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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost" data-source="post: 263952" data-attributes="member: 4720">Actually, there's enough divergence there to suggest multiple independent evolutionary lines.  Wow.At any rate, thank you Plane Sailing, (and Cyberzombie and Mr. Greystoke).  That's a lot to absorb, but it's got my brain percolating.  As does Caliber's suggestion regarding paladins.Shirt Guy John, only a small part of my complaint about Rangers is that they're underpowered (though they are.  A first level Ranger is powerful toe-to-toe with any first level character, but maybe three levels down the road, they're rapidly losing ground).  The larger part is that they don't make sense.  Why would a class that's described as a woodsman/hunter (as per PH flavor text) be specialized in two-weapon melee fighting?  When you're hunting deer (or most other game, for that matter), do you stalk through the woods with a pair of short swords?  No, you get yourself a bow or a spear.  Why is it that a fighter can become much better with bows and spears much faster than a Ranger, who should have been carrying one from shortly after the time he could walk, if the standard archetypes have any merit?  Favored Enemy is fine flavorwise if your DM provides a steady diet of the same few enemies, but that's not always the case, no matter how much the player wants to find them.  And even if he does, is that fair to the rest of the party, who might want a little variety in their adventuring diet?Party - "Well, we have two plot hooks here.  One looks like it leads to an intriguing mind flayer slave ring.  The other is a standard orc and goblin killing spree to rescue a stolen herd of cattle that any 1st level party could probably handle."Ranger -  "Gotta vote for the orcs and goblins, guys."Party - "What the #&%@!  Why do you always want to slaughter orcs and goblins?!  It's getting old!"Ranger (to self) - Mainly because 1) My favored enemies include orcs and goblins  2) Without my favored enemy bonus, the rogue can skill me at EVERYTHING, even in the woods, where I've supposedly been stalking things from shortly after birth and he's never been out of a city until last year.  3) Without my favored enemy bonus, my damage per round lags so far behind the fighter, the paladin, and even the cleric, I look like a pasty cancer patient in melee.  (maybe instead of making a futile attempt to match the rogue in certain skills that fit my background by pumping intelligence and charisma, I should have put those points in Strength.  But that wouldn't fit my character)    Conclusion: If I want to be a contributor to this enterprise, there better be favored enemies involved.Ranger (out loud, in an effort to justify all that in character) - "Because orcs killed my parents, and I will take EVERY opportunity to destroy them!  Oh, and I hate goblins too!And, to bring it back to mechanics: Rangers, even more than Paladins, need ALL their stats to be good in order to be reasonably effective.  Unless you roll INCREDIBLE stats, you're better off leaving the fighting to the fighter and paladin, and the skills to the Rogue and Bard.  And the spellcasting is a joke, no matter what your stats.  Realistically, a 1st level Ranger is going to take something like orcs or goblins as their first favored enemy.  First level characters don't have the resources to take on dragons, demons, etc. so those would be unrealistic choices.  So, at 20th level, the Ranger has +5 and possibly +4 against canon fodder and +1 or +2 against things that are actually nasty.  Well, that's more or less the precise inverse of useful, thanks.  Not to mention that hunting skills and the best ways of killing things are actually pretty portable.  Developing the skill to hunt magical beasts should make hunting normal animals that much easier.  Hunting orcs for a long time would give you necessary skills for hunting any humanoid (or monstrous humanoid, for that matter).  Realistically, it would work like other skills: +5 vs orcs would give a synergy bonus against any similar critter.  Unless you want to say that the anatomy of each category is so different that the knowledge of where and how to hit them isn't portable, which doesn't make any sense.  And how many ways are there to hide in a given environment?  If I can spot goblins hiding in heavy brush, it should be that much easier to spot anything larger that doesn't have tremendously good camaflouge.  And if a skilled bowman can hit a bullseye on a target from 50 or 100 feet (or more), why can't he apply his favored enemy bonus to damage at anything greater than 30 feet?You might say that all this mechanical stuff is unimportant compared to playing the role.  But how much fun is it to play the role of the guy who can't compete with the rest of the party at anything but tracking?  The Ranger needs to at least compare with the other classes in something else.  If they want him to be a dextrous warrior, why have his abilities lock-step him into melee where he needs Dex (and maybe Con) to avoid getting clobbered due to his armor restriction but also Str in order to be competitive?  Charima is necessary for archetypes like Robin Hood or Strider.  Wisdom is necessary for spellcasting.  And Intelligence is vital to take advantage of their great skill selection, especially considering their low base skill points per level compared to the other "skill" classes.  The character class is a staple of fantasy, and I think they made it simply less fun to play than the other classes.</blockquote>

Verification