D&D 3E/3.5 3.0 Ranger vs 3.5 Ranger

[ForceUser]

They're pretty cool in 3.5, though they're clearly relegated to 2nd-rank status now. Just for fun, I've added a third combat style in my campaign: "mighty fighting" - Cleave at 2nd, Great Cleave at 6th, and Combat Brute (from Complete Warrior) at 11th. Also, rangers in my campaign can choose to forego combat styles altogether in favor of gaining wild shape as a druid (Small and Medium creatures only).

 

[Darklone]

These area of effect spells better don't deal damage.... Evasion anyone?

Ok, the saves aren't that great, but these mounts IMHO last long enough not to make it worth it wasting shots on the mount.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Actually, it seems to me that a mount would be one of the better ways a ranger could use their animal companion. The 1/2 level deal is crippling for the animal's melee survivability, but a ranger with Mounted Combat and maxed out Ride ranks can make good use of the stronger mount. And if the mount dies, since there's no penalty for AC death, he heads to the horsedealer in the local town, picks up another one, slaps the AC powers onto it, and is good to go again.

Well, yeah, that works if you're adventuring in cities all the time. Really, I don't see why there's no penalty for losing a mount in the rules.

Have your experiences with it been different? I have to admit I haven't ever had a ranger actually go this route. IME most rangers pick up a wolf or somesuch to help them with tracking and maybe toss in the occasional trip attack if a melee brute gets to close to them.

IME I've had to hold back on attacking druid animal companions as a GM because they die too easily. Their ACs are low, their hit points lame, etc. That's taking into account Evasion and the like - I didn't bother using direct damage because it's usually weak, I just used arrows or light fighters with rapiers... even a monk. The only thing I've seen an NPC monk kill is an animal companion. Even the rogue couldn't get killed by a monk, and IME rogues die like flies IMC.

 

[mikebr99]

They're pretty cool in 3.5, though they're clearly relegated to 2nd-rank status now.

Funny... my 11th Dwarven Ranger, two-weapon fighting with a Dwarven Waraxe & Shield Spike doesn't seem to have a problem in the front line... that's 6 attacks per round, and with my favoured enemy bonuses, I keep up with the Barbarian just fine. YMMV


Mike

 

[Plane Sailing]

IMC I house-ruled ranger animal companions to use ranger level-3 rather than half ranger level when determining benefits. This puts the animal companion one step behind a druid animal companion, and still useful.

A character of mine has a ranger cohort and that ranger has a terrier as his animal companion - a Small dog with attributes changed around to give it a high CON. He makes a fun scout, flanker, guard etc. The ranger loves his dog and once shielded it with his own body from a fireball which would have finished off the wounded tyke. Ahhh.

 

[DarkMaster]

I use the animal cohorts feat from the wotc sites. If a ranger or druids take it I house rule that (ranger automatically uses the druid table and they both use their total level to determine the power of their animal up to twice their druid/ranger level. The Ranger/Barbarian just took it and I will see how it goes.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

IMC I house-ruled ranger animal companions to use ranger level-3 rather than half ranger level when determining benefits. This puts the animal companion one step behind a druid animal companion, and still useful.

I like that. As per the RAW the Ranger AC is too weak to be considered any but disposable, even more so as you scale up in level.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I like that. As per the RAW the Ranger AC is too weak to be considered any but disposable, even more so as you scale up in level.

FWIW I do the same with Ranger and Paladin caster level too - I took the cue from the paladin "turn undead" at level-3.

Cheers

 

[Celtavian]

re

Ranger is a much more attractive class. I still don't have any players that will play a straight ranger, but they do take more levels of ranger. Ten levels of ranger is very nice combined with a rogue or fighter or fighter/rogue.

 

[shilsen]

IMC I house-ruled ranger animal companions to use ranger level-3 rather than half ranger level when determining benefits. This puts the animal companion one step behind a druid animal companion, and still useful.

FWIW I do the same with Ranger and Paladin caster level too - I took the cue from the paladin "turn undead" at level-3.

Same here. I've done all of the above in a campaign up to 10th lvl, and it worked out very well. I doubt it would be any different at higher levels. Just watch out for the Golden Barding paladin spell from Complete Divine