3.5 Ranger Combat Styles

[Steverooo]

Re: Re: 3.5 Ranger Combat Styles

I think shoehorning Rangers into any kind of combat style is a bad idea. The class abilities of the Ranger should be focused on exploration and survival. Not fighting--that's the Fighter's domain. These "combat styles" seem like nothing more than pre-chosen Fighter bonus feats.

There you are, Zar! Been wondering what happened to you!

I think, for the sake of backwards-compatibility, that giving Rangers a choice of occasional Bonus Feats from a different list than the Fighters is the right way to go. Ambi/TWF/Improved TWF for those who like the current version. PBS/Archery Feats for those who want a bowslinger. Mounted Combat/Horse Feats for those who want a buffalo-rider (or whatever). Improved Unarmed Strike and Claw/Slam for those who want a Tarzan/Beastmaster. Something spellzy for those who want a spellslinger.

Offering a list of Feats to select from is not shoe-horning. It also doesn't fix the problem, either!

What Rangers need are flavoring, identity-establishing abilities, whether they be Special Class Abilities, or Ranger-only Bonus Feats (some of which can overlap to other classes, or even be general, but many of which should be specific to the Ranger). THAT, I think, would "fix" the Ranger. Not a choice between two combat styles.

 

[Steverooo]

Personally I wish they would have dropped the spellcasting.

When is the last time you saw Aragorn or Robin Hood cast a spell? If you want woodland spellcasting, multiclass with druid.

And I disagree! Leave the spellcasting in, if for nothing else but backwards-compatibility!

When did Aragorn cast a spell? How about on Weathertop, after the sword-and-torch fight with the Nazgul? He went off, searching for Athelas IN THE DARK! Shucks, y'don't suppose he might have used Detect Animals or Plants in 3e terms, doya?

So here's an ALTERNATE method: Give the Ranger spells, but allow them a "Trade-it-all-Away" option, too. Give up a first level spell slot/day, and gain the inherent Supernatural ability to do something Rangerish, such as Pass without Trace, Detect Animals or Plants, Detect Snares and Pits (which also detects sinkholes and other unsafe ground), etc. Now the Ranger has a choice.

As another alternative, remove ALL Ranger abilities except Track, make them all Bonus Feats, allow a choice of Bonus Feats at every level where a new Ranger ability was formerly gained, and toss in some new choices. Shake thoroughly (don't stir), and serve.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Rangers were the class most people wanted to play around with. There are about gazillion ranger variants--a clear sign that the class needed surgery. I'm happy to say that most of my concerns have been met pretty well.

Rangers have been extensively rebuilt.

Those playing Bards, Druids, Monks, and Rangers will want to see what happens. These "tweener" classes as Skip Williams named them will see some improvements and some of their abilities will be stretched out. Rangers will definitely no longer be front loaded with their feats. However their spell selection and abilities will be beefed up for mid and high levels of play.

Classes are working, for the most part, the way they were intended. But, some of the classes are being fine-tuned. Andy Collins (the designer who was there) specifically mentioned the ranger and the bard as two who would see some changes.

No mention of "wildernessy" so I must have made a memory error; hmm... maybe there won't be "nature" feats for rangers

 

[Steverooo]

...and what other combat styles do people think we will see or would like to see.

We will see EXACTLY TWO combat styles; Dual-Wielding, and Missile. That's it.

What SHOULD we see (What WOULD we see, if I were doing it)? Dual-Wielding, Missile, Sword-and-Board, Unarmed, Spellslinger, Two-handed.

Another option I might invoke, to decrease the Ranger's power a bit (as folks like to tell me that my versions are unbalanced) might be to remove weapons proficiency in most polearms...

Polearms are Fighter weapons, historically used by the lower classes, because they were cheaper and easier to make. They have little place in the forests and jungles, however, because they are harder to drag through the trees and brush.

The exceptions to the above, however, include any type of spear, and the Tiger-Spear (Trident), and (of course) the staff... (some people consider the staff a polearm... nothing on the end of a pole... Others think that's stupid. I will include it in the exceptions, anyway!)

IMHO. YMMV.

 

[Steverooo]

Yea it'd really be nice to also have options on what you put the bonuses on. Perhaps Damage AC, certain skills etc. I kind of doubt they will actualy do much with favored enemy tho they seem rather relucant about that

Actually, I did almost exactly that (not the skills, though, sorry)!

I gave Rangers one "Ranger-only" Feat at level one, and made "Favored Enemies" a General Feat. I then added several Bonus Feats that allowed extra "Oomph!" against Favored Enemies, all requiring the Favored Enemies Feat as a Prerequisite. These Feats work only against Favored Enemies. One of them added a Dodge Bonus to AC equal to the FE Bonus (although I limited it to +4, as per the Dwarf vs. Giants).

Another way to better "fix" the Ranger might be to allow him a half-strength "Sneak Attack" against FEs, BUT he doesn't have to surpise the foe to get it... In other words, he knows how to hit them in the weak spots, does less damage than a Rogue, but can use it every round. Hmmm! Needs some work, but it's an idea...

As for the bonuses against FEs, +1 at first level, +2 at fifth, +3 at 10th, +4 at 15th, and +5 at 20th is exactly backwards-compatible. If you allowed it to be stacked as desired, that could be +15 against one type of foe, or +2 or more against anything... Not sure how I feel about that. +15 vs. Outsiders (Evil)? Masters of the Wild allows that as a FE class!...

ANYWAY, the point (to me) is: In order for the Ranger Class to "fit" Robinhood, Aragorn, Tarzan, The Beastmaster, and "Ranger Rick" it is going to have to be highly flexible. Much more flexible than it is now. This COULD BE DONE with a few Bonus Feats, and quite a few more Ranger-only Feats, but will it be done by WotC?

No! Probably never!

 

[Steverooo]

Also alow favored enemy damage to effect things like undead and constructs. So what if they are immune to criticals and stuff. it doesnt take doing a critical hit to eek out a few extra points of damage by knowing how or where to hit a creature to do the most damage. dont cheat rangers of part of their favored enemy bonus by not letting it effect certain creatures like undead and constructs.

Agreed!


Favored Enemies (General)
You hate certain types of creatures so much that you have extensively studied and trained in the proper techniques of combatting them. Thus, you gain bonuses in hostilities with them.
Benefit: Against one general type of creatures (Aberrations, Animals, Constructs, Dragons, Humanoid Sub-Group (such as "Dark & Vile", "Fey", or "Magical Humanoids"), Magical Beasts, Oozes, Outsider Sub-Group (such as Elementals or Slaadi), Plants, Shapechangers, Undead, or Vermin) you receive a +1 damage bonus (even against creatures immune to critical hits), even when using missile weapons within 30', as well as +1 to all Bluff, Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, and Wilderness Lore checks when using these skills against those types of creatures. Every five levels after taking this Feat, these bonuses increase by one, and a new Favored Enemy may be added, beginning at +1.

 

[shilsen]

Agreed!


Favored Enemies (General)
You hate certain types of creatures so much that you have extensively studied and trained in the proper techniques of combatting them. Thus, you gain bonuses in hostilities with them.
Benefit: Against one general type of creatures (Aberrations, Animals, Constructs, Dragons, Humanoid Sub-Group (such as "Dark & Vile", "Fey", or "Magical Humanoids"), Magical Beasts, Oozes, Outsider Sub-Group (such as Elementals or Slaadi), Plants, Shapechangers, Undead, or Vermin) you receive a +1 damage bonus (even against creatures immune to critical hits), even when using missile weapons within 30', as well as +1 to all Bluff, Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, and Wilderness Lore checks when using these skills against those types of creatures. Every five levels after taking this Feat, these bonuses increase by one, and a new Favored Enemy may be added, beginning at +1.

No "hate certain types of creatures", please! I'm glad that they dropped that aspect (having to detest your favored enemy) from rangers in 3e. Now I just hope 3.5e allows rangers to take their own species as favored enemies as well.

 

[Mercule]

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

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.

 

[Mercule]

re: the d8 hd----- when I heard that it was dropping to this in 3.5e, I balked. Then it started to grow on me as I realized that a ranger is more of a scout than a front-line fighter. If his BAB progression is better than a druid, then he's still a reasonably good fighter, right?

Is there any actual confirmation on the d8 hit die for rangers?

Somebody please tell me that this is just a really bad rumor.

 

[Steverooo]

I think the two paths are a welcome change. I mean, when I think ranger, I think Longbow. It's about time that they implement something to mold in the sterotype bow-user image that a lot of people have when they think ranger.

I think Rangers should have MORE than two paths, and free choice between them, with REAL Feats, not virtual ones. There are better ways to limit them to armor type: Evasion and the Barbarian's Fast Movement both spring to mind!

why does everyone think that the ranger should have d8 hit dice? this is sheer stupidity.

Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, all are considered warrior classes. warriors get d10 hit dice.

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.

personally, i think that both the ranger AND paladin should actually get some bonus feats. they spend only a bit less time fighting than a fighter does, and they should at least have access to Weapon Specialization. Everyone should. Why is it that only fighters have access to this feat? Why is it that my ranger cannot deal some extra damage with his sword, simply because he likes the outdoors?

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.

As for Weapon Specialization, I think that only the Fighter Classes should get it. That's the way it worked in 1e. I allow Rangers WS in only certain types of weapons, ala Unearthed Arcana, bows, swords, spears, axes, and a few others (not really done working on that, yet).

hell, I think that rangers should be able to drop the animal companion in order to get a few feats. broohaha.

And I think the above method does that. Let them trade away spells for Ranger-only Feats, if they want, but leave the spell option for backwards-compatibility!