From R&C: Fighters & Armor

[WhatGravitas]

I sincerely hope so. Anyway, we'll all know soon enough.

Well, so much was stated in the Races & Classes book. So I assume they're going to stick to it.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Terramotus]

But you also get all the ranger "woodsman" baggage on top of it, which has absolutely nothing to do with being a good archer.

As long as we're talking about European cultures, it absolutely does. Anyone who had the wealth to afford it and the available time to train was going to be an armored warrior, and a horseman if he really had the money. It's funny - people wearing armor tended to live longer.

If you didn't have that money, you were probably a farmer who doubled as hunter. The bow, after all, is a hunting weapon just as much as a warfare weapon, and that would give you the time to get good at using it, just as a knight would be with his weapons. I suppose that in the later middle ages there were archers that weren't really woodsmen, but they were probably poor dirt farmers, and would probably be more appropriately represented as NPC classes.

Now, that doesn't take into account any cultures that had a martial archery tradition amongst the upper classes. Feudal Japan springs to mind here, and perhaps China. But, then again, I'm sure we'll see something related in the inevitable Oriental Adventures book.

 

[ZappoHisbane]

As long as you don't have spells granted from a particular deity, or animal companions, I think the Ranger can fit a lot of different archetypes. Like this guy (which is only a good example if you've seen the movie). You're basically just hyper-aware, agile, terrain-savy and ranged-attack-preffered.

This is exactly what I'm hoping for. Thus far I haven't liked the official alternatives offered by giving up an animal companion and divine spells. They were nice ideas, but I never felt that they were mechanically on par with what you were giving up. I think I'd prefer it if rather than built-in class abilities, the divine connection and/or animal companion (if they even exist in 4e) were available as feats or optional talent trees or something.

I'd like to see some crunch on ranged weapons actually. We've heard lots about all the various new melee options and powers and whatnot, but precious little about the humble bow.

 

[ZappoHisbane]

As long as we're talking about European cultures, it absolutely does. Anyone who had the wealth to afford it and the available time to train was going to be an armored warrior, and a horseman if he really had the money. It's funny - people wearing armor tended to live longer.

If you didn't have that money, you were probably a farmer who doubled as hunter. The bow, after all, is a hunting weapon just as much as a warfare weapon, and that would give you the time to get good at using it, just as a knight would be with his weapons. I suppose that in the later middle ages there were archers that weren't really woodsmen, but they were probably poor dirt farmers, and would probably be more appropriately represented as NPC classes.

Erm... correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the English army feared for their well-trained masses of lightly armored longbowmen? That's certainly the impression I've gotten from popular history.

 

[Reynard]

Now, that doesn't take into account any cultures that had a martial archery tradition amongst the upper classes. Feudal Japan springs to mind here, and perhaps China.

Bingo.

But, then again, I'm sure we'll see something related in the inevitable Oriental Adventures book.

That would be unfortunate. There is no reason why only an eastern flavored setting should provide for that kind of character archetype in D&D.

 

[Gloombunny]

Erm... correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the English army feared for their well-trained masses of lightly armored longbowmen? That's certainly the impression I've gotten from popular history.

And they were mostly farmers, when there wasn't a war on.

 

[Reynard]

And they were mostly farmers, when there wasn't a war on.

Everybody was a farmer when their wasn't a war on.

 

[Valiantheart]

Everybody was a farmer when their wasn't a war on.

He is very much right about that.

Even the Roman Legionarries went back to their farms when not marching to expand the empire.

 

[Gloombunny]

Everybody was a farmer when their wasn't a war on.

Except for the rich people who could afford armor when they did go to war. Which is exactly what Terramotus was saying.

Though I'm not sure where he got the idea that farmers would double as hunters. Wasn't most hunting ground reserved for the aristocracy?

 

[The Grackle]

Shields are mentioned as turning aside spears, arrows, and fireballs.

= bonus to REF defense and AC?

But you also get all the ranger "woodsman" baggage on top of it, which has absolutely nothing to do with being a good archer.

It could be that the Ranger has the option to get outdoorsy stuff, but could skip those feats/powers if he didn't want them. Multiclass for powers from a different class??