The Bard isn't the jack of all trades... the Ranger is

[ferratus]

I never liked ranger spells before someone explained them in these boards as being a few tricks that the ranger learned in order to survive out in the wild.

That of course makes perfect sense, as the ranger can't exactly pop off back to the city for a clerical cure disease or poison every time he gets hit by mummy's touch or a goblin's arrow. He has to basically have all the skills of other party members because he has to be a one-man party. He has to be sneaky like a thief, deadly like a fighter or assassin, able to cure himself like a cleric, and as cunning and tricky as a wizard.

Listing off the skills that wouldn't be out of place for a ranger to have:

- Fighting style with ranged and skirmish tactics
- Limited Alchemy for poultices and salves, poisons, and smoke bombs, glow-sticks, small explosives etc.
- Druidic spells for curing wounds, poison and disease, animal friendship, camouflage and reconnaissance.
- Stealth and Wilderness Surivival Skills
- Hedge Wizardry (reading scrolls or casting minor spells)

The ranger does not have to be a master equal to the other classes in these things. He just has to be effective and flexible to surivive.

The bard in contrast doesn't really have anything in its flavour text that would make him a jack of all trades because he isn't a loner. If he is a new school bard, he is a master of song magic with a bit of a roguish bent and a penchant for trivia. If he is an old school bard he is more based on his celtic roots, so he is a messenger, diplomat and loremaster. In either school, he has a hint of enchantment magic about him allowing him to easily gain friends and allies. None of that is really the flavour text for a jack of all trades. Why does he need to know everything and be self sufficient if he is primarily a social based character?

I think the short answer is that he doesn't. Plus, since he has been taking up the "jack of all trades class" slot we have watched as the ranger has been relegated to being the "wilderness fighter" role instead of the many-skilled one man army he should be. It is time for that to change.

 

[gyor]

I get your point. You make a great arguement for Rangers as a Jack of all trades.

Still the way I look at it Jack of all Trades is an,overarchtype akin to spellcaster that can be expressed in a multitude of ways.

The Rogue for example is a Jack of all trades, with skill mastery making him a master of any skills he has, plus sneak attack makes him dangerous in combat.

Rogue is a Jack of All trades in regards via skill based way.

Rangers on the Jacks of all trades in a Survivalist way. They have all the skills they need to survive in the wild, enough magic to keep themselves in one piece. Thier Jack of all Trades with a focus on independance and survival in the wilds, self suffiency.

Bards are Jack of All trades in the sense of having a ton of lore from studying songs and stories, as well as having the resources and time to dabble. Think Jlo whose a dancer, actoress, philanthroper, singer, business woman, brand, and who knows what else.

The Ultimate Jack of All trades of course is the factorum class in 3x and the Chameleon paragon path in 4e. But Factorum has no other themes then Jack of All trades.

 

[ComradeGnull]

How about: Ranger :: Bard as Cleric :: Wizard? Or possible: Bards are Rangers for urban environments (not literally, as in the sense of the Urban Ranger, but in that the Bard's social skills are the equivalent of wilderness survival skills.)

I don't see the Ranger ever having arcane magic. It is a wilderness 'career', and fits well to represent the skills that someone from a primitive D&D society would develop in order to survive.

The Bard is a jack of all trades not because he is a loner, but because he is a dabbler and a wanderer by nature. Making a living as an entertainer is by necessity a somewhat rootless trade- you move around a lot, you hear things, you stay in one village until you wear out your welcome, you steal a few things, you move on. The Ranger, by contrast, has favored terrains and favored enemies, which means he probably stays within one area- guarding the border of a particular settlement, or living permanently as a hunter or hermit in a particular wilderness. Bards travel, but they travel the roads and not the wilds, so they learn to fight semi-competently and make use of armor and weapons (Bards could also follow an army, since they have a ready audience and a good source of stories and gossip).

I think it comes down to what you mean by 'jack of all trades'. I don't see the Ranger being competent in social interactions or arcane magic, just as I don't see the Bard being competent in wilderness survival and healing. Nonetheless, each class is much broader and has more competencies than any of the Core 4 or a Paladin, Druid, etc., and is well suited to the environment in which they operate- the wilderness for the Ranger, society for the Bard.

 

[gyor]

Actually I think it would be more Ranger/Bard Druid/Wizard Paladin/Cleric as a comparison.

Paladins make for a less obvious Jack of all trades, but Your skilled at beast handling (mount), Fighting (smite, weapons, and heavy armour), spells, healing, diplomacy, protecting others, and religion, and being tough. In most editions Paladins are so stretched out that they suffer from major MAD.

And to feed your Bard example research for song could dabbling in verious skills and abilities. Demi Moore learned pole dancing for striptease, and various actions stars learn how to fight or stunts, or the basics of a profession thier pretraying or writing about.

A Bard writing Spiritual Hymns may learn some limited divine magic in the process in an effort to gain better understanding or learn that fighting style of a war hero they're writing s musical tribune to in order to more acurately pretray that hero.

 

[BobTheNob]

I agree that the ranger is a Jack-of-all-trades.

But dont agree that the Bard isnt. (Arguments already made by gyor, wont repeat).

Who ever said there isnt enough room in class definitions for two?

 

[GameDoc]

I think the larger point is that all classes really have a diversity of skills, abilities, techniques, and knowledge that can shine in different situations if given the opportunity and that uber-min/maxed one trick ponies that have to sit around waiting for their specific type of encounter to come up are lame.

 

[Minigiant]

I have been saying it for a while now.

A ranger has to be able to Calm an angry bear or leopard. Avoid a wolf pack, lion pride, orc war band, goblin raiding party, or shiver of sharks. Battle a hostile ape, tiger, or chimera. Gather food for 4 in the frozen or sandy wastes. Create shelter from natural components. Neutralize the poison from the animal that bit him. Cure a jungle disease. Craft a wilderness disguise in a short period of time. Create poisons for weapons. Endure extreme hot and cold climate. Predict the weather and natural disasters. Survive forest fires, hurricanes, sandstorms, earthquakes, tornadoes, landslides, and quicksand.

Rangers are their own villages. A walking talking village shaped as a man.

 

[Klaus]

When I have to explain spellcasting rangers, I go one of two routes:

- Rangers are the druidic equivalent to Paladins; or

- Nature in a D&D world is inherently magical. Trees have spirits, animals can be talked to, fey creatures lurk about. In such an environment, one cannot help but learn some of nature's magical ways, even if only to survive.

 

[Minigiant]

When I have to explain spellcasting rangers, I go one of two routes:

- Rangers are the druidic equivalent to Paladins; or

- Nature in a D&D world is inherently magical. Trees have spirits, animals can be talked to, fey creatures lurk about. In such an environment, one cannot help but learn some of nature's magical ways, even if only to survive.

I usually go with a combination. By level X, a ranger would have ran into one of the magical aspects of nature. Maybe they run into a fey, a druid, or a primal spirit. Maybe they just absorbed enough magical energy and lore by interacting with the magic of nature for that long. It's like living in a city and making powerful connections.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

A while back there was a thread making the same point about how wizards and rogues were both "generalists" because their skills applied to a wide range of social, exploration, and combat scenarios. I pointed out that you could say the same of clerics, leaving fighters as the only base class NOT a "generalist" or "jack of all trades."

Point being, EVERY class should have the breadth and versatility to look like a badass across all three tiers. The bard can charm, gather information, heal, inspire, and stab. The wizard can scry, buff, nuke, study, and turn into a dragon. So on for clerics, rangers, druids, and pretty much everyone else. (Again, except fighters and maybe barbarians, who kind of get screwed here.) The question is, what distinguishes each class?