D&D 3E/3.5 Combat style/earthwood archer, 3.5

[von jrs]

halløj. smiler

spiller 3.5 d&d(eborron, arcanis osv).. hm fandt den her ranger type, earthwood archer på nettet, der ikke virker specielt godt afbalanceret, men tilgengæld finder jeg combat style udgaven lidt opmærksomhed værd. EarthWood Archer | D&D (3.5) | Obsidian Portal

første trin i combat style skal nok sættes ned fra +3 til +2 og ved næste trin burde bonusen nok fastfryses på +2.. men okey, det er mere en instinktiv fornemmelse, end mattematiske evner der siger mig ovenstående.
Hvad siger i/du/dig/nogen? til det..?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Errr...

Wilkommen, aber...Sprechen sie English?

(Yes, I know the OP wasn't in German, but, with luck, the OP speaks it.)

 

[Blackrat]

Yeah, welcome on board. Lets put what Danny said into danish too:

Men taler du engelsk?

Considering you did read the article you linked to, you do . I don't think there's many danes around here, though I could be wrong too. I'm sorry I'm not able to answer in danish, but even if I can barely figure it out through swedish, I don't know even swedish well enough to make sensible sentenses.

Anyways, to answer your question, if I understood it correctly. Yeah, I think there's always something suspicious when the bonuses are uneven. Changing that to +2 would be more in line with official classes in my opinion.

 

[von jrs]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Oh hello ( blushing)[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Yes i do speak English, but not that good. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]should have thought about the language thingi.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I play 3.5 d&d(Eborron, Arcani[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]s etc.)[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif].. I found this ranger type, the Earth wood Archer, it doesn´t seem that well balanced, but on the other side, I think that the combat style presented in this class is worth a thought, (as a choice to the normal ranger) [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]EarthWood Archer | D&D (3.5) | Obsidian Portal[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The bonus from the first step in combat style should probably only be a +2 bonus and not +3, and at the next step, I think that the bonus should be frozen at +2.. but anyway,it´s more of an instinctive feeling than mathematical ability, that makes me suggest these changes, to balance the game.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]But.. the reason why I´m asking about this, is that Idon´t think, that the archer/ranger in d&d has the same opportunities, to excel as the melee fighter. Making combat style in to something that doesn´t equals some of the archer feats, gives the character the chance to pick many shot/rapid shot, as normal feats, and thereby the archer can compete in more fair terms with the melee orientated players. [/FONT]

 

[Darth K'Trava]

Your English is pretty good.

 

[von jrs]

thank you, but i cheated.. evil laughter!

I wrote it in a word document, and got my girlfriend to look at it afterwards

 

[irdeggman]

As far as balance goes the earthwood ranger also loses any favored enemy bonuses that the normal ranger gains as well as track feat and animal companion.

So keep those in mind as well.

 

[von jrs]

that is definitely something to keep in mind.. but ranged threat alone is, i think, disturbing the game balance.

and a Ranger gets animal companion at 4th level, while the earthwood archer gets imroved combat style at 5th level, with that in mind, i do´nt think that the loss of this companion is enough, (i´ts some pretty good bonuses ).. but maybe it is?

And the culminative bonuses at step two seems way to powerful to me, if you look at other classes and their bonuses at their respective levels.

(and as as blackrat said earlier in the thread, talking about the +3 bonus at first step. "Yeah, I think there's always something suspicious when the bonuses are uneven").

I don´nt want to offend any one, i´m glad that you´r taking the time to write me.

But is there some one who knows the mechanics of the game well enough, to tell if it would be aprobiate to give this form of combat style as a choice to the normal d&d Ranger, (with the suggested changes, ( or some better changes perhaps?)?)?

 

[irdeggman]

that is definitely something to keep in mind.. but ranged threat alone is, i think, disturbing the game balance.

Ahh but regardless of whether or not you threaten with a ranged weapon - you will still generate an AoO when making a ranged attack still generates an AoO.

Rules Compendium pg 8, 16 and 18

 

[von jrs]

ah thank you, that reduces some of the power, (i thougt), that the class is recieving..
but what about the size of the bouneses..?
you pointed at the loss of animal companion, but is that enough to justify the, (posible) extreeme bonuses when recieving improved comat style?
And again, if i wanted to use this form of combat style as a normal ranger, would´nt some kind of adjustmen be necisery?

(sorry the spelling, and just plain crappy english, but i do´nt have the time right now to check).