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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Ranger Design Goals
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="fuindordm" data-source="post: 5938255" data-attributes="member: 5435"><p>That was a really vague blog. And it sounds to me like they're trying to make a ranger that takes from all four editions... </p><p></p><p>"Being at home in the wilderness" is obviously key to the class.</p><p></p><p>"Rangers have learned hard lessons... and are tougher than other characters" is an exceptionally feebly justification. Should a ranger who roughs it regularly be tougher than a veteran soldier? Tougher than a barbarian? It <em>would</em> make sense for them to have more endurance, which could be represented as a class bonus to Con or a couple of bonus hit dice for out-of-combat recovery.</p><p></p><p>"Protector" sure, why not? Let's wait to see what class abilities they propose to represent it. A ranger protects his companions by avoiding encounters, not by bodyguarding them in the midst of combat. But it would make sense for them to have combat stunts or tricks to influence the behavior of natural critters (make them choose a different target, make them flee for a round, that sort of thing).</p><p></p><p>"In their guise as hunters, rangers can choose to focus on an individual quarry, whereupon their hunter’s instincts kick in, allowing them to strike with enhanced lethal force."</p><p></p><p>This is the one statement that rubs me the wrong way. Like the statement about "Rangers are tougher", I don't understand how in the game world you justify this hunter's focus as something rangers have while fighters, barbarians, or assassins do not. I understand all the problems with favored enemy, but at least it made sense in the game world. </p><p></p><p>Now, the mundane classes have to have something to differentiate them, and the most important something is how they excel in combat. Each one should have a class ability that makes them an effective warrior (at least in some situations) and leads to a unique play experience. Barbarians have rage, rogues have sneak attack, fighters have a pretty consistent upgrade to AC and damage, and so on. </p><p></p><p>So what do you give rangers? I'd like to see a compromise between 3E's favored enemy, which makes sense in the world but doesn't come up often enough, and 4E's hunter's quarry, which works in every combat but feels like a generic fighter skill. A couple of months ago, someone else on the board suggested that they could get better with a chosen enemy as an encounter progresses--in effect, they could choose a new favored enemy for each adventure, and the more often they met that enemy the better their bonuses got. I thought that idea was excellent.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="fuindordm, post: 5938255, member: 5435"] That was a really vague blog. And it sounds to me like they're trying to make a ranger that takes from all four editions... "Being at home in the wilderness" is obviously key to the class. "Rangers have learned hard lessons... and are tougher than other characters" is an exceptionally feebly justification. Should a ranger who roughs it regularly be tougher than a veteran soldier? Tougher than a barbarian? It [I]would[/I] make sense for them to have more endurance, which could be represented as a class bonus to Con or a couple of bonus hit dice for out-of-combat recovery. "Protector" sure, why not? Let's wait to see what class abilities they propose to represent it. A ranger protects his companions by avoiding encounters, not by bodyguarding them in the midst of combat. But it would make sense for them to have combat stunts or tricks to influence the behavior of natural critters (make them choose a different target, make them flee for a round, that sort of thing). "In their guise as hunters, rangers can choose to focus on an individual quarry, whereupon their hunter’s instincts kick in, allowing them to strike with enhanced lethal force." This is the one statement that rubs me the wrong way. Like the statement about "Rangers are tougher", I don't understand how in the game world you justify this hunter's focus as something rangers have while fighters, barbarians, or assassins do not. I understand all the problems with favored enemy, but at least it made sense in the game world. Now, the mundane classes have to have something to differentiate them, and the most important something is how they excel in combat. Each one should have a class ability that makes them an effective warrior (at least in some situations) and leads to a unique play experience. Barbarians have rage, rogues have sneak attack, fighters have a pretty consistent upgrade to AC and damage, and so on. So what do you give rangers? I'd like to see a compromise between 3E's favored enemy, which makes sense in the world but doesn't come up often enough, and 4E's hunter's quarry, which works in every combat but feels like a generic fighter skill. A couple of months ago, someone else on the board suggested that they could get better with a chosen enemy as an encounter progresses--in effect, they could choose a new favored enemy for each adventure, and the more often they met that enemy the better their bonuses got. I thought that idea was excellent. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Ranger Design Goals
Top