D&D General Chris just said why I hate wizard/fighter dynamic

[Cadence]

Edit: Sorry @Faolyn , missed your post on this right above this one.

That's certainly not my read on rangers from 1e or 2e. Plus they could be both rangers and druids as of Dragon #96, where Gygax decided to re-examine level limits and the like. "Elves, half-elves, and halflings being more nature-oriented than the other demi-human races deserve admission to the druid sub-class. [...] Elves are no longer prohibited from entering the ranger sub-class, in keeping with the same reasoning that now opens the druid subclass to that race. For consistency, half-elven rangers are also given more potential." (Edit: as @DND_Reborn noted, these changes became official in Unearthed Arcana)

I'm slightly surprised Gygax went with level limits for non-humans instead of an XP penalty. Like say that nonhumans earn only half or three-quarters as much XP as a human does. Oh well--thank goodness that sort of nonsense is long over with.

I was thinking the 1e ranger must be pretty naturey... but I just reread it in the 1e PhB, and I was surprised how much more it's "fights in the woods" instead of "protects the woods".

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Your point here becomes especially poignant when we reflect on the origins of the Dúnedain vis-à-vis elves.

Absolutely. Both in terms of elvish descent amongst the Men of Numenor, and of course in terms of the training and knowledge of the Dúnedain.

I think there's always been an element in the ranger of the caught between two worlds character. The hero who defends civilisation from the wild, because he is in part of the wild. You see elements of this in the Witcher character who is in part monster himself, and who's sympathies are often with the monsters.

But this aspect doesn't really come from Aragorn, it comes from Westerns and other frontier tales.

It certainly exists in Aragorn. He could be recontextualized as a Witcher with little trouble. He is part of the wilds, is often feared and distrusted by those he protects, he is not entirely “mundane”, etc.

 

[Maxperson]

My point is the original rangers would be 100% into bulldozing the forest to get rid of the monsters. Original rangers were Man first Man Second then maybe Nature.

That's why an elf couldn't be a ranger back in the day. Their reverence to nature held them back.

The Dunedain that the 1e Ranger was modelled after would not have bulldozed the forest. They honored Yavanna among the other Valar. They protected civilization against orcs and trolls, but not to detriment of the wild.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I just checked--neither the 1e or 2e ranger write-ups specifically say that rangers are defenders of the wilderness (just that they're good at woodcraft), so I suppose that claiming they're anti-wilderness makes some sense in the light of nature-loving elves originally not being allowed in the class if you also hadn't read Tolkien or otherwise knew about Aragorn. I mean, I hadn't read any Tolkien when I started gaming, but I started with 2e, not 1e or earlier.

Yeah I still don’t see how that could translate to “anti-wilderness”. I wouldn’t call a conservationist whose efforts are motivated by and understanding of the consequences on civilization if we burn down the forests, anti-wilderness. That is like call Teddy Roosevelt anti-wilderness because his motivation for setting aside federal land to remain wild was for the benefit of people. It’s still pro-wilderness.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I'm not even sure where a ranger would even find a bulldozer. They have enough trouble finding a decent animal companion.

 

[Faolyn]

I'm not even sure where a ranger would even find a bulldozer. They have enough trouble finding a decent animal companion.

Domesticated bulettes?

 

[Minigiant]

That's certainly not my read on rangers from 1e or 2e. Plus they could be both rangers and druids as of Dragon #96, where Gygax decided to re-examine level limits and the like. "Elves, half-elves, and halflings being more nature-oriented than the other demi-human races deserve admission to the druid sub-class. [...] Elves are no longer prohibited from entering the ranger sub-class, in keeping with the same reasoning that now opens the druid subclass to that race. For consistency, half-elven rangers are also given more potential." (Edit: as @DND_Reborn noted, these changes became official in Unearthed Arcana)

I'm slightly surprised Gygax went with level limits for non-humans instead of an XP penalty. Like say that nonhumans earn only half or three-quarters as much XP as a human does. Oh well--thank goodness that sort of nonsense is long over with.

2e rangers wouldn't be original rangers would it.

Gonna need a citation for that.

Because the OG Ranger was based on Aragorn, and I’ve never seen anything in any writeup for rangers in any edition that suggests anything remotely like that.

The Dunedain that the 1e Ranger was modelled after would not have bulldozed the forest. They honored Yavanna among the other Valar. They protected civilization against orcs and trolls, but not to detriment of the wild.

The original ranger was based on Aragorn and the Dunedain but they weren't them. The 0e and 1e ranger were more focused on tracking monsters and murder-killing them dead dead than preserving nature. The focus was "keeping orcs and giants from killing humans and halflings" not "protecting the wilderness." That's one reason why elves couldn't be rangers, they were too aloof and magicky.

Nature loving came later as players and DM roleplayed them as such. Then they became more and more druidic and less LG serial killers.

 

[Mordhau]

I think a lot of the practical models for early Rangers were colonial frontier fighters, just by nature of the way the way D&D was written. Texas Rangers cosplaying as Aragorn.

 

[Maxperson]

The original ranger was based on Aragorn and the Dunedain but they weren't them. The 0e and 1e ranger were more focused on tracking monsters and murder-killing them dead dead than preserving nature.

They were literally part druid. If that doesn't say nature to you...

The focus was "keeping orcs and giants from killing humans and halflings" not "protecting the wilderness." That's one reason why elves couldn't be rangers, they were too aloof and magicky.

It was both. Nature may have been second seat, but it was present strongly or they would not have had druid spells.

 

[Cadence]

They were literally part druid. If that doesn't say nature to you...

It was both. Nature may have been second seat, but it was present strongly or they would not have had druid spells.

Did they also have M.User spells and using all magic items? (Were they about as much M.User as Druid).

I don't know if they were so much part druid as mostly "anything that would be needed to play Aragorn in the LotR".