D&D 5E Fictional examples of Rangers

[Kinematics]

From an extended attempt to rebuild the ranger class last year, we'd settled on three primary archetypes:

1) Hunter — Focuses on the tracking and hunting side of things. Most closely aligned with Fighter, which is where a lot of the thought of Ranger being a subclass of Fighter might come from. Knowledge of terrain and means of survival are a bit component.

• Aragorn
• Lone Ranger
• Batman
• various other examples people have mentioned already

2) Beastmaster — Focuses on animal companions. Much more closely tied to nature than the Hunter. Lives alongside nature rather than 'protecting' nature, because nature is pretty damn good at protecting itself.

• Grizzly Adams
• Tarzan
• The Beastmaster

3) Warden — The magic-using subclass. The Ranger's half-caster status was removed, and Warden became the 1/3 caster subclass. This subclass is much closer to the Druid, and probably closest to what I'd consider a 'shaman' (an idea which has a lot of similar characteristics to the knowledge aspects of Ranger). Would focus on using magic to draw out 'natural' magic effects, and is the one that is probably most likely to fall into the idea of protecting a region, and thus protecting nature.

Can't think of any good named examples right now.


The most notable change was making Ranger a pure martial class, opening up a lot of design space for the class itself, and the Hunter and Beastmaster subclasses. Ranger magic has always seemed to be one of the primary problems of the class, largely because it doesn't mesh with the majority of ranger concepts. I can't think of any major ranger-like concept characters that I'd think would use magic to any significant degree.

On the other hand, Ranger+magic fits well with a lot of 'shaman' concepts. As Shamans are more associated with spirits, it even fits in with Aragorn's calling of the spirit army.

Thinking it over, I actually quite like directions this could go. Going to go back to the rebuild thread and talk it over.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well most D&D settings are in the Classical-Medieval-Renaissance Era were there is a LOT of wilderness and few big cities.

So druids would not need to defend nature that much. The wild was winning and you need a massive physical and financial effort to cut through it.

That just isn’t true. It wasn’t exactly the modern era when England deforested itself and chunks of continental Europe to field large armies of hundred and hundreds of longbowmen against their neighbors (mostly France).

A ranger or especially a Druid isn’t going to look at the whole planet or continent or even broad geographical biomeregion. They’re gonna look at their homeland. If D&D druids Existed in England during the Middle Ages, the Crown would have had to field troops just to successfully cut all those trees down, because the Druids and their allies would have been disappearing every logger that stepped into their Woods.


edit: not sure how “their” could be misspelled to the point it gets autocorrected to “Iraq”, but okay

 

[Tonguez]

That just isn’t true. It wasn’t exactly the modern era when England deforested itself and chunks of continental Europe to field large armies of hundred and hundreds of longbowmen against their neighbors (mostly France).

A ranger or especially a Druid isn’t going to look at the whole planet or continent or even broad geographical biomeregion. They’re gonna look at their homeland. If D&D druids Existed in England during the Middle Ages, the Crown would have had to field troops just to successfully cut all those trees down, because the Druids and their allies would have been disappearing every logger that stepped into their Woods.


edit: not sure how “their” could be misspelled to the point it gets autocorrected to “Iraq”, but okay

Kind of, but it wasnt until the 16th Century that serious deforestation happened due to the expansion of the English Navy. Prior to that the Forest was too important as a resource and as a royal hunting ground. It wasnt until the second half of the 17th century that the Enclosures really cut in to the English Forest and then most of the deforestation happened during WW1

Also the crown did have to post troops against the peasant riots during the era when the peasants protested their rights against crown imposed restrictions - whose to say they werent led by druids

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Kind of, but it wasnt until the 16th Century that serious deforestation happened due to the expansion of the English Navy. Prior to that the Forest was too important as a resource and as a royal hunting ground. It wasnt until the second half of the 17th century that the Enclosures really cut in to the English Forest and then most of the deforestation happened during WW1

Also the crown did have to post troops against the peasant riots during the era when the peasants protested their rights against crown imposed restrictions - whose to say they werent led by druids

A second round of deforestation happened in the 16th century, but a first round absolutely happened earlier than that. Hell, there is strong evidence that the island was densely forested in Neolithic times, and constant farming expansion and tin mining lead to only about 15% of the land being forested by the early medieval period, with medieval wars dropping that even lower, not to mention taking old growth wilderness and turning it into lumber farms.

Plenty for a Druid to oppose in the name of protecting nature, there.

 

[Flamestrike]

Daryl Dixon from The Walking Dead.

Lives in the woods alone with his dog and bow. Tracks things all the time.

Favored enemy: Undead.

 

[jayoungr]

People always mention Aragorn when discussing fictional rangers (and rightly so), but what about the other ranger from LOTR, Faramir? He's not the "lives in the woods full time" sort, but he and his men are experts at woodland fighting and camouflage. They also fit the mold of protecting civilization.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Plenty for a Druid to oppose in the name of protecting nature, there.

If the Romans hadn't exterminated them centuries earlier. (because they where afraid of their magic, not because they wanted to chop down trees).

 

[billd91]

If the Romans hadn't exterminated them centuries earlier. (because they where afraid of their magic, not because they wanted to chop down trees).

My money’s on politics. The druids represented a rival authority in Gaul that Rome wouldn’t tolerate. When it came to religion and other implied magic, the Romans were otherwise pretty accommodating - as long as you recognized Rome’s authority and made the appropriate, required civic sacrifices they tended to live and let live on other religious questions.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

My money’s on politics. The druids represented a rival authority in Gaul that Rome wouldn’t tolerate. When it came to religion and other implied magic, the Romans were otherwise pretty accommodating - as long as you recognized Rome’s authority and made the appropriate, required civic sacrifices they tended to live and let live on other religious questions.

There where plenty of other political groups that the Romans managed to subvert. If you read the writing of the time, it sounds like what the Romans where really afraid of was druidic magical power. The Romans may have been "sophisticated and civilised" but they still believed in magic.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If the Romans hadn't exterminated them centuries earlier. (because they where afraid of their magic, not because they wanted to chop down trees).

I was referring to the D&D druid.