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

[MadScientist]

But the two extra skill points are not going to protect his lowered hit die. The skill point will boost his Diplomacy skill when using Wild Empathy feat, and boosting his Survival skill when living in the wild as well as tracking his prey, among other things.

I gave reasoning for my statement. I don't understand where you think my reasoning is incorrect.

Edit: Also Wild Empathy, at least according to the Druid revision spotlight, doesn't use the Diplomacy skill, or any skill for that matter, in its mechanic. (Aside from the fact that even if it did it would essentially be replacing the points spent on the Animal Empathy skill.)

 

[Felon]

I figured it would atleast be a week or two after the books were officially released before people started complaining about the ranger but here we go already....

*shrugs*

I used to get the same sort of comments when I was in the WarHammer forums commenting on my disappointment with how GWS had wrecked my favorite army:

"Shouldn't you wait until after the army book actually comes out before you start complaining?"

And then when I expressed my dissatisfaction after the book came out, what do you think the clever responses were?

"What's the point of complaining now? The book's already out!"

...and that was followed-up by...

"Why don't you play for a while with your new army before you make up your mind?"

Months passed. Played my share of games, and sure enough the army's inflexible lameness was manifold. Was it OK to vent now? Nope:

"I can't believe someone would complain about the army he's been playing with all this time!"

Most people simply don't care about what peeves you, and they'll always find a reason for insisting the circumstances don't warrant complaining.

No doubt many folks are now itching to put my text in quotes and reply "So don't complain! Just learn to deal with it!"

Of course, that's bunk. Complaining beats suffering in silence hands down. Who inspired the vast majority of 3.5e's revisions? All those whiners out there engaging in allegedly ineffectual, pointless complaints. There's nothing inherently wrong with complaining: it's the merits of the complaints (and lack thereof) that should draw fire, not the simple act of complaining itself.

 

[Vurt]

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.

But D&D is filled with exactly this type of thing all the time! Watch as I mischeviously twist your own words. (And please don't think I'm trying to be overly antagonistic, that's not my intent. I'm really trying to be a little tongue-in-cheek with this, the whole absurdity leads to paradox leads to enlightenment schtick.)

Look at rogues. They can't sneak attack all the time, they need to be flanking or have their opponent denied Dex. I don't like sneak attacks that have a condition attached to them. It's either you give it to me or you don't. Simple as that.

Barbarians can move at +10, but not in heavy armour or under a heavy load. I don't like fast movement that has a condition attached to it. It's either you give it to me or you don't. Simple as that.

Monks get a cool Wisdom based armour class bonus. But it doesn't work in conjunction with armour! I don't like cool Wisdom based armour class bonuses that have a condition attached to them. It's either you give it to me or you don't. Simple as that.

Sorcerers and Wizards can cast spells. But they have difficulty doing so wearing armour, the heavier the worse off it gets. I don't like spellcasting abilities with conditions attached to them. It's either you give it to me or you don't. Simple as that.

Bards. Don't even get me started on bards. They have various armour proficiencies given to them as class features, but they still suffer from spell failure casting spells in them. What's up with that? I don't like spellcasting abilities with conditions attached to them. It's either you give it to me or you don't. Simple as that.

Seriously, though, I could keep going for the rest of the classes. What's the difference though? Rangers get abilities that mimic feats. They look like feats. They sound like feats. So you think of them as feats. But really, they're not. Don't think of them as feats. Don't even think of them as virtual feats, because that just makes you think of them as watered down feats. They are cool class-based abilities you get for free. Hence, combat "styles". Not feats. Freebies. Like the barbarian's fast movement. A cool little bonus to distinguish the class from the others.

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.

Dude, I love playing rangers, and I don't mind it one bit. There are lots of people on these boards who also don't mind it at all. Now people can't take one level of ranger for a couple freebie combat feat-like special abilities. What's the big deal? You only stay at 1st level for 1000 xp. Sneeze and you'll miss it.

Vurt

[Edit: grammar, bold...]

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'm really not sure how any of that is handcuffing the ranger.

I was talking about the combat styles. Nothing else.

 

[Ranger REG]

Dude, I love playing rangers, and I don't mind it one bit. There are lots of people on these boards who also don't mind it at all. Now people can't take one level of ranger for a couple freebie combat feat-like special abilities. What's the big deal? You only stay at 1st level for 1000 xp. Sneeze and you'll miss it.

[Edit: grammar, bold...]

Dude. You get those combat path starting at SECOND class level. They decided it should be given at a 2nd level to ease the ranger's front-load special ability problem.

Look, in 3e I could tolerate those "virtual feats" given to me at 1st class level, but at 2nd level and it still remain a "virtual feat" (either Rapid Shot or 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting)? You have got to be kidding me.

 

[Li Shenron]

A removal of combat styles.

Feel free to ignore the bonus feats from combat styles, and don't even dare to complain you would be underpowered!

Ok, beside jokes, I really think combat styles are an unnecessary gift to the Ranger. Without them, it would still be balanced with the other classes. If you really want to fight all your time with sword+shield or a 2-handed weapon, the Archery path will still be useful when you attack from range (don't tell me you necessary want a sling or even a crossbow, which is everything except a wilderness weapon), even if that's not happening very often if you prefer to be on the front line.

I don't know yet if the combat style feats are usable with double weapons now, but that's possible; also I'd like to know if the archery style feats work only with BOWS or with other stuff.

And regarding the armor restriction, I really think it's a good restriction. It makes the 3 free feats slightly less valuable than normal feats, because you either have to choose between having 3 effective free feats OR using medium/heavy armor. I see no problem with that, not even in multiclassing: try asking a multiclass Druid which armor she uses, or a Wizard who has to choose between free spells/day OR access to all schools.

 

[Vurt]

Dude. You get those combat path starting at SECOND class level. They decided it should be given at a 2nd level to ease the ranger's front-load special ability problem.

Errr... Is this not what I wrote? First level goes by so fast you generally don't notice it. BOOM! You're suddenly back in business.

Look, in 3e I could tolerate those "virtual feats" given to me at 1st class level, but at 2nd level and it still remain a "virtual feat" (either Rapid Shot or 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting)? You have got to be kidding me.

Why? I still don't see a problem with them. *SHRUGS* And it's "combat styles" buddy, get used to it! i.e. a rose by any name smells the same.

If all you want is to pick up the TWF feat and some hit points you can still grab a level of fighter, which is arguably thematically better any way.

Vurt

 

[kibbitz]

Just my 2 cents, I just don't like the idea of virtual feats because it seems weird to me flavor-wise, since I see TWF as being present or not. If armor ruins ones' ability to use TWF, shouldn't it be in the armor proficiency rules, Ranger or no Ranger? That's my main beef vs TWF. Why am I not complaining about the other classes? Well, you want me to? I'd just like some consistency to how certain things are ruled, that's all...

 

[sithramir]

complainers

Why complain about virtual feats? It makes sense because a ranger is supposed to be in the wilderness. Heavy armors dont' work there. Um clankedy clank clank, i'm the sneaky woodsman who can track who has 20 movement and -9 to all the class abilities like hide/climb, etc while i move through the forest. Oh wait, that'd be a normal fighter.

I just hear people who should be playing fighters complaining the rangers (who would be balanced without the virtual feats as said above ) who have been given a LOT of power boost should be able to use them in something not role playing/thematically right with the class.

I hope they made evasion not work with heavy armors because it makes NO SENSE ALSO! A ranger at 9th level gets evasion now? One of the most powerful things in the game btw. Being able to take 0 damage with those "very high now" reflex saves is incredible. If you want to fight in heavy armor as a ranger you are probably losing these kinds of things also.

Remember that as a fighter you can do all the things you want as a ranger also. Cross class hide/sneak (take a level or ranger or rogue or monk if you want to make it higher) plus the feats to get any style you want (you can get track too). The only thing you lose is favored enemy which you could replicate with a foe hunter PrC or something.

Just me complaining about complainers

 

[Fenes 2]

If you are still not content with the ranger 3.5, just add three bonus feats instead of combat styles (or maybe 4 or 5) to your ranger. It is not as if anyone is stopping you in your game. I have the impression that some people will not be content until the ranger has d12 hit dice, 8 skill points per level, 11 bonus feats, druid spellcasting, animal companion, favored enemy, evasion, trap sense, hide in plain sight, uncanny dodge, animal companions and access to the rogue special abilities.

(But even then they would not be satisfied since at this point everyone and their brother would play rangers.)

Now really, if you want to be a plate-armored archer or twf just take a couple of levels in fighter so that you can take the three "virtual feats" from combat style as bonus feats.