D&D 5E The Dual Wielding Ranger: How Aragorn, Drizzt, and Dual-Wielding Led to the Ranger's Loss of Identity

[Voadam]

Wands helped, but in 1e they didn't recharge, and they weren't that common in the modules. For example, if you managed to get every single item in Keep (B2), which was a notoriously high-magic item module for low levels, then you got, in terms of wands by the end ... wait for it .... a wand of enemy detection with 9 charges, and a wand of paralyzation with 7 charges.

Yes, low level modules rarely had wands, and I too found most adventures had wands with few (often single digit) charges as opposed to the DMG page 132 guideline of 81+

"Unless noted to the contrary, these items will have the following number of charges; each time the item is used, there is an expenditure of 1 charge (the user will not necessarily be aware of the number of charges in an item):
rods 50 charges minus 0 to 9 (d10 − 1)
staves 25 charges minus 0 to 5 (d6 − 1)
wands 100 charges minus 0 to 19 (d20 − 1)"

However wands are a bit more common in higher level modules such as the Temple of Elemental Evil which has multiple double digit charge combat wands.

Once/if a magic user did get a normal DMG wand though it was a strong regular combat option that made wizards repeating artillery instead of the otherwise special occasion rationed artillery.

Also most wands in 1e specifically said in their descriptions they could be recharged (in the DMG all but wands of negation and wonder).

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Meh, we did it I mean, we had a cleric and a fighter/MU, and then we had about 10 hirelings.

Again, that's not doing it. An all-MU party isn't "we had a cleric, and a F/MU, and 10 hirelings to do the combat."

In addition, from your comments it appears that you were not using the spellcasting rules (time- you needed to add six segments to decide to cast a spell and use material components if the spell required it in addition to the actual casting time, as well as the combat rules). In addition, and I know it's been a while, but some of your comments don't always make sense (for example, MUs didn't have a lot of money- they had the least money, other than monks.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yes, low level modules rarely had wands, and I too found most adventures had wands with few (often single digit) charges as opposed to the DMG page 132 guideline of 81+

"Unless noted to the contrary, these items will have the following number of charges; each time the item is used, there is an expenditure of 1 charge (the user will not necessarily be aware of the number of charges in an item):
rods 50 charges minus 0 to 9 (d10 − 1)
staves 25 charges minus 0 to 5 (d6 − 1)
wands 100 charges minus 0 to 19 (d20 − 1)"

However wands are a bit more common in higher level modules such as the Temple of Elemental Evil which has multiple double digit charge combat wands.

Once/if a magic user did get a normal DMG wand though it was a strong regular combat option that made wizards repeating artillery instead of the otherwise special occasion rationed artillery.

Also most wands in 1e specifically said in their descriptions they could be recharged (in the DMG all but wands of negation and wonder).

Right, although I don't recall any explanation of HOW recharging works. Thus it might be super difficult (IE require Enchant An Item plus impossibly difficult lists of ingredients, etc.), OR it might be as simple as casting the most appropriate spell onto the wand, or something in between (IE requiring research, special ingredients, some higher levels, etc.).

Anyway, the treasure tables in the MM and the DMG, plus wandering encounter rules which by default will invoke them, will inevitably lead to a lot of magic item treasure, and at least SOME wands, etc. By 11th level my wizard had a wand of magic missiles, a necklace of fireballs, a Staff of Power!!! and a slew of defensive items and oddball stuff (including a Portable Hole).

One thing that happens in these games is that, even if there aren't some vast number of items out there, parties accumulate them. Some characters die, but others survive and tend to collect the good items and become even harder to kill. That was certainly the deal with my character, surviving pretty much every TSR module and a lot of our own adventures, by 14th level you will be festooned with 'stuff'. Same with spell book, I'd just copy the best spells from each other wizard's book (either we'd trade, or if they got offed by some unfortunate event then they really couldn't object). After a while you tend to have pretty much everything worth having at most levels.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Also most wands in 1e specifically said in their descriptions they could be recharged (in the DMG all but wands of negation and wonder).

Well, recharging wasn't exactly easy. See, e.g., Charging Isn't Cheap, Dragon # 101. Most notably, after the whole involved process, you have to "enter" the charges.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm not sure everyone shares your interpretation though. I think it is perfectly within the archetype to consider a loner who makes a living out in the wilderness to be a 'ranger'. This is the classic 'mountain man' trope. Indeed a lot of the famous pioneers of American history fall into this bin. It was said of Daniel Boone that as soon as he could see his nearest neighbor's chimney smoke he knew it was time to move on.

So I don't hold with your idea they are 'outliers and special cases'. They are maybe not the entirety of the trope, sure. I think what I was arguing is that D&D can handle the other types, the 'lawman' or 'member of an organization' too. There is nothing about the class design, in any edition AFAIK which really points you either way.

Older editions actually had organizational rules or donation assumptions to associates and associations.

The thing is the D&D ranger is a special concept created for D&D based on various inspirations. However the random loner in the wild isn't the primary. It work but the class is built off another archetype.

The ranger class is built off the ranger job.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Older editions actually had organizational rules or donation assumptions to associates and associations.

The thing is the D&D ranger is a special concept created for D&D based on various inspirations. However the random loner in the wild isn't the primary. It work but the class is built off another archetype.

The ranger class is built off the ranger job.

why do we not have a book for that type of stuff it is interesting for dms and players.

 

[Chaosmancer]

why do we not have a book for that type of stuff it is interesting for dms and players.

Matt Colville's newest book (Kingdoms and Warfare) is supposed to contain rules for making organizations, and for allowing "all Blank" parties with diversity. So, making a theives guild where everyone feels like a theif, but also cover various roles like magic user, scout, heavy, ect.

I don't know exactly how it will work yet (I wasn't in the playtest) but the few previews I saw looked really good

 

[The Hierophant]

I cross-referenced acaeum, which didn't help, but did give me this AMAZING pre-publication cover:

...

4. That cover.

@Snarf Zagyg have you got a link to that cover, I have never seen that before.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

@Snarf Zagyg have you got a link to that cover, I have never seen that before.

Later AD&D Manuals

www.acaeum.com

Scroll down to unearthed arcana and click link to pre-production cover.

 

[Scott Christian]

One tough thing about the loner out there in the wilderness archetype is it is hard to imagine that loner as low level. Anyone wandering around solo in a D&D world, especially in forests full of danger, are easily level 8. So from the very beginning, the concept can be tough to swallow for some players.