Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
70% standard and the Ranger options
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 7283067" data-attributes="member: 6683613"><p>What <em>exactly</em> makes mysticism intrinsic to the ranger? Because it can't be the original ranger of Tolkien's fiction in all his non-mystical glory. It can't be all the other popular non-mystical wilderness warrior characters, often described as "rangers", in fantasy and adventure media. It can't be the distinctly non-mystical ranger characters in flagship D&D adaptations. It can't be the non-mystical-til-8th rangers of 1E or 2E, the non-mystical-til-4th rangers of 3E, or the non-mystical-period rangers of 4E. It can't even be the three non-mystical character blurbs 5E uses as introduction to the class. (Seriously, they wrote the rogue and fighter intros more magical than the ranger's. Check it out.)</p><p></p><p>There is nothing wrong with writing a ranger class that can actually encompass all the, y'know, rangers. Much healthier than insisting on an "intrinsic" definition that somehow encompasses almost none of them.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Source? My current hypothesis is that you are misremembering something they said, and hypothesis B is that WotC fudged the numbers. 90% is not a believable figure, here any more than in a third-world election result.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheCosmicKid, post: 7283067, member: 6683613"] What [I]exactly[/I] makes mysticism intrinsic to the ranger? Because it can't be the original ranger of Tolkien's fiction in all his non-mystical glory. It can't be all the other popular non-mystical wilderness warrior characters, often described as "rangers", in fantasy and adventure media. It can't be the distinctly non-mystical ranger characters in flagship D&D adaptations. It can't be the non-mystical-til-8th rangers of 1E or 2E, the non-mystical-til-4th rangers of 3E, or the non-mystical-period rangers of 4E. It can't even be the three non-mystical character blurbs 5E uses as introduction to the class. (Seriously, they wrote the rogue and fighter intros more magical than the ranger's. Check it out.) There is nothing wrong with writing a ranger class that can actually encompass all the, y'know, rangers. Much healthier than insisting on an "intrinsic" definition that somehow encompasses almost none of them. Source? My current hypothesis is that you are misremembering something they said, and hypothesis B is that WotC fudged the numbers. 90% is not a believable figure, here any more than in a third-world election result. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
70% standard and the Ranger options
Top