D&D 3E/3.5 "Military Scout Ranger" for 3.5e

[haakon1]

Ever since 3e, the Ranger has kind of annoyed me, and some of my players.

Our view is the ranger should be a wilderness warrior and scout, who trades off some combat prowess (d8 HP instead of d10, and fewer feats) for additional wilderness/military reconnaissance type skills and skill points. Basically, a D&D equivalent of a Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol (LRRP) soldier, which became the modern US Army Rangers.

Some of the class features -- Favored Enemy, Animal Companion, and Spellcasting -- just didn't fit our concept for what a Ranger should be -- namely a scout with a lot of "fieldcraft".

I found online a "LOTR Ranger" someone created that nearly fit the bill, except it seemed to just remove stuff, not really adding back something of equal value.

So I finally created my own "Military Scout Ranger". Here it is, in case this is useful to others. I'm just stating where it differs from the SRD Ranger -- if I don't mention it, we're using the RAW SRD (3.5e PHB).

New Class Skill: Knowledge (Military Intelligence): This skill involves turning observations into tactical military intelligence. From observing a military unit, can estimate Order of Battle (size, role, quality, and allegiance). With successful Knowledge: Nature check, can attempt to estimate the likely effects of weather, or with Knowledge: Geography, the effects of terrain, on the tactics and movement of military units. With successful Gather Information, can estimate the sentiment (“hearts & minds”) and morale of military units and civilian villages.

Favored Terrain (replaces Favored Enemy, based on Pathfinder Core Rules, p. 65, but starting at 1st level): At 1st level, a Ranger may select a type of terrain from the Favored Terrains list. The ranger gains +2 to Initiative checks and Knowledge (Geography), Perception (Listen & Spot), Stealth (Hide & Move Silently), and Survival skill checks in this terrain. A ranger in this terrain leaves no trail and cannot be tracked (though he can leave a trail if he chooses). At 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter, the Ranger gains an additional terrain and chooses a terrain already known to gain an additional +2 bonus for it.

Favored Terrains choices: Cold (ice, snow, glaciers, tundra), Desert (sand and arid wastelands), Forest, Jungle, Mountains (includes Hills), Plains, Swamp, Underground, Urban, or Extraplanar (choose a Plane other than Material Plane).

Terrain Bond (replaces Animal Companion at 4th level, from Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide, p. 66): Within Favored Terrain, Ranger grant all allies in line of sight and that can hear him +2 to Initiative checks and Perception (Listen & Spot), Stealth (Hide & Move Silently), and Survival in this terrain. Also long as they travel with the Ranger, they leave no trail and can't be tracked. The ranger can choose for the group, or specific members of the group, to leave a trail.

Champion of the Wild (replaces spellcasting ability at 4th level, from Complete Champion, p. 50): Instead of spellcasting ability, you gain a bonus feat at 4th, 8th, 11th, and 14th levels. You can choose from the following list for which you must meet the prerequisites: Blind-Fight, Combat Expertise, Eyes in the Back of Your Head, Improved Disarm, Improved Favored Enemy, Improved Feint, Improved Trip, or a specific list supporting your Combat Style.

 

[Grogg of the North]

IIRC, Complete Warrior states that you can use Knowledge: History (or maybe local?) to know things about the military of various races/countries. Rather than inventing a new narrow skill, you could give them that instead.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Have you looked at the actual Scout class from Complete Adventurer? You could probably get some ideas from there, including the possibility of trapfinding.

 

[haakon1]

IIRC, Complete Warrior states that you can use Knowledge: History (or maybe local?) to know things about the military of various races/countries. Rather than inventing a new narrow skill, you could give them that instead.

Ah, I overlooked that. It's actually BOTH skills. The Local rule seems pretty good, but the History one seems more from the "filler not killer" era of 3.5e rules. I'll quote it all:

<<History: With a successful DC15 Knowledge (history) check, you know the basics of how a particular army organizes itself. For example, a successful check reveals that bugbears include a shaman for every 20-soldier platoon, or that elf generals often ride with the cavalry. If you're standing on or near a historic battlefield, you can recall the details of the battle fought there with a DC20 Knowledge (history) check. You know for example that the dwarves of the Brass Hills defeated the orc hordes by starting an avalanche on the hills to your left, and that most of the surviving orcs retreated into the lava tubes somewhere ahead."

Local: A DC10 Knowledge (local) check is sufficient to identify a military unit or noble's family by its heraldry, if the unit or the family hails from the local area. A Knowledge (nobility and royalty) check is required to identify the (sic) heraldry from far-off lands.

Nobility and Royalty: A Knowledge (nobility and royalty) check tells you something about the heraldry of far-off lands. A DC25 check tells you what part of the world (down to a province or city) a heraldic design comes from. A DC30 check tells you the name of the military unit or family.>>

To me, that stuff seems a bit like "parlor tricks".

To use a real world example, that I can identify the US 2nd Infantry Division by its heraldry is "interesting", but that I could look at a squad from that unit and tell that they are equipped as scouts, so that they might on a long-range patrol or a spearhead for a larger force, that's much more interesting and requires more than Knowledge (Local) or Knowledge (History) -- the latter is a skill I actually have -- I could also tell you the Indianhead division has been based in Korea since the 1950's -- but not being a veteran or analyst, I couldn't tell regular infantry from scouts. That's I mean by Military Intelligence -- not just familiarity with symbols, but familiarity with and ability to interpret military behavior.

To give examples of how I used the Military Intelligence skill, we've done things like:
-- The player wondering about the hobgoblins wearing the Baron of the land they are travelling in's uniform, so he can "estimate" if they might really be mercenaries working for the Baron, or if that's unlikely (which was the case) due to who is recruited and who else in the area has used hobgoblins.
-- Encountering allied forces and identifying their nationality by their heraldry. Not the specific unit by heraldry, as it was the national army. But type and purpose of unit from its gear, nationality from heraldry.
-- Encountering friendly forces and estimating their quality and training.
-- Encountering friendly forces and estimate their numbers and intent (siege train with them, not just regular baggage).

 

[haakon1]

Have you looked at the actual Scout class from Complete Adventurer? You could probably get some ideas from there, including the possibility of trapfinding.

Yeah, but it didn't seem like the right fit to me. The Skirmish ability is the main thing, and I don't really get it . . . attacking on the move isn't to me the main thing a scout does. To me, it's sneaking and observing and interpreting. I used to run a long-running RECON game . . . Vietnam Long-Range Recon Patrols, which were renamed Rangers in 1969.

Trapfinding doesn't fit for me either . . . that's an Engineer/Sapper (Rogue in 3.5e), not a Recon scout.

 

[doghead]

I like the Terrain bond ability to provide bonuses to allies' skill checks. Personally, I am moving increasingly towards blending the Stealth/Perception checks into one group check as a sort of sanity saver. Its still fairly informal, but basically boils down to best Perception vs worst Stealth with various situational modifiers on a case by case basis. It would be nice to see a nice simple mechanism for team checks.

A couple of questions and thoughts, in no particular order.

1. Why distinguish forests from jungles? Aren't they essentially the same, only one is temperate, and one tropical? How about rivers/coastal for those looking or playing a more nautical game?

2. Knowledge (Military Intelligence) seems like a very modern name. But can't think of anything better to be honest. It seems a little unusual in requiring other skills in order to function. Could these be synergistic skills providing a bonus to Knowledge (MI) instead. For example: 5 ranks in Knowledge (Nature) provides a +2 synergy bonus to estimating effect of weather on future movement and condition of forces.

thotd

 

[Jackinthegreen]

I like the Terrain bond ability to provide bonuses to allies' skill checks. Personally, I am moving increasingly towards blending the Stealth/Perception checks into one group check as a sort of sanity saver. Its still fairly informal, but basically boils down to best Perception vs worst Stealth with various situational modifiers on a case by case basis. It would be nice to see a nice simple mechanism for team checks.

A couple of questions and thoughts, in no particular order.

1. Why distinguish forests from jungles? Aren't they essentially the same, only one is temperate, and one tropical? How about rivers/coastal for those looking or playing a more nautical game?

2. Knowledge (Military Intelligence) seems like a very modern name. But can't think of anything better to be honest. It seems a little unusual in requiring other skills in order to function. Could these be synergistic skills providing a bonus to Knowledge (MI) instead. For example: 5 ranks in Knowledge (Nature) provides a +2 synergy bonus to estimating effect of weather on future movement and condition of forces.

thotd

Forests and jungles were separated out by the game designers. It might have everything to do with the climate since dealing with being cramped and hot versus cramped and cold are quite different beasts. Note the UA version of Favored Environment.

Heroes of Battle has a blurb about Knowledge: History being relevant to military tactics:

[sblock]KNOWLEDGE
Information can be as important a weapon in battle as the
troops themselves.
Check: In a military campaign, a character with
Knowledge (history) will be well versed in military history
and know something of military tactics used in past
wars. A DC 20 Knowledge check enables you to provide
a strategic advantage to your side in a battle (see Strategic
Advantages, page 70). Use the guidelines in that section
to determine which situations are appropriate for each
area of knowledge. As always, the DM is the final arbiter
of this issue.
Action: Using Knowledge to gain a strategic advantage
for a battle requires 1 hour of planning during the planning
stage.
Try Again: No. The check represents how your knowledge
applies to the situation, and thinking about it a second
time doesn’t grant you any additional insight.[/sblock]

If it wasn't for the fact that Martial Lore only applies to maneuvers from Tome of Battle, I'd say that might work.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

New Class Skill: Knowledge (Military Intelligence): This skill involves turning observations into tactical military intelligence. From observing a military unit, can estimate Order of Battle (size, role, quality, and allegiance). With successful Knowledge: Nature check, can attempt to estimate the likely effects of weather, or with Knowledge: Geography, the effects of terrain, on the tactics and movement of military units. With successful Gather Information, can estimate the sentiment (“hearts & minds”) and morale of military units and civilian villages.

There's only one problem with this: it's a skill tax. IMO, this should be a class feature, not a skill, which allows the ranger to use a previously existing skill for greater effect. For instance, a ranger might be able to use Knowledge (nobility and royalty) to get a better idea of which lord is in charge of a unit or make a Knowledge (history) to determine what type of unit they're spotting.

Favored Terrain (replaces Favored Enemy, based on Pathfinder Core Rules, p. 65, but starting at 1st level): At 1st level, a Ranger may select a type of terrain from the Favored Terrains list. The ranger gains +2 to Initiative checks and Knowledge (Geography), Perception (Listen & Spot), Stealth (Hide & Move Silently), and Survival skill checks in this terrain. A ranger in this terrain leaves no trail and cannot be tracked (though he can leave a trail if he chooses). At 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter, the Ranger gains an additional terrain and chooses a terrain already known to gain an additional +2 bonus for it.

Since this isn't magic, I think there should be penalties to attempts to track rangers rather than completely removing the trail. This would make it possible for a ranger to track another ranger (although probably not if they're of the same level). There's already a way to do this in the rules, but requires slower movement; I would suggest a long-range ranger could inflict a greater penalty while still moving at full speed.

IMO, favored terrain does not do enough to replace favored enemies, so I would suggest some additional combat ability, perhaps based on surprise, as well. (This is one reason I like the Scout class. The combat abilities all make sense for the class, although I've noticed you didn't think that fit for this specific archetype.)

Favored Terrains choices: Cold (ice, snow, glaciers, tundra), Desert (sand and arid wastelands), Forest, Jungle, Mountains (includes Hills), Plains, Swamp, Underground, Urban, or Extraplanar (choose a Plane other than Material Plane).

Terrain Bond (replaces Animal Companion at 4th level, from Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide, p. 66): Within Favored Terrain, Ranger grant all allies in line of sight and that can hear him +2 to Initiative checks and Perception (Listen & Spot), Stealth (Hide & Move Silently), and Survival in this terrain. Also long as they travel with the Ranger, they leave no trail and can't be tracked. The ranger can choose for the group, or specific members of the group, to leave a trail.

This is pretty neat. Same note about auto-hidden trails.

Champion of the Wild (replaces spellcasting ability at 4th level, from Complete Champion, p. 50): Instead of spellcasting ability, you gain a bonus feat at 4th, 8th, 11th, and 14th levels. You can choose from the following list for which you must meet the prerequisites: Blind-Fight, Combat Expertise, Eyes in the Back of Your Head, Improved Disarm, Improved Favored Enemy, Improved Feint, Improved Trip, or a specific list supporting your Combat Style.

I like these ones too. Off-hand, I can't think of any additional feats to add to the list except Mobility and Spring Attack, but I'm sure there's a ton of feats that would support archery (besides what rangers could normally get) out there somewhere.

 

[haakon1]

1. Why distinguish forests from jungles? Aren't they essentially the same, only one is temperate, and one tropical? How about rivers/coastal for those looking or playing a more nautical game?

I actually just took that from the Pathfinder rules. I think the intent is mostly tropical rain forest versus temperate and cold, which is how a similar, older 3.5e supplemental rule broke it out. It makes sense to me because I think Survival and Hide, etc. techniques in temperate forests would be fairly different. You could get scientific and use actual climate zones, like Oceanic (mild with rain all year) and Mediterranean (mild with dry summers), but I think that would be too specific.

Of course, if you like my rule idea and want to use different terrains, you're more than welcome to do so.

2. Knowledge (Military Intelligence) seems like a very modern name. But can't think of anything better to be honest. It seems a little unusual in requiring other skills in order to function. Could these be synergistic skills providing a bonus to Knowledge (MI) instead. For example: 5 ranks in Knowledge (Nature) provides a +2 synergy bonus to estimating effect of weather on future movement and condition of forces.

Yes, I think you're right about the synergy.

 

[haakon1]

There's only one problem with this: it's a skill tax. IMO, this should be a class feature, not a skill, which allows the ranger to use a previously existing skill for greater effect. For instance, a ranger might be able to use Knowledge (nobility and royalty) to get a better idea of which lord is in charge of a unit or make a Knowledge (history) to determine what type of unit they're spotting.

That's an interesting idea . . . I'll consider it. But my first thought is, it doesn't seem like a long-range patrol ranger would need to/be likely to know other things that go with knowledge skills like nobility (etiquette), local (streetwiseness), and history (being learned about other aspects of history). I think my mistake here is to have it work "on top" of other skills, like K (nature) and K (geography). I think synergy with them makes more sense.

Since this isn't magic, I think there should be penalties to attempts to track rangers rather than completely removing the trail. This would make it possible for a ranger to track another ranger (although probably not if they're of the same level). There's already a way to do this in the rules, but requires slower movement; I would suggest a long-range ranger could inflict a greater penalty while still moving at full speed.

I don't disagree -- I was just quoting the rule I found. Perhaps it should +20 to the DC to track them, and can move at double move speed, or +10 to DC at a full run?

IMO, favored terrain does not do enough to replace favored enemies, so I would suggest some additional combat ability, perhaps based on surprise, as well. (This is one reason I like the Scout class. The combat abilities all make sense for the class, although I've noticed you didn't think that fit for this specific archetype.).

It does get +2 on Init in favored terrain, rising at higher levels. What do you suggest? I like the idea of this sort of Ranger often getting the first shot. +4 instead?

I like these ones too. Off-hand, I can't think of any additional feats to add to the list except Mobility and Spring Attack, but I'm sure there's a ton of feats that would support archery (besides what rangers could normally get) out there somewhere.

Yes, I left the Combat Style related feats up to the DM, as there are many I could see, for different Combat Styles. I wouldn't just limit them to Archer (which I believe is most common for Rangers) and Two-Weapon Fighting. The Ranger I'm developing this for chose Hoplite (longspear and shield) and found a bunch of relevant feats in the Net Book of Feats -- Spear & Shield lets you use a two-handed longspear and a shield at once, Rank Fighting lets you use a longspear over a front rank comrade from the second rank, Near and Far lets you get a close opponents with a longspear. Makes another melee weapon besides swords a viable choice.