Confirmed - Rangers get d8 HD in 3.5e.

[Plane Sailing]

Plane Sailing, I'd agreed with everything you said except the above for the following reason:

<snip>

I think your reasoning is deeply flawed, because you are relying on giving the fighter an 18 CON and the ranger a 14 Con based on point buy schemes which didn't exist then. You are not comparing apples with apples.

I stand fully by my original assertion - Rangers were hardier at 1st level (2d8 vs 1d10) and could get more CON bonuses (11x rather than 9x) BUT where down a peg or two. i.e. no longer had the complete hp dominance which they had when they were first introduced.

All the rangers I knew in 1e focussed heavily on CON to maximise their bonuses, and where allowed chose that for their high score. It was a sound tactic which made the maximum advantage of their greater number of HD.

Cheers

 

[Gargoyle]

...
Cheers
Plane Sailing
with input from Cyberzombie and Paul Greystoke

p.s. I'm looking forward to seeing the 3.5e ranger with bated breath...

Cool analysis. I hope you add to it in July with your first impressions of the new ranger.

 

[Desdichado]

Just to be clear, in the book did Aragorn actually use two weapons before he recieved the sword of Isyldor (sp?). While I know he did in the movie (once using a torch), it's been so long since I've read the book.

If so, then, of those, only Robin Hood didn't use two weapons. As a bow master, he wouldn't mind the 3.5e combat paths. And I never saw him as someone who could take damage. More someone who avoided it.

It's the sword of Elendil, Isildur's father, and he had it all along, albeit broken until Frodo and Co. went to Rivendell. He is never portrayed as using two weapons, no.

 

[Dimwhit]

Heck, even Dodge is getting better (they're going with the version of Dodge in Mutants and Masterminds), so it's going to be harder to get hit.

So how does the Dodge in Mutants and Masterminds work?

 

[MadBlue]

I'm all for ranger's getting d8 hit points. Sure, rangers are hardy - and I guess this will be reflected in their saves.

Well, they already get a good Fort save. The other two aren't increasing any. We haven't heard anything about any special abilities that will affect Ranger saving throws or anything else that would otherwise reduce their chances of losing HP - and we've heard about a lot of things the 3.5 Ranger will be getting. If it gets more than what we've already heard about, I'd be surprised.

MadBlue

 

[Mercule]

To me, a ranger is not only a hunter, but survivalist. He is also a skirmish specialist, relying only himself or just a handful of allies, as opposed to the legion approach (it's pretty hard to move an army through the closed terrain of the forest or swampland).

Exactly. I don't disagree with anything said here. "Skirmisher" is a word I've often used to describe the Ranger.

While, as a DM, you may decide what type of ranger is acceptable in your game, I hope you do are open to a player's suggestion that he wishes to be a skirmishing type, close-quarter combat ranger.

That's the sort of Ranger I prefer. Which is why I like the 1E Ranger and dislike the 2E and later Rangers.

TWF has nothing to do with skirmishing. TWF has nothing to do with scouting. TWF has nothing to do with the wilderness. TWF has nothing to do with hunting orcs (or whatever). TWF has nothing to do with the archetype the Ranger is supposed to serve. In short TWF has absolutely no business being associated with the Ranger.

As far as allowing a player to play what he wants, I don't disallow PC Rangers from taking the TWF feat. Any PC can take it. Rangers have to spend the feat just like Rogues, though. That's one of the greatest things about the 3E system -- it's flexible enough that players can do some customizing.

 

[Mercule]

Only a powergamer would accept a ranger front-loading ability and the same HD as or better than a fighter, and that would be unbalancing.

Completely agree. Not sure what front-loading ability you're talking about, though.

My solution is to get rid of front-loading and give the Ranger the same HD as a Fighter.

As for being hardy, when you compare to the NPC commoner's hit die (similar to the arcane wizards and sorcerers), they're about as hardy as they come, but they're not tank who can wade into battle. THAT's the fighter's forte.

The tank aspect of Fighters come from the heavy armor. If you strip both a Fighter and a Ranger to skins, the Ranger is going to be every bit as tough as the Fighter, if not slightly moreso.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Cool analysis. I hope you add to it in July with your first impressions of the new ranger.

Thanks, I sure plan to.

I have a gut feeling that some of the distinctiveness which was lost might come back his way.

Cheers

 

[mooby]

So how does the Dodge in Mutants and Masterminds work?

you can choose to either dodge all enemies, and gain +1 AC against all attacks, or

you chan choose to dodge one enemy, and gain a +2 bonus to your AC against that one enemy.

 

[Umbran]

TWF has nothing to do with the archetype the Ranger is supposed to serve.

As has been demonstrated, time and again - there is no single archtype the Ranger is supposed to serve. That's a large part of the problem. Everybody's got a different archtype in mind, each of which calls for different abilities. You can't fit them all with a single class.