Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9505966" data-attributes="member: 7026594">This one mystified me when I first encountered it in the 1E PH, but I later read the original Strategic Review Ranger class and the OD&D little brown books, and learned it was originally just a direct reference to the Giant Types sub-table of the  wilderness encounter tables, which read "1. Kobolds, 2. Goblins, 3. Orcs, 4. Hobgoblins, 5. Gnolls, 6. Ogres, 7. Trolls, 8. Giants, 9. Gnomes, 10. Dwarves, 11. Elves, 12. Ents". TSR Vol 1, issue 2:  "All Rangers gain a special advantage when fighting against monsters of the Giant Class (Kobolds - Giants). For each level they have gained they add +1 to their damage die against these creatures, so a 1st Level Ranger adds +1, a 2nd Level +2, and so on."Starting in AD&D the term "Giant class" no longer actually referred to anything outside the Ranger class itself in the rules.  Page 185 of the DMG has a Giant Type wilderness encounter subtable, but it only has actual giants on it.The term as used on page 24 of the 1E PH is entirely self-referential and so they had to list all the monsters the damage bonus applied to, adding Ettins and Ogre Magi. Same when they expanded the list in Unearthed Arcana to add more monsters from the Fiend Folio and Monster Manual II.  (Adding Cyclopskin, Dune Stalker, Flind, Gibberling, Grimlock, Meazel, Norker, Ogrillion, Quaggoth, Tasloi, and Xvart.)<a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-dual-wielding-ranger-how-aragorn-drizzt-and-dual-wielding-led-to-the-rangers-loss-of-identity.679361/" target="_blank">Zeb Cook denies it</a>, although that's long been common speculation.  He says they were trying to give the Ranger a more <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/dual-wielding-and-the-ranger-part-2-on-the-unappreciated-genius-of-zeb.679415/" target="_blank">distinct identity, and switching it to more Dex-focused </a>with the lighter armor, two-weapon fighting, and stealth abilities was part of that. This was an interesting drop, because starting in 1E Unearthed Arcana Rangers were required to take a bow or light crossbow as one of their Weapon Proficiencies, so in 1E they did make archery part of the core concept.  I would guess this got omitted because they made proficiencies optional in 2E and gave them their own chapter, so it didn't make sense to include that requirement either under the class entry or as a standalone side note in Chapter 5.Druids being a Priest sub-class in 2E, using Priest spells of the All, Animal, Elemental, Healing, Plant, and Weather spheres, this is basically just a more limited version of casting Druid spells.The damage bonus, I think, was the enormous one.  Especially with the G series modules having been some of the first ones mass published. 1E Rangers hit far harder than anyone else against a lot of the most common monsters in the game. A 10th level Fighter with +3 longsword and 17 Strength deals an average of 10.5 damage to a Hill Giant per hit, killing one in an average of four hits.  An equivalent Ranger deals 20.5 per hit, killing in half the time.  And reliably one-shots nearly all the smaller stuff.</blockquote>

Verification