3.5 Ranger Combat Styles

[Merlion]

One thing I would like to see with favored Enemy be that you go more bonuses more often but you have control over where you put the Plus. Ie Over 20 levels you could get a +8 bonus to one creature or +1 to eight different creatures for example. Thats kinda what bugs me about current favored enemy . if you want it to be worth anything or to 'make sense' you have to start choosing favored enemy dragons or demons or whatever early one in order to get any respectable bonus. But... with these creatures its unlikly you'll have ever faced anything of that kind. something more flexable would allow for more realistic evolving abilities. that and come on. how often does a ranger realy get to use his favored enemy bonus? if the bonus is often then the extra damage makes sense. they fight it often. if its rare the ability is practically worthless. its kinda sad to run for a ranger and the play gets all excited cause he 'finaly' gets to fight his favored enemy he's been building up to for the last 4-8 levels and has been yet to meet.

Yea it'd really be nice to also have options on what you put the bonuses on. Perhaps Damage AC, certain skills etc. I kind of doubt they will actualy do much with favored enemy tho they seem rather relucant about that

 

[Zephyrus]

Also alow favored enemy damage to effect things like undead and constructs. So what if they are immune to criticals and stuff. it doesnt take doing a critical hit to eek out a few extra points of damage by knowing how or where to hit a creature to do the most damage. dont cheat rangers of part of their favored enemy bonus by not letting it effect certain creatures like undead and constructs.

 

[Taren Seeker]

I'd just like to see an good ability unique to Rangers that doesn't just translate into bonus feats that you can use in light armor.

That being said, the fighting path is a good start to improving the class. I just hope they have something else. Favored Enemy as it stands will hopefully be ERADICATED! ERADICATED I say!

Oh, and Merlion, please ease up on the thread policing there. Yes you started the thread but that doesn't give you absloute control of the discussion. The branchings have been few and related to the topic anyways.

 

[Merlion]

Yea thats true. but they've also involved people attacking each other, and each others ideas. And arguing at length about which versions of the ranger fit which archtypes...which really has nothing to do with the specfic things I was asking for opnions on. I see how things often go on thease boards...threads tend to degenerate into a couple of people arguing their opnions(which have ofteb diverged quite a way from whatever the original poster was talking about) and often being unpleasant to each other. thats why I stopped posting on the boards for a couple or three weeks or so. I dont like seeing that kind of junk happening on threads I start. I'm just trying to calm people down myself before it becomes the sort of thing the mods have to get involved in.

 

[Vrylakos]

If you want choices, play a fighter. paths are perfect for a ranger.

Aragorn was a healer. Last time I checked , healing was definatley divine. Also the spells that help the ranger best are woodland spells. The ranger has a great spell list in my opinion. Though it would be nice to see just a few more

Rangers are hardy, not tough. Good fortitude saves. But not uber-hitpoints.
double?? The rogue has 8. I love rangers, but come on. Rogues should have the most points. 6 is a good number for ranger, not 8 or above!


It sounds like you are looking not for a ranger, but a "superman" class. The ranger has some faults. True. being front loaded, etc. The two weapon fighting is perfect for a ranger. His skills are dex based. A smart ranger will have a higher dex than strength. That extra attack makes up for the lack of damage bonus. Also that is why bow is a great path also. You seem to want a fighter with d12 hitpoints who dosen't use heavy armor. Lots of feats, skills, hit points, magic, but very little balance.

Just wanted to note that your quoted bit above was not from me, though you did attribute it to me...

Vrylakos

 

[Angcuru]

I think the two paths are a welcome change. I mean, when I think ranger, I think Longbow. It's about time that they implement something to mold in the sterotype bow-user image that a lot of people have when they think ranger.

still, i prefer the 2nd edition Archer class kit for the ranger.

why does everyone think that the ranger should have d8 hit dice? this is sheer stupidity.

Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, all are considered warrior classes. warriors get d10 hit dice.

personally, i think that both the ranger AND paladin should actually get some bonus feats. they spend only a bit less time fighting than a fighter does, and they should at least have access to Weapon Specialization. Everyone should. Why is it that only fighters have access to this feat? Why is it that my ranger cannot deal some extra damage with his sword, simply because he likes the outdoors?

hell, I think that rangers should be able to drop the animal companion in order to get a few feats. broohaha.

 

[Vrylakos]

Thats kind of what I mean...I didnt start this thread for people to argue at extreme length about their opnions of the ranger as a class, or to tear each other down for said opnions. try posting again and actualy giving your opnion on the things I asked for opnions on.

Relax.
I have.
I then responded to another poster.
You don't get the conversation you want, I'm sorry.

Vrylakos

 

[Mercule]

If you want choices, play a fighter. paths are perfect for a ranger.

I don't think that paths are appropriate for any class. I'm opposed to the mechanic in general.

What I'd like to see instead is bonus feats that include the feats from the paths. They should also include completely non-combat feats rather than forcing the ranger to "choose a fighting style".

Aragorn was a healer. Last time I checked , healing was definatley divine. Also the spells that help the ranger best are woodland spells. The ranger has a great spell list in my opinion. Though it would be nice to see just a few more

I'm not really opposed to the idea of rangers having spells, per se. I've just seen enough concepts that are great for ranger, but the spells basically detract from it that my solution is to dump spells from the ranger and encourage multi-classing to get the spells.

That works nicely whether you see the ranger "archetype" as divine caster (as you apparently do), arcane caster (as I do), or non-caster (as a couple people I've talked to do).

Rangers are hardy, not tough. Good fortitude saves. But not uber-hitpoints.

I'm _definitely_ not advocating giving them d12, although I could see where it would come across that way. I think d10 is perfect. My point really is that d8 is a bad idea for the ranger.

If someone was going to change the hit die, I would be less opposed to changing to d12 than to d8, but it still wouldn't be my first choice.

double?? The rogue has 8. I love rangers, but come on. Rogues should have the most points. 6 is a good number for ranger, not 8 or above!

"Double plus good" is from "1984" and means "very good".

8 skill points would be absurd for a ranger, I agree. 6 is about right and is a better balance than TWF or some other combat path.

It sounds like you are looking not for a ranger, but a "superman" class. The ranger has some faults. True. being front loaded, etc. The two weapon fighting is perfect for a ranger. His skills are dex based. A smart ranger will have a higher dex than strength. That extra attack makes up for the lack of damage bonus. Also that is why bow is a great path also. You seem to want a fighter with d12 hitpoints who dosen't use heavy armor. Lots of feats, skills, hit points, magic, but very little balance.

I _don't_ want to see ranger be a superman. I think that impression came from a misunderstanding.

My main disagreement with TWF is "What does being a woodsman have to do with ambidexterity?". It doesn't seem to have any relation to the core archetype and even seems a bit out of place. I'm under the impression that the 2E developers have even openly stated that it was added to the ranger to give them an extra "balance" kick. I don't have a problem with a ranger or two having it, and the normal feat mechanic works fine for that. It's when it's a core of the class that it bugs me.

And, as I said above, I have a problem with the virtual feats and path mechanic in general, regardless of what the paths are. I'd much prefer to see a few real bonus feats that aren't hemmed in by a decision at 2nd level and weren't exclusively combat oriented. The list used by the Woodsman class in WoT is quite along the lines I'd like to see (in fact, the Woodsman is what I use as a substitute for the ranger in my game).

 

[Merlion]

No problem with you Vrylakos...you've sticked to completely civil conversation. that statement was aimed mainly at noretoc who started throwing acusations at people. I prefer very direct responses to my posts but my main thing is I dont want a thread I start to turn into nothing but an arguement...and their is no reason to start slinging mud on thease boards. Sorry Vry if you thought that one bit was aimed at you

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Useful combat styles:

Two weapon
Archery/crossbow
Double Weapon
Unarmed
Reach weapon
Thrown weapon
Sword-and-shield
Two-handed weapon

I'd like the range to be a good all-around wilderness warrior/scout-type, who can survive well in the woods alone. He's the fighter/druid/rogue to the paladin's fighter/cleric. I think that includes:

- 6 skill points per level
- Good Fort saves (reflex a bonus)
- Light or medium armor
- d10 hit die (gotta be tougher than the druid)
- Favored terrain is better than favored enemy (FE needs tweaking)
- Spellcasting? Yes or no. If yes, focused on wilderness skills, sneaking, and hit-and-run fighting.
- Combat Styles? As long as it has some options (and archery must be one), sure, why not? Then the fighter is the most flexible, the barbarian has rage and mucho HP, the paladin has holy skills/lay on hands/spells, and the ranger has a feat path.
- Virtual feats? Nah, make 'em real feats. Just spread 'em out for no front-loading.