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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pax" data-source="post: 913483" data-attributes="member: 6875">But let us not forget, those are (a) thematic to each other, and (b) spread out more than the mostly-front-loaded "three bonus feats" the Rangers get now (Amdi and 2WFight at 1st, ImpCrit at 8th).Actually, you're incorrect here; Rangers already have Animal Companions ... having an animal companion is a direct result of beign able to cast Animal Friendship.  Ranger animal companions are simply lesser than druid ACs, because Rangers have half as many caster levels.No, it doesn't replace a skill.  It shifts all the uses of "Animal Empathy" into the skill "Handle Animal"; rangers will still need ranks in a skill to use the benefits, those ranks will simply also make them able to CARE for the animal, as well as make nicey-nice with it.Yet, many of the abilities that cause people to take one (and only one) level of ranger, ar ebeing spread out ... so there's always a reason NOT to multiclass out of ranger, unlike presently.I perhaps agree that 4+ for skills owuld have been better ... even 5+ (does anyone know why 3E seems stuck on even numbers of base skill points?).  However, levels 1 and 2 of ranger gives you (with a 10 INT) 12 skill points and one feat.  The same levels of FIGHTER, OTOH, give you 4 skill points and TWO feats.Are 8 skill points REALLY worth more than one feat, in EVERY situation?I disagree.  Rogues, IME, aren't truly selected for the skill points; it's the sneaking and sneak-attacking that's the primary draw to that class.  Fighters, OTOH, will, in the long run, consistently outperform Rangers in terms of sheer general melee "oomf".</blockquote>

Verification