ok, now rangers.

[Kahuna Burger]

OK, my multiple choices bard poll proved pretty useful, so I'll do a ranger one. Hopefully I'll get all the options people want, but I'm less sure of this one since is not as prime a class to me.

 

[Merlion]

I have posted most of my ideas about the ranger over and over but here goes some of it again
I see the ranger as defined by his skills and special abilites...stealth scouting observation, knowledge of nature and the wilderness, tracking, and link with nature. So I checked hunter/tracker scout minor nature caster and..explorer/trailblazer as I see wanderlust and exploring new areas as very ranger apropriate concepts.
I checked neither of the fighting styles...I dont think either is that important to the idea or that a ranger should necesarily have to be either one. That said, I feel Archery has more of a link to the overal ranger idea/archtype the the TWF

 

[Zaruthustran]

Ditto. Archers are Fighters who take archery feats. Two weapon fighters are Fighters who take two weapon-fighting feats. Rangers should be scouts/trail blazers/guides/survivalists.

If the ranger gets archery feats + special abilities, or two weapon fighting feats + special abilities, than all archers and all TW fighters will pick the Ranger class instead of the Fighter class. So where does that leave the Fighter?

-z

 

[Kahuna Burger]

interesting...

maybe I phrased the option badly, but it worth noting that morevotes have been cast for the joke answer than the favored enemy archetype...

Kahuna Burger

 

[Mercule]

Re: interesting...

maybe I phrased the option badly, but it worth noting that morevotes have been cast for the joke answer than the favored enemy archetype...

I think it was poorly phrased.

I've never really seen Rangers as being fixated on killing orcs so much as being the sworn defenders of civilazation from those murderous orcs.

It's a fine line, but it makes all the difference to me.

 

[Iron_Chef]

AEG's MERCENARIES book does the ranger justice in several core classes: Guerilla (stealth fighter), Hunter (bounty hunter or survivalist), Mercenary Ranger and Scout (ranged sneak attack!). They are all good and all focused on different areas. I played an AEG mercenary ranger last week (first time I EVER played a ranger of any type for the first time) and the class kicked ass. Definitely plenty of reasons to go up in it past level 1. You can recreate the PHB style ranger with it as well (entirely at player's option), or do pretty much whatever you think a ranger should be able to do with it. It's that flexible!

 

[Angcuru]

The Monte Cook Ranger is the best one I've seen. Nice and balanced, and a d8 instead of a d10 for hp makes him think more along the lines of STEALTH instead of I HIT IT WITH MY CLAYMORE! It also implements bonus feats instead of virtual fighting feats. Works wonders in general, if you ask me.

 

[Shadowdancer]

I checked all the ones Merlion did plus Archer. In my mind, Archer has always gone with the hunting aspect of the ranger. That's just the best way for them to hunt animals in the wild.

The two-weapon fighting style -- I've never gotten that. I see it more with rogues if you limit it to smaller weapons, such as knives and daggers, maybe a short sword.

I've never liked the Favored Enemy aspect of rangers, either. I think that should be a feat that anyone can take.

 

[Mercule]

The Monte Cook Ranger is the best one I've seen. Nice and balanced, and a d8 instead of a d10 for hp makes him think more along the lines of STEALTH instead of I HIT IT WITH MY CLAYMORE! It also implements bonus feats instead of virtual fighting feats. Works wonders in general, if you ask me.

Monte's is better than most.

Still, I can't take any variant Ranger seriously when it's only got a d8 hit die. Rangers are tough mothers.

 

[Spike]

just like...........SHAFT