Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 5813781" data-attributes="member: 29398">Even that is too limiting.&nbsp; You could simply say: &quot;Rangers are protectors of nature (like wardens) who are good at survival skills; this has made them tough, and skilled at most forms of combat.&quot; and leave it at that.&nbsp; The player can figure out what she wants to do from there.Aside: the two-weapon Ranger archetype can die in a fire any time it likes:&nbsp; Drizzt Do'urden was the ruination of a perfectly good class.Agreed, though I'd tweak it to say not every character should be as good at fighting every opponent.&nbsp; Each class has its strengths and weaknesses (e.g. Illusionists vs. dumb Ogres, Illusionists vs. undead) and to me this is a feature rather than a bug.I think the view of roles is being taken on a much larger scale than day-to-day here, but you're quite right.Perhaps, but let's face it: a well-rounded party needs some starch up front, someone to patch up the starch, some artillery, and some stealth.&nbsp; Parties lacking one or more of those can certainly function, but not as well.My answer to this: bigger parties.&nbsp; Let players run more than one character at a time.&nbsp; That way, all the bases will probably be covered and players will still be able to branch out into something else at the same time.Lan-&quot;rock and role&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 5813781, member: 29398"] Even that is too limiting. You could simply say: "Rangers are protectors of nature (like wardens) who are good at survival skills; this has made them tough, and skilled at most forms of combat." and leave it at that. The player can figure out what she wants to do from there. Aside: the two-weapon Ranger archetype can die in a fire any time it likes: Drizzt Do'urden was the ruination of a perfectly good class. Agreed, though I'd tweak it to say not every character should be as good at fighting every opponent. Each class has its strengths and weaknesses (e.g. Illusionists vs. dumb Ogres, Illusionists vs. undead) and to me this is a feature rather than a bug. I think the view of roles is being taken on a much larger scale than day-to-day here, but you're quite right. Perhaps, but let's face it: a well-rounded party needs some starch up front, someone to patch up the starch, some artillery, and some stealth. Parties lacking one or more of those can certainly function, but not as well. My answer to this: bigger parties. Let players run more than one character at a time. That way, all the bases will probably be covered and players will still be able to branch out into something else at the same time. Lan-"rock and role"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification