Please kill off dual wielding ranger genre for 5th ed, please?

[Traycor]

Ironically enough, he learned the style as a fighter. Ranger is his second career.

Nah, he was a ranger from the beginning. He was trained in two weapons, stealth, and was the point guard and scout for his group from Melee Magthere. He knew the underdark and could survive in the wilds. He was quite obviously of the ranger "class" even before he was of the ranger "profession".

 

[Delta]

Did the TWF Ranger really not appear in the books until after Drizz't. I thought Drizz't was an expression of the archetype not the source. Of course, I was kind of late to the DnD game so I'm fuzzy on the timeline.

When did the TWF Ranger appear in DnD? Is it not in 1e PHB or UA?

1E PHB: No TWF for Rangers.
1E UA: Still no TWF for Rangers. However, permits PC drow elf characters, and they all have TWF.
* Drizz't books published -- drow elf ranger with TWF *
2E PHB: Drow elf PCs removed, TWF given to rangers so as to still allow Drizz't.

 

[Moonshade]

Nah, he was a ranger from the beginning. He was trained in two weapons, stealth, and was the point guard and scout for his group from Melee Magthere. He knew the underdark and could survive in the wilds. He was quite obviously of the ranger "class" even before he was of the ranger "profession".

I checked my Heroes' Lorebook for confirmation and as I remembered it says Drizzt became an 18th level fighter before coming to the surface and getting his 2E ranger stats. He may have known the profession if not the name in the sense of being a scout, but he only got the D&D class later.

 

[Krug]

They should make it three weapon fighting at high levels. He can stick a sword in his mouth or on a foot or sumthing.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

I've been more or less indifferent about ranger double-wielding (they do make excellent archers, too, if you're bothered about TWF!), but lately I've found myself leaning towards codifying the TWF thing in D&D all the way down to double-digit editions and more. If only because it will tweak some people.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Personally, I don't have a problem with Dual Wielding Rangers.

I just have a problem with that being the sole option besides archery.

I can think of various "rangers" from myth and legend who were "sword & board-ers" (mostly spear & shield, actually), mounted archers, or even unarmed warriors, and those options should be supported with class paths.

I've even seen some who were more "Manhunters" and chose exotic or unusual weapons- things that made them identifiable from a range, thus literally making their reputation proceed them and adding to their intimidation factor. Again, this is an an aspect of being a ranger that should be supported.

 

[Plane Sailing]

In a way 2wf became a crutch for distinguishing the ranger class in 2e, and continued to do so (and now it has actually become the distinctive thing about the class)

I think that is a shame, it would have been nice if more thought had gone into actually developing a 'ranger' archetype. My vision of it (fast, tough outdoorsman) was actually covered pretty well by the 3e barbarian, FWIW!

Still, that's water under the bridge now.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

In a way 2wf became a crutch for distinguishing the ranger class in 2e, and continued to do so (and now it has actually become the distinctive thing about the class)

I think that is a shame, it would have been nice if more thought had gone into actually developing a 'ranger' archetype. My vision of it (fast, tough outdoorsman) was actually covered pretty well by the 3e barbarian, FWIW!

Still, that's water under the bridge now.

This is pretty close to my thoughts. It's not that Rangers have TWF, it's that the ranger class has, sadly, become synonymous with TWF.

When quite frankly, using two weapons is the worst thing for the Nature Dude to be doing.

Then again, he's not even Nature Dude anymore. He's...I'm not even sure? I get he doesn't have to take Nature in 4e, but what does taking Dungeoneering instead make him?

 

[Plane Sailing]

Then again, he's not even Nature Dude anymore. He's...I'm not even sure? I get he doesn't have to take Nature in 4e, but what does taking Dungeoneering instead make him?

Spelunking dude?

(actually I think the choice of Nature and Dungeoneering makes sense as "explorer dude", which is fairly rangerish)

 

[hamishspence]

Drizzt

Not sure what he was in 2nd ed, but in Baldur's Gate he was pure ranger, but in FRCS 3rd ed he was multiclass fighter-barbarian-ranger.

Maybe Drizzt could be statted out in 4th ed as NPC, Ranger, with the elite template Berzerker (to get the whole "Hunter" theme, which in 3rd ed was represented by one level of barbarian, giving him ability to rage.

Or stat him as a PC (exceptional enough to justify)

Note that with 4th ed and Ritual Casting, you can have him do things a 3rd ed version could not, like put up a Circle of Warding, which he did in The Crystal Shard, to keep Errtu away (did not work)