, if he is going into combat. He is trading his DEX Bonus and Ranks of Stealth Skills for AC. That's his choice. Maybe he has chosen to go the Mounted Combat Feat Path, and doesn't HAVE Hide/Move Silently. Perhaps he has Improved Charge, or some-such. That is his choice, and a perfectly valid one. He is "The Paladin of the Woods", thundering into combat with his trusty lance and steed. If he prefers that character concept, there is nothing "weird" about it.

If you want to play a character like this, play a fighter or paladin. If you want your ranger to wear half-plate, he can grab a level of fighter. Or spend the feat. I just don't think the stealthy outdoorsman archtype should start with heavy armor proficiency.

Steverooo · Mar 15, 2003

Droogie said:
If you want to play a character like this, play a fighter or paladin. If you want your ranger to wear half-plate, he can grab a level of fighter. Or spend the feat. I just don't think the stealthy outdoorsman archtype should start with heavy armor proficiency.

Nor did I ever suggest it, Droogle.

Paldins don't work as "Paladin of the Woods", though. Neither does Fighter. No Survival/Wilderness Lore (and LG, in the Paladin's case). NG Ranger or Druid might, but Feats make it tough to do.

And remember... When I said all classes should get professional Feats, I also said from a limited list, with Class-specific Feats included. Wizards, Rogues, and Fighters already do it. Monks and Druids already do it, too... they just get no choices about what abilities they get!

I would like to see ALL classes getting a new ability every level. You may not like it, but that's your choice. I think it would cut down on the multiclassing. The abilities need not be big or dramatic, but they should be flavorful, and useful to the class's concept. Look at the first couple of Druid Special Abilities, for example. Nothing much, but useful (and, IMO, sensical). YMMV.

I think allowing all classes to be handled in a similar fashion would be nice. I understand that D20 Modern basically does this...