D&D General What is the Ranger to you?

[Shadowdweller]

The ranger represents the woodsman / huntsman / survivalist archetype to me. As just about everyone has said. Characters such as Aragorn, of course. But also Robin Hood or his merry men, Orion from Lord Dunsany's "The Queen of Elfland's Daughter", Jack from the movie Legend, Katniss Everdeen from the Hunger Games, and a vast number of others. Also native American and other indigenous hunters across the world. I think they should be:

* Tough
* Skilled at fighting and capable of inflicting high amounts of damage
* Stealthy and skilled at ambushes
* Possess keen senses
* Mobile
* Lightly armored
* Superlative trackers - possibly even able to discern details others cannot from tracks.
* Adept at dealing with environmental hazards and obstacles.

I've never cared for the two-wielding thing, it just doesn't fit the archetype in my mind. I'm not particularly attached to the favored enemy thing either, but I don't despise it. Weapons that should probably be associated with rangers would be bows, axes, and spears. I've no real problem with the 5e incarnation of the class, though there are many examples of the archetype in fiction that simply do not use magic. I've long thought that a set of limited-use "tricks" that work like spells would be ideal for a ranger (and rogue) class. Representing particular feats that require extra preparation, special tools, and/or concentration. And causing effects that would be too powerful to be allowed all the time (like most skills are). These could be quasi-magical in nature...but ideally just pushing the bounds of what could be done without magic. For example, they could be used to increase damage for a sort of focused strike, find and prepare an application of poison, craft and set traps, create climbing equipment that grants auto-success on athletics (climbing) checks for a very limited time, prepare healing poultices, give extra details and/or combat bonuses against an enemy based on its tracks, camouflage one's party.

 

[Garthanos]

Sure, really that is the sort of thing that makes 4e Paragon paths and epic destinies so wonderful. That King’s Magic stuff isn’t a level one class concept .

Except that is like picking a high level effect and saying none of them are appropriate... in 5e terms temp hit points you inspire are now real hit points up to targets max. Heck Kings magic is about ownership too.... you can bind things to you this is my sword and it answers to no other cannot be reformed without my say. Its territorial you can get advantage on nature related checks in your territory so define one LoL. Your wealth is bound directly to your health. So your wealth benefits get con bonus. No I am thinking of that magical warlord that naysayers pretend must be so . Its Arthur forcing boosted intimidate flavor - someone to crown him with excalibur or to bow before him reflexively and creating a combat opening aka prone. A non magical warlord marshals troops in 4e use a practice in high fantasy flavor they may be oath bound dead and it's a ritual shrug I think D&D hasn't explored Kings magic but legend has.

 

[Stalker0]

A ranger is a fighter or rogue with survival and nature. I’ve never really understood the appeal of it as it’s own class

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Except that is like picking a high level effect and saying none of them are appropriate... in 5e terms temp hit points you inspire are now real hit points up to targets max. Heck Kings magic is about ownership too.... you can bind things to you this is my sword and it answers to no other cannot be reformed without my say. Its territorial you can get advantage on nature related checks in your territory so define one LoL. Your wealth is bound directly to your health. So your wealth benefits get con bonus. No I am thinking of that magical warlord that naysayers pretend must be so . Its Arthur forcing boosted intimidate flavor - someone to crown him with excalibur or to bow before him reflexively and creating a combat opening aka prone. A non magical warlord marshals troops in 4e use a practice in high fantasy flavor they may be oath bound dead and it's a ritual shrug I think D&D hasn't explored Kings magic but legend has.

Mil not saying that at all, I am saying that Kings magic should be something that has nothing to do with class. Arthur and Aragorn aren’t of the same class.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

A ranger is a fighter or rogue with survival and nature. I’ve never really understood the appeal of it as it’s own class

This thread is chalk full of examples of why the class as it’s own thing appeals to people.

 

[Garthanos]

I built a 1e Ranger in 4e used a fighter, martial practices and the multi-classing was mostly just to pick up more skills, if I wanted a touch more magic flavor I would have had him train rituals and maybe pick a theme to increase the feel instead.

 

[Garthanos]

Mil not saying that at all, I am saying that Kings magic should be something that has nothing to do with class.

If we are going for fighting style I might build Aragorn as a Warlord sparking his allies into action with serious bonus initiative when battle starts for instance and High Fantasy Arthur as a Paladin/Celtic Bard but the lower fantasy Arthur I would also build as a Warlord (yes with nature skills).

Arthur trained in natural things and natural wisdoms by the Merlin but raised among the Nobility. Some of the abilities I mentioned like connection to the land was both part of kingship and training of both these characters.

Now they might be different classes... because Strider went into hiding and developed more stealth and his natural skills were more practical (and only perhaps less mundane because of the influence of elves).

 

[Xeviat]

A ranger is a fighter or rogue with survival and nature. I’ve never really understood the appeal of it as it’s own class

I'm more than happy to have subclasses for the fighter or rogue (as appropriate) for a lot of the magical classes for use in lower magic settings. Bard, Monk, and Ranger could be Rogues; Barbarian, Paladin, and other Rangers could be Fighters. And Warlords! (Though I do argue that the Bard can build a reasonable Warlord if you justify a Warlord's ability with magic and choose your spells carefully).

 

[Garthanos]

This thread is chalk full of examples of why the class as it’s own thing appeals to people.

I am missing them I would so cut ranger before Warlord for instance

 

[Garthanos]

I'm more than happy to have subclasses for the fighter or rogue (as appropriate) for a lot of the magical classes for use in lower magic settings. Bard, Monk, and Ranger could be Rogues; Barbarian, Paladin, and other Rangers could be Fighters. And Warlords! (Though I do argue that the Bard can build a reasonable Warlord if you justify a Warlord's ability with magic and choose your spells carefully).

Even when I bring up Kings Magic and use it as a flavor for presenting Warlords it just never seems that a vancian spell system does it anything approaching justice...

[SBLOCK=Kings Magic]
King's Magic is the kind of magic where true oaths can bring back the dead and your magic item only responds to those of your blood and oaths of allegiance create brotherhoods whose unity grants them power. It might involve fated companions and is often focused through marks of authority. It can involve influence of followers, and those under your jurisdiction or whom you have mastered by force of arms. It could involve your lands health and prosperity being attached to yours like ancient Celtic Kings. It might include Fate and Destiny manipulation and it's price is often marked in units of charity or karma.

In the ancient world oaths were things of "magic" from which power flowed yet made to sovereign rulers as often or more than deities
This magic is not that of a spell caster in any classic sense and is more subtle than any sorcery. It is the Magic when Uther smashes caldwych/excalibur in to the stone and declares only he and his will have it. Its the magic which causes Aragorns hand to catalyze a weed in to a healing herb. It's the magic when the bearer of the Sword of Truth drives his companions in to a berserkergang. It's the magic which causes Arthur's enemies to crown him king in spite of their own desires and it's focused through his famous Sword of Kingship and again Aragorn calling in the oaths of the unforgiven dead.
[/SBLOCK]