As everyone knows, there was no discrete "ranger" class in BD&D/BECM. Considering how rangers were built in the Strategic Review (and 1e), that was probably a good thing. The early builds of rangers were way overpowered, IMHO.
That being said, there were a couple of attempts at "simulating" rangers in BECM, at least in the "official" supplemental materials. The Gazetteers introduced the concept of "foresters", humans who had much the same fighter/mage abilities as elves. The Princess Ark series in Dragons introduced the concept of the "druidic knight", sort of a "prestige class" like the paladin that could cast druid spells at 1/3 the level of the character.
While elves were a class in themselves (the fighter/mage combo), there were also provisions for fighter-only elves and mage-only elves; but the mages were "treekeepers", the elvish equivalent of clerics, unless they were human-trained. Treekeepers used a combination of mage and druid spells.
With all that in mind, I would like to suggest the following:
1. Elven mages should all use the "treekeeper" spell list, unless they are human-trained, in which case they would use the normal mage list.
2. Human foresters (rangers), because of their close association with elves, can cast elf/treekeeper spells at 1/3 their level. They can also detect danger as druidic knights and track as AD&D rangers.
2. The typical "elf class" is actually the elven forester class.
What this gets us:
1. More separation of race and class, which is what Gary G. and company intended all along (according to OD&D).
2. A balanced "ranger" equivalent for BD&D/BECM, which includes mage and druidic features from AD&D without all the extraneous stuff.
3. A truly unique elven mage-variant.
Any thoughts?
That being said, there were a couple of attempts at "simulating" rangers in BECM, at least in the "official" supplemental materials. The Gazetteers introduced the concept of "foresters", humans who had much the same fighter/mage abilities as elves. The Princess Ark series in Dragons introduced the concept of the "druidic knight", sort of a "prestige class" like the paladin that could cast druid spells at 1/3 the level of the character.
While elves were a class in themselves (the fighter/mage combo), there were also provisions for fighter-only elves and mage-only elves; but the mages were "treekeepers", the elvish equivalent of clerics, unless they were human-trained. Treekeepers used a combination of mage and druid spells.
With all that in mind, I would like to suggest the following:
1. Elven mages should all use the "treekeeper" spell list, unless they are human-trained, in which case they would use the normal mage list.
2. Human foresters (rangers), because of their close association with elves, can cast elf/treekeeper spells at 1/3 their level. They can also detect danger as druidic knights and track as AD&D rangers.
2. The typical "elf class" is actually the elven forester class.
What this gets us:
1. More separation of race and class, which is what Gary G. and company intended all along (according to OD&D).
2. A balanced "ranger" equivalent for BD&D/BECM, which includes mage and druidic features from AD&D without all the extraneous stuff.
3. A truly unique elven mage-variant.
Any thoughts?
