Favored Enemy Question

[elawai]

We are starting a new game tonite. Our elven ranger wishes to take Favored Enemy - Humans. Problem to me is that at least 3 other members of the group are human (including my character).

Is there really a problem with this? I'm getting upset at the idea, and not sure I should be or not. Any official rulings regarding this?

 

[Crothian]

Does he have a reason for this? Most people with a Favored enemy hate the enemy. So, why would he be going around with three humans.

By the rules, you have to be evil to take your own race. No other restriction applies.

 

[whatisitgoodfor]

If the character wanting Favored enemy: human is a human, then according to the rules he must be evil. That is the only official word about that kind of situation.

Keep in mind that having a race as a Favored Enemy does not mean you hate them, or have any emotion in excess towards them. It only means that you have studied tactics that help to defeat them.

Let your player take the class ability, then when the campaign turns P-Kill he will already be a leg up.

There is nothing wrong with a character adventuring with a party made up primarily of his favored enemies.

 

[melkoriii]

Nothing wrong with taking Human as your favored Enemy. It's a race just like anyother. Now for the RP of the reason WHY he has humens as a favored enemy is another thing.

First he should have ether not liked humens in the first place and should be questioned on why he is grouped with humens. OR some time in the past he was for some reason had humens as an enemy to the point he got to hunt them well.

He should have a good reason ether way to why he has them as favored enemies.

 

[EOL]

I don't think that you necessarily need to hate your favored enemy. And there is nothing in the rules which prevents this. And it is the best choice, since there are so many humans.

That being said if I were the DM I would make him come up with some really, really good justification for it. It wouldn't have to involve hating humans, but it would have add enough to the campaign in role-play/story value to make up for what it took away in naked power-gaming.

 

[Tylias]

I have a Half-Orc Ranger character whose first favored enemy is Elves.

He doesn't hate elves. He's close friends with the two elves in his party.

He understands a lot about elven psychology, elven culture, etc. from speaking with his friends, and he's used to their fighting tactics. Most of the time, he uses his Favored Enemy knowledge to *avoid* actual combat with elves (Bluff/Sense Motive bonus), who tend to distrust him and consider him an enemy simply because he's obviously half orcish.

The combat bonus comes in handy when he needs to defend himself against elves who shoot first and think later. It's also very useful when the party finds itself up against Drow.

But he has no hatred of elves; he merely understands them often better than they understand themselves. That's one way to play it.

 

[Negative Zero]

i agree completely. i think that hating a favoured enemy is a very limited way to look at the ability. any specific favoured enemy could simply be a result of whatever threat is greatest to said ranger's home/training lands. or simply the one that his/her mentor had most familiarity with. or even a morbid fascination by the character.

in addition, altho there is no alignment restriction placed on the class, being closely associated with nature, might at the very least provide an understanding of the all too neccessary roles of predator and prey (even if the ranger doesn't actually have neutrality as part of his/her alighment). thus leading to the view that a favoured enemy isn't a result of hatred, but merely a chosen role in the grand play that is nature. (which is how i play mine )

<edit>
kudos to you, Tylias, on your ranger. i really like those ideas :thumbs up:

 

[gfunk]

I MoTW I believe it discusses some options about using humans as a favored enemy. Instead of *all* humans, choose a specific subset, such as the Red Wizards or Zhentarim or Harpers. This would be more appropriate role-playing wise.

 

[RogueJK]

I MoTW I believe it discusses some options about using humans as a favored enemy. Instead of *all* humans, choose a specific subset, such as the Red Wizards or Zhentarim or Harpers. This would be more appropriate role-playing wise.

This is in the FRCS, in the section on Rangers. (FYI: splatbooks and other non-FR books probably won't reference FR-specific organizations... )

I agree that having a favored enemy doesn't require that you hate them. Unfortunately, this is usually the easiest explanation for it, so you see plently of rangers with the story of "Race X killed my family, so I took them as a favored enemy."

An example of an alternate way of viewing favored enemies might be a town guard, in a town of mainly gnomes, who takes Favored Enemy: Gnome so that he is able to do his job more effectively.

Another example might be an exotic game hunter who takes Favored Enemy: Magical Beasts so that he is more capable in his hunts.

 

[Negative Zero]

I MoTW I believe it discusses some options about using humans as a favored enemy. Instead of *all* humans, choose a specific subset, such as the Red Wizards or Zhentarim or Harpers. This would be more appropriate role-playing wise.

going out on a limb here, i read that, and i thought it was kind of a dumb idea. i mean after all, when it comes to damage, don't you hit all humans in the same place to make it hurt more? ... altho i guess i can see that some of the other bonuses might apply to tactics employed by specific groups ... *goes off to re-evaluate his thinking*