3.5e Ranger... Little Improvement But Still...

[Li Shenron]

Rangers get more skill points, a good reflex save, evasion, a better animal companion (see the new druid revision), some better spells (barkskin), cool hiding abilities, there favored enemy is much better and more flexible- seriously guys how much more do you want?

Finally someone sane!

Compare the new Ranger to the new Figther over 20 levels:

Ranger's scores:
+ 4 skill points/level
much longer class skills list
better reflex ST
Evasion
5 bonus feats (but fixed)
Animal Companion
Spells (divine)
5 Favored Enemies
Wild Empathy, Woodland Stride, Swift Tracker, Camouflage, Hide in Plain Sight

Fighter's scores:
better HD
11 bonus feats
access to WSpec, GWFocus, GWSpec (not free)
better armors

Good to know that at least the new GWFocus and GWSpec require a higher level of Figther, otherwise I don't think we would have seen many straigth Ftr but rather few levels to get a bunch of bonus feats.

How can you complain about combat paths? Try to picture the new Ranger WITHOUT those 3 FREE feats: does it look weak? Does it look worse than the 3.0 Ranger? I think it looks already strong enough without them, but you get them. Besides, you still have as many feats as any non-Ftr and non-Wiz characters every 3 levels to spend in whatever combat style you may like. With the combat path you can either be the second best archer or 2Wfighter around or being good in an extra style if you need.

It may not still fit everyone's concept of the Ranger, but the only way to succeed in that would be to just get rid of it and write a bunch of wilderness oriented feats, then play a Figther and take them as bonus feats.

 

[Vurt]

But again, my gripe is the armor restriction for those "virtual feats." I don't like the fact that ranger will forever be restricted, while a rogue or a wizard who even took the time to acquire armor proficiency could fight in armor without penalty.

Much like a rogue taking the medium and heavy armour feats to sneak attack in heavy armour, there's nothing preventing the 3.5 ranger from taking TWF in addition to their combat path abilities to fight with two weapons in medium armour without penalty.

In both cases you spend one of your feat slots, you get the full ability.

Rangers simply don't get the full ability for free. I see nothing wrong with that, there's nothing that says the class has to get its cake and eat it too while in medium armour.

Vurt

 

[Korin Tempest]

re: sword & board rangers

anyone that want's a sword/board ranger path... go with two weapon path and take shield expert as one of your regular feats... not that difficult... that would make a pretty competent sword and board fighter.. to make it better, take two weapon defense as one of your other feats.. you'll have a +2/+3 to the ac, depending on what shield you used

 

[Westwind]

Deleted Post: I should read more carefully the text I'm posting questions on.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

seriously guys how much more do you want?

A removal of combat styles.

 

[ForceUser]

Rangers get more skill points, a good reflex save, evasion, a better animal companion (see the new druid revision), some better spells (barkskin), cool hiding abilities, there favored enemy is much better and more flexible- seriously guys how much more do you want?

Heh, not as much as they got. I think Wizards has gone the wrong way, by buffing some classes that were fine (such as the druid) not because they were actually weak, but because they were unpopular.

Regarding the 3.5 ranger, I don't like it. I don't like the d8 HD, and I don't like the narrow focus on 2weapon fighting and archery. Rangers should have choices that make sense, but again they've been forced into artificial weapon restrictions. As for all the cool abilities they've gotten in 3.5 yes, they are cool when taken on an individual basis, but I think that taken as a whole that's just too much good stuff. For instance, I would have never given rangers Evasion or Hide in Plain Sight, but that's because my interpretation of the class differs from Wizards'. I don't like the shift in role from wilderness warrior to wilderness rogue, and I probably won't use this version of the class IMC. I'm still leaning toward a variation on the Wheel of Time Woodsman; it's closer to my vision of what a ranger should be.

Se la vie.

 

[diaglo]

A removal of combat styles.

and roll 2d8 at 1st lvl for hps.

 

[Thels]

The Bow and the Two-Weapon style both have quite a few feats associated to them. There are no feats associated with Two-handed style or Sword and shield styte (I also don't see shields as something appropiate for a woodsman, but that might just be my opinion).

If you want that defence, why not go with Two Weapon Style and get Two Weapon Defensive with one of your general feats.

Also, there's no reason why you can't go fight with a greatsword. You still have your regular feats to spend on greatsword focus for example and with the archery path, you're getting yourself a diversity in weapon options. I don't think the idea is to be able to fight as good with any weapon style as the fighter does.

However, what I don't get is the new class abilities that are based on level+ability score, like wild empathy.

There's already Traps that works on your search skill and Tracking that works on wilderniss lore (soon to be survival). Then why is Wild Empathy not on Animal Handling? A little consistency would be nice.

And what's this with d8? Ranger HD Type got nerfed?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Diaglo

and roll 2d8 at 1st lvl for hps.

Nah, I don't even want that.

Thels

I don't think the idea is to be able to fight as good with any weapon style as the fighter does.

A ranger who has to spend his seven feats on combat, rather than 18 feats, will not be a match for a fighter. The fighter can take both combat styles, if he wanted to, as well as Greater Weapon Specialization and whatever else, and still kick the ranger's behind.

Removing the combat styles won't make the ranger any stronger than the fighter.

Besides, paladins and barbarians don't get this kind of restriction. Why handcuff the ranger?

And what's this with d8? Ranger HD Type got nerfed?

Yup.

 

[Ranger REG]

Much like a rogue taking the medium and heavy armour feats to sneak attack in heavy armour, there's nothing preventing the 3.5 ranger from taking TWF in addition to their combat path abilities to fight with two weapons in medium armour without penalty.

In both cases you spend one of your feat slots, you get the full ability.

Rangers simply don't get the full ability for free. I see nothing wrong with that, there's nothing that says the class has to get its cake and eat it too while in medium armour.

Still it is like dangling a carrot, where once in a while I can sneak a few bites. As someone else have said, I don't like "virtual feats," bonus feats that have a condition attached it. It's either you give it to me or you don't. Simple as that.

I mean honestly, how many of the ranger players are going to roll over and accept these conditions, especially when they move from offering those 3e "virtual feats" from 1st class level to 2nd class level? I can't. Therefore, I will houserule it.

BTW, the most recent scoop on the ranger class... good saving throw bonuses for Fortitude AND Reflex. Still, no one has confirmed whether the ranger's hit die remains at d10 or changed to d8. Correct my oversight.