Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ranger REG" data-source="post: 936699" data-attributes="member: 533">Eh, at least you have some kind of martial training. And then there are the starting weapon proficiencies as well as your normal feat acquisition (at 1st, 3rd, and every three levels thereafter).If by &quot;virtual feat,&quot; you mean those feats with restriction (i.e., can only be used while wearing light or no armor), then yeah. That is the main crux of my discussion here.Fighter still reign supreme in major combat abilities, especially with the bonus feats.Ranger have more combat options (sometimes in the wild, you have no choice but to fight to survive) to choose, but also have other wilderness/hunting abilities that the fighter or any other classes lack (let's hope the 3.5e barbarian is not good in this area, which was noticeable).BTW, it was a smart move to let combat path begin at 2nd level, so as not to front-load the ranger class abilities at 1st level.But again, my gripe is the armor restriction for those &quot;virtual feats.&quot; 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ranger REG, post: 936699, member: 533"] Eh, at least you have some kind of martial training. And then there are the starting weapon proficiencies as well as your normal feat acquisition (at 1st, 3rd, and every three levels thereafter). If by "virtual feat," you mean those feats with restriction (i.e., can only be used while wearing light or no armor), then yeah. That is the main crux of my discussion here. Fighter still reign supreme in major combat abilities, especially with the bonus feats. Ranger have more combat options (sometimes in the wild, you have no choice but to fight to survive) to choose, but also have other wilderness/hunting abilities that the fighter or any other classes lack (let's hope the 3.5e barbarian is not good in this area, which was noticeable). BTW, it was a smart move to let combat path begin at 2nd level, so as not to front-load the ranger class abilities at 1st level. 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification