Core Classes that IMO are lame

[shivamuffin]

I'd say it's more because he doesn;t define anything. He hates the Ranger because of what it has, but doesn't say what he thinks it should have.

Dudes, nuph taunting. You see, the other people are coming up with good ideas...There does not have to be a right or wrong answer, just answers and opinions...That's what yapping on forums is all about...Read this slowly so you can understand....

I started a discussion. It's obvious that the questions I asked were open for subjective answers. there is no right or wrong answer for any question.





Crothian
Jack Daniel

If I'm no fun to debate, then don't debate.

 

[CCamfield]

The fellow who mentioned AEG's Mercenaries missed one of the ranger variants - the Guerilla. Well, I think of it as close enough to the ranger to consider a variant, although the idea behind it is the warrior who fights in the wilderness, not necessarily with a great knowledge or connection to it. Uses traps and ambushes a lot.

Something to keep in mind, shivamuffin, is that we're not talking about a world without magic any more. An assassin in a world with magic probably would study relevant magic because it might be the edge needed to complete otherwise impossible jobs. A simple spider climb spell, for instance, could make entry into otherwise impossible fortresses a snap. But if you just don't like these classes using spells that's an opinion I can respect.

 

[shivamuffin]

My opinion is strictly from a DM perspective. As a player, I enjoyed playing the assassin in an FR setting...I also enjoy the ranger as a player in an FR campaign. The setting is a ridiculously magic saturated campaign, and the spells were not too out of place. Settings with less magic, or restricted magic may not be suitable for the ranger and assassin though.

The core of the problem I guess, is that many classes and PRCs are designed for high magic realms such as FR, with no options for lower magic or restricted magic settings. As A DM, it is important to offer rangers, but how do you offer a decent class without the magic fused into it?

This discussion is about such options, and with the exception of a few die hard taunters, there have been some really good ideas coming out of this topic.

spell use amongst bards, rangers, and other classes is a problem in settings where spell use is not a common activity, and generally limited to clerics, wizards, and certain creatures. Now a Paladins spell capability is acceptable, since they are the militant servants of a deity...Spells seem probable.

 

[Kannik]

More candidates(?)

Well, one of the two created here still has spells, but the other is spell
less. It still has favoured enemy, so that may still annoy thee, but perhaps
not.

Two alt.rangers (Wilderness Warrior and Wilderness Paladin):

http://boreal.catsden.net/RPG/d20-rangers.pdf

We'll have to wait and see what 3.5e brings along.

Oh, and if the spells are your main sticking point, Oriental Adventures
provides an alt.ranger where simply every level where you would have received a
new spell level (4, 8, etc) you gain a bonus feat.

Kannik }

 

[Steverooo]

 

 

[Clifford]

Rangers

Um How about Just roll up a fighter with the track feat SOme wilderness lore and Call him a ranger?

Cliff

 

[Clay_More]

Or take Kermit the Frog and give him a bow & arrow ?

 

[shivamuffin]

Yeah Teah Yeah, I heard it

Kermit with a bow sounds like a good idea!

" Here piggy piggy piggy "

 

[Clay_More]

Beware the Horrid Stuffed Frogs of Doom And Their Bows of Slaying All...

Kermits just outright spooky

 

[shivamuffin]

That's an FR prestige class isn't it?