Search results

Okay, well you've met one now. I prefer 5e's skill system. Yes, even to the one you've created. Based on 5e's sales number, I'm going to go out on a limb and say there are at least a couple of us. And no, I don't think asserting that there are other people is being vehement or overly...

I have to admit, I'm quite surprised as well. Although maybe it's a function of those wanting change to be more likely to interact with the poll. It's interesting, nonetheless.

Oh, I acknowledge you’ve made that claim. You’ve been quite explicit about dismissing my concerns. That doesn’t mean I need to agree that this concerns are so easily dealt with. Look, I’m glad you’re writing a game system that you think will work for you. And that you’ve got all the possible...

The level-scaling is an excellent point. Wilderness travel of any sort usually gets negated as soon as a party gets access to reliable magic for travel and provisioning. Thereby negating the entire new subsystem.

I'm sorry if you take my disagreement for me not understanding your posts. I promise you, I am reading them. I just don't agree with what you are saying. I will admit I have no idea what LNO is. 32 skills is still splitting the hair too thin for me. And to be honest, I have no idea what...

Personally, yes, I see 5e’s “cruddy, shallow skill system” as a huge improvement over the 40+ skills of the 3e era. I would never want to go back to a game with that many skills. And if you need that to support your Magic-less ranger, I’d say there’s probably not much chance of either of us...

@Emberashh, first off, I just wanted to say thank you taking the time to explain what you are looking for in that level of detail. I sincerely appreciate it. It does show me that I was right, with the point this isn’t necessarily about the Ranger class for you. You’re looking for a whole...

There’s already Survival and Animal Handling. How much finer do you want it sliced? Do we have to go back to the days of Move Silently and Hide being discrete? Listen and Spot Hidden being separated skills? At this point, you’re not asking for class changes, you are asking for an entirely...

And how is not that just someone with a high Survival skill? Or if that isn’t a high Survival skill, what is a high Survival skill for? And if it is Survival, why do we need special class abilities for an existing skill? Edit to clarify (again): I’m not trying to get rid of Rangers. I like...

But, if it’s an Animal Handling check, why does it need to be a class specific ability? Why do we need a class specifically to make use of an already existing skill? Rogues are no longer the only ones who can Find and Remove Traps. Now, anyone with the right skill can do it. A Ranger having...

Well, I was sort of looking for options other than “bin the whole game and start from scratch” :)

Well, that’s sort of a different argument, then. And would definitely need some careful balancing. Take the list of example abilities @Emberashh posted on the first page. Many of those have direct spell analogues. They seem to want a Ranger who can cast Animal Friendship at will, for...

That all makes sense. Especially the part about it being in a D&D world, where primal magic is an obvious tool for this sort of wilderness warrior to use. That’s what separates it from the highly skilled fighter or rogue (who, let’s face it, is capable of Survival skills as high as a Ranger)...

I didn’t gloss over them. I just didn’t comment on each one. I just reread it, and with the exception of trap-building, it all sounds like magic to me. Summon helpful animals? Understand and speak to animals? How is that not magical? I’m beginning to think you want a magic ranger, you just...

No, I’ve just never seen anyone come up with an example of a magic-less ranger in fiction that justified a class. Like I said, Robin Hood? How is that a Ranger? What is a Ranger to you? What does it need (that isn’t mystical) in order for it not to be a scout, or a dex fighter? What...

I suspect this is an discussion that will never satisfy anyone, because you say Faramir, Robin Hood, and others and I say ‘Fighter’ (or Rogue). And I say Dar and Geralt may be exactly the wheelhouse that the D&D ranger is supposed to accommodate. Edited to add: the only way I could see...

You are 100% correct. It could be used both ways. My only counter is that take away the ‘mystical’ Dunedain abilities, and you are left with basically a wilderness skilled fighter. There’s not enough meat there to justify an entirely new class. A subclass, maybe. But 1e didn’t do subclasses.

Really, it comes down to WOTC deciding that just like there is a half-caster divine caster in between Fighter and Cleric (Paladin), there should be a half-caster primal caster in between Fighter and Druid. Which makes a lot of sense for game reasons (to me). The problem seems to be, that due...

That’s actually part of my point. Birds fly because they are birds. Aragorn does near-mystical stuff, not because he’s a ranger, but because he’s not just human…he’s human+. Isildur’s heir, one of the Dúnedain. If I recall, he also has an increased lifespan. Should Rangers get that as well?

I guess it’s a matter of degrees. Having a trained animal companion isn’t magic. Being able to whistle up animals to help like a Disney Princess is. Obviously this all just my personal preference. But I just look at all the wilderness abilities and wonder why that just isn’t a use of the...