Dragon #308 previews new ranger and barbarian!
- Thread starter thalmin
- Start date
While I really like the new Ranger, I also feel it may be overpowered. If you break it down, at level 11 a fighter gets 10 feats, at 11th level a Ranger gets 9... Yes, they may be slightly more focused, but ontop of those 9 feats they also get 4 more skill points per level, spells, animal companions, better stealth and a neat favored enemy ability. As has been said before the d8 hit dice and the armor restriction are hardly a real detriment to the overall powe of the calss
One of the things I really don't like about the new ranger is the copycatting of certain abliities.
Evasion, woodland stride, and hide in plain sight are rip offs of other abilities. Although HIPS is from a Prc, so not as bad imo.
This was why I was normally so opposed to bonus feats for the ranger, its just latching on another ripped off ability.
But then again, the ranger is kind of a hodgepodge regardless of your opinion of the ideal ranger, and wotc doesn't seem to have a problem with copying of abilities, as long as its only with two classes (ie. turning undead, animal companions, evasion, uncanny dodge). But in that spirit, I again hate the addition of evasion. Now 3 classes have it!!! Its getting to the point that its not a special ability, its a "what do you mean you don't have evasion?"
As just a thought, instead of evasion, why not give the ranger an initiative bonus? IT represents being able to handle surprise, its a powerful ability, and one no one else has.
Evasion, woodland stride, and hide in plain sight are rip offs of other abilities. Although HIPS is from a Prc, so not as bad imo.
This was why I was normally so opposed to bonus feats for the ranger, its just latching on another ripped off ability.
But then again, the ranger is kind of a hodgepodge regardless of your opinion of the ideal ranger, and wotc doesn't seem to have a problem with copying of abilities, as long as its only with two classes (ie. turning undead, animal companions, evasion, uncanny dodge). But in that spirit, I again hate the addition of evasion. Now 3 classes have it!!! Its getting to the point that its not a special ability, its a "what do you mean you don't have evasion?"
As just a thought, instead of evasion, why not give the ranger an initiative bonus? IT represents being able to handle surprise, its a powerful ability, and one no one else has.
Lela
First Post
daTim said:
I see four feats (combat style: 3, Endurance). I don't think character feats should be taken into account for a class (balance wise anyway). There's also five speical abilities (not feats).
To break that down:
- Wild Empathy: At lower levels this will be very helpful. But later, sometime around levels 7-9 (well before 11), it becomes almost useless in anything besides flavor. Weak.
- Favored Enemy: While powerful against the enemy itself, much of it depends on what the DM throws at the party (as Monte Cook said). Though a lot of this has been taken away by the option to up your new enemy to +4 right out, the DM still has much control. Strong.
- Combat styles (3): Here we have three combat feats that can be used all the time. Strong, Strong, Strong.
- Endurance: Exactly how many of your players take this feat? Yes, it helps with running and swimming but that doesn't translate into actual gameplay that often. It's almost completely flavor. Weak.
- Animal Companion: Being able to use this so many different ways, it depends on the player (and the changes WotC made). Strong.
- Woodland stride: I've never seen this used. Ever. Which is not to say that it hasen't come up in other games, but I doubt it's that often. Mostly flavor. Very Weak.
- Swift tracker:Useful, but not that great. This one will depend on the campaign style (though it is very cool and I hope the DM uses it). Average.
- *Evasion: This blows a lot of the Ranger's other abilties out of the water. Suddenly a dragon hunter (with FE) can avoid one of the dragon's main attacks. Mages have lost a powerful weapon against them. Very Strong.
Final score:
Very Strong: 1
Strong: 6
Average: 1
Weak: 2
Very Weak: 1
So it's a good class, but not that good.
Did I miss anything?
*I still advocate putting UD in place of Evasion. Though I doubt I'd actualy House Rule it.
[Edit: Math. Bolding]
Last edited:
Kobold Avenger
Legend
Sure I'll also mention that you shouldn't try to ban the class until you actually get the book in the first place.
But here's something you should consider, the new Ranger needs to be that powerful to survive encounters against the revised Pit Fiends and Mystic Theurges.
But here's something you should consider, the new Ranger needs to be that powerful to survive encounters against the revised Pit Fiends and Mystic Theurges.
Merlion
First Post
Stalker0 said:
Before I start let me say, Stalker, this is not an attack on you. Just the voicing of thoughts and opnions, sparked by your comments.
3e/3er/D20 is very much all about "copycatting". The d20 system was made to be modular and generic...to use certain basic mechanics either alone or in groups to represent certain things.
Lots of classes and prestige classes get Uncanny Dodge, and/or Evasion. the Smite ability in one form or other is possessed by at least half a dozen classes and prestige classes.
Now this could be a good thing, a bad thing, or some of both depending on your view. Me, I mostly like it...although when designing stuff I do try to at least accasionly come up with all new "mods" for the modularity.
As you also say Stalker the Ranger is a hodgepodgy sort of class any way you cut it. I think the combination of "mods" being used in the 3er Ranger is pretty decent. Actualy I like it a lot myself from what we've seen and I think it will drasticaly up the number of more-than-1-level rangers played. I think it fits a number of archtypes nicely. Not all that everyone feels the name "ranger" entails. Its not gonna please everyone. but neither would anything else they decided to do.
Ashrem Bayle
Explorer
I think several classes are just mixtures of other concepts with a little spice added in.
Ranger = Fighter/Rogue
Paladin = Fighter/Cleric
Bard = Rogue/Sorcorer
Psychic Warrior = Fighter/Psion
I personally wonder why these classes weren't Prestige Classes to begin with. *shrug*
Ranger = Fighter/Rogue
Paladin = Fighter/Cleric
Bard = Rogue/Sorcorer
Psychic Warrior = Fighter/Psion
I personally wonder why these classes weren't Prestige Classes to begin with. *shrug*
Aaron L
Hero
When a Prestige Class becomes common enough in a setting that it appears as frequently as a core class, then it should be a core class. Making rangers or paladins Prestige Classes could be viable for your home setting, but in default D&D, they are both common enough that they are justified as being core classes.
(As and aside, I would actually like to see a prestige class variant of the paladin for my homebrew campaign world, and maybe even a PrC version of the ranger, too.)
(As and aside, I would actually like to see a prestige class variant of the paladin for my homebrew campaign world, and maybe even a PrC version of the ranger, too.)
Simplicity
Explorer
Felon said:
A two-weapon fighting specialist begins the game with double the attacks of a normal one-weapon fighter (although at a lower to hit, and possibly a lower damage per hit). I think people pretty much agree that a level 1 TWFer vs. a level 1 OWFer is about equal. However, at +6 BAB, the ratio becomes skewed.
Without Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, the two weapon fighter now only gets 3 attacks versus the OWF's 2 attacks.
Think about it. If 1 swipe from a one-weapon fighter is equal to 2 swipes from a two-weapon fighter, then 2 attacks from a one-weapon fighter is greater than 3 attacks from a two weapon fighter. Luckily, improved two weapon fighting is there at +6 BAB to kick in and give you another attack. Thus, the ratio goes back up to 2 attacks vs. four attacks.
Similar Threads
