Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 873292" data-attributes="member: 5100">I'm not sure what the Ranger not being evil has to do with anything.  Pretty much offset by not having the Paladin be in the woods.Well, if you're counting proficiencies, then don't forget the heavy armor proficiency that a Paladin gets.  The extra AC makes up for the TWF proficiency that the Ranger gets.  Not likely to be fully equiped at 1st level?  No big -- the Ranger's BAB is high enough to make frequent use of the TWF.Of course, since I don't think Rangers have any business having TWF as a class ability, the argument is rather lost on me.  Still, my point really is that if you hand the Ranger one longsword and leather armor, and do likewise with the Paladin, the two classes should be equally dangerous in neutral ground (say, an arena).If you give the Paladin his plate and the Ranger his second weapon, they're probably still evenly matched, just different.  Since I advocate taking away the TWF along with maintaining the d10 HD, my Ranger would still be a weaker combatant than the Paladin.  Based on that, I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that my concepts would make some sort of out-of-balance munch monster.Truth be told, you'd probably have to add an ability or two to balance him out.No big.</blockquote>