Ranger Favored Enemy question

I am running a campaign and a player who is running a Ranger character
wants to use "Undead" as his first favored enemy. The 3.5 PH is a bit vague
when it mentions "type" and "example" - ie, it says "Undead ----- Zombie"
does this mean,

YES, you can choose ALL undead as a favored enemy,
or
NO, it means you have to choose one sub-type of undead (zombie, or lich, or mummy) etc?

thanks for your input
 

log in or register to remove this ad




Incorporeal creatures are immune to critical hits, extra damage from being favored enemies, and from sneak attacks. They move in any direction (including up or down) at will. They do not need to walk on the ground. They can pass through solid objects at will, although they cannot see when their eyes are within solid matter.
 

frankthedm said:
Incorporeal creatures are immune to critical hits, extra damage from being favored enemies, and from sneak attacks. They move in any direction (including up or down) at will. They do not need to walk on the ground. They can pass through solid objects at will, although they cannot see when their eyes are within solid matter.

I find that incredibly annoying.

I see no logical reason that Favored Enemy should work be fundamentally worse than Weapon Specialization when it comes to damage dealing. If special knowledge and skill about a specific kind of enemy is of no effect, why should very generalized knowledge about using a specific weapon be so much better?

It is just unnecessary nickel and diming to no useful purpose.
 

Ridley's Cohort said:
I find that incredibly annoying.

I see no logical reason that Favored Enemy should work be fundamentally worse than Weapon Specialization when it comes to damage dealing. If special knowledge and skill about a specific kind of enemy is of no effect, why should very generalized knowledge about using a specific weapon be so much better?

It is just unnecessary nickel and diming to no useful purpose.
It has a very logical reason. That damage was based on anatomy in 3.0 [thus foiled by crit immunity]. In 3.5 to placate those who whined about that they expanded the creatures effected to include just about all creatures, thus making the damage effectively structural based since it now works on anything with a corporeal form. I too feel this is an annoying double standard that should be rolled back to the 3.0 version.

Pesonally find it annoying an incoporeal creature takes damage based on how hard a weapon is swung.
 
Last edited:

It has a very logical reason. That damage was based on anatomy in 3.0 [thus foiled by crit immunity]. In 3.5 to placate those who whined about that they expanded the creatures effected to include just about all creatures, thus making the damage effectively structural based since it now works on anything with a corporeal form. I too feel this is an annoying double standard that should be rolled back to the 3.0 version.

I could see this if HP was solely a direct representation of life (or unlife) force. But it is not. It also encompasses the opponents ability to shrug off blows and avoidance of potentially severe injury. The damage bonus of a favored enemy is the representation of the characters intimate knowledge of the foe and its tactics and therefore i house rule that the damage applies.
 

It works on all undead. The "Zombie" thing is just an example.

EXCEPTION: Incorporal as mentioned.

It would not be an unreasonable house rule however to grant the ranger that whopping +2 damage vs. shadows.
 

nittanytbone said:
that whopping +2 damage vs. shadows.
The damage isn't always as inconsequential as it seems. Rangers often take undead as their initial enemy, and specialize in large number of attacks. So at say, 11th level it becomes +6 damage multiplied by 4 to 7 attacks. That can be a nice bonus against traditionally low hp incorporeal undead.
 

Remove ads

Top