When 3.5 came out, I really had mixed feelings about the Ranger
Loved 6 Sp per level
Hated d8 Hit Die
Favored Enemy was handled much better, but is still the most DM dependent of class abilities
The new class abilities were all pretty cool
Having options for the combat style was cool
Only having two was not, one being clearly superior was even worse
Having a d8 Hit Die, with light armor, and two weapon fighting is a bad idea.
You'll get hit more often, be able to take less hits, hit less often, and take more hits (due to having to move 5 feet or less to use two-weapon fighting.
As an archer the ranger only suffers a few of these, but at 6th level gains the ability to use his combat style while on the move.
After seeing the scout for the first time, I had no qualms about beefing up the ranger.
If the scout can get 15 BAB, d8 hit die and 8 skill points per level, then the ranger should be fine with 20 BAB, d10 hit die, and 6 skill points.
I added two additional weapon styles, and loosened them up a little, instead of doling out specific feats, the ranger can choose any feat that requires a specific feat as a prerequisite, for instance the melee path allows the ranger to choose any feat that requires the two weapon fighting feat.
I gave them half of the skirmish ability (just the damage bonus) starting at 3rd level with an increase every four levels afterward. This helps keep the ranger mobile, and works well with the combat styles since he typically can't use both in the same round. One requires the player not move while the other encourages it. Plus this gives the ranger a damage dealing option he has control over, unlike the Favored enemy bonus.
I also changed woodland stride to allow for different types of rangers, and a rangers animal companion advances at the rangers level -3, like the paladins turning ability.
Just to be fair I also added the additional restriction on alot of the rangers abilities that they could not be used if the ranger was carrying heavier than a light load. I also lowered their starting gold.
Recently though I've been toying with the idea of moving the Woodland stride ability to 2nd (like both the Druid and Scout), and giving them trackless step at 3rd (in my campaign trackless step has no effect vs your scent trail, so creatures with scent can still track you (finally a use for animal companions, and getting rid of the endurance feat all together.
Especially after had a character play an Archer Ranger who slept in a suit of medium armor, since he figured if somone attacked while he was asleep, he problably wouldn't get off too many shots anyway.
Instead of the endurance feat, I will give the Ranger an ability similiar to the endurance feat, but with out the sleeping in medium armor, and that applies to weather extremes. This means rangers will no longer have the easy path to the diehard feat, but since I bumped up their hit die, I won't fill too bad about it.
Even with the additional changes I'm thinking of adding I think the ranger still isn't as good as the scout. More skills, same Hit die, the BAB of 15 isn't even that bad when you consider that a Two weapon ranger is taking either a -2 or -4 to his attacks, and the Archer is taking -2 or -4 as well, a lower fort save which is partially off set by a class ability. A much better woodland stride ability, an always active freedom of movement ability, blind sense, then blind sight, a faster evasion, camoflage and HiPS progression, bonus feats, bonuses to AC and Initiative, trap finding and uncanny dodge, as well as a faster movement rate.
In comparison the ranger gets wild empathy, an animal companion, spells, endurance, combat styles, favored enemy, track and swift tracker. (this is a comparison of my ranger vs the scout, not the scout vs the core ranger which become even more lopsided).
The first time I actually saw the scout in play was in a campaign one of my players was running. I was playing a ranger (core), and one of the other players was playing the brand new scout. The disparity between the two was obvious and quickly felt. He only wanted to run a short campaign, so started us at 6th level and advanced us a level every session. By the 5th session he was asking me if I wanted to switch to a different character (by this point though I wanted to see it through though, hoping that maybe it would eventually even out, it didn't). I've ran four other campaigns since then, and I have had at least one scout in three of the four (in one I had three, a pure scout, a barbarian/scout, and a druid/scout, this incidently was the last campaign I allowed the scout in), we had a new player for this one who played a ranger (my version with out faster woodland stride or trackless step, eventually he killed off his character and played the Scout/Druid) other than that I haven't seen a rogue or ranger since then. The only campaign I didn't see the scout in was the one they were banned from play (as a base class anyway).
Hate the scout, absolutey love the skirmish damage ability though. Sorry for the rant.
Loved 6 Sp per level
Hated d8 Hit Die
Favored Enemy was handled much better, but is still the most DM dependent of class abilities
The new class abilities were all pretty cool
Having options for the combat style was cool
Only having two was not, one being clearly superior was even worse
Having a d8 Hit Die, with light armor, and two weapon fighting is a bad idea.
You'll get hit more often, be able to take less hits, hit less often, and take more hits (due to having to move 5 feet or less to use two-weapon fighting.
As an archer the ranger only suffers a few of these, but at 6th level gains the ability to use his combat style while on the move.
After seeing the scout for the first time, I had no qualms about beefing up the ranger.
If the scout can get 15 BAB, d8 hit die and 8 skill points per level, then the ranger should be fine with 20 BAB, d10 hit die, and 6 skill points.
I added two additional weapon styles, and loosened them up a little, instead of doling out specific feats, the ranger can choose any feat that requires a specific feat as a prerequisite, for instance the melee path allows the ranger to choose any feat that requires the two weapon fighting feat.
I gave them half of the skirmish ability (just the damage bonus) starting at 3rd level with an increase every four levels afterward. This helps keep the ranger mobile, and works well with the combat styles since he typically can't use both in the same round. One requires the player not move while the other encourages it. Plus this gives the ranger a damage dealing option he has control over, unlike the Favored enemy bonus.
I also changed woodland stride to allow for different types of rangers, and a rangers animal companion advances at the rangers level -3, like the paladins turning ability.
Just to be fair I also added the additional restriction on alot of the rangers abilities that they could not be used if the ranger was carrying heavier than a light load. I also lowered their starting gold.
Recently though I've been toying with the idea of moving the Woodland stride ability to 2nd (like both the Druid and Scout), and giving them trackless step at 3rd (in my campaign trackless step has no effect vs your scent trail, so creatures with scent can still track you (finally a use for animal companions, and getting rid of the endurance feat all together.
Especially after had a character play an Archer Ranger who slept in a suit of medium armor, since he figured if somone attacked while he was asleep, he problably wouldn't get off too many shots anyway.
Instead of the endurance feat, I will give the Ranger an ability similiar to the endurance feat, but with out the sleeping in medium armor, and that applies to weather extremes. This means rangers will no longer have the easy path to the diehard feat, but since I bumped up their hit die, I won't fill too bad about it.
Even with the additional changes I'm thinking of adding I think the ranger still isn't as good as the scout. More skills, same Hit die, the BAB of 15 isn't even that bad when you consider that a Two weapon ranger is taking either a -2 or -4 to his attacks, and the Archer is taking -2 or -4 as well, a lower fort save which is partially off set by a class ability. A much better woodland stride ability, an always active freedom of movement ability, blind sense, then blind sight, a faster evasion, camoflage and HiPS progression, bonus feats, bonuses to AC and Initiative, trap finding and uncanny dodge, as well as a faster movement rate.
In comparison the ranger gets wild empathy, an animal companion, spells, endurance, combat styles, favored enemy, track and swift tracker. (this is a comparison of my ranger vs the scout, not the scout vs the core ranger which become even more lopsided).
The first time I actually saw the scout in play was in a campaign one of my players was running. I was playing a ranger (core), and one of the other players was playing the brand new scout. The disparity between the two was obvious and quickly felt. He only wanted to run a short campaign, so started us at 6th level and advanced us a level every session. By the 5th session he was asking me if I wanted to switch to a different character (by this point though I wanted to see it through though, hoping that maybe it would eventually even out, it didn't). I've ran four other campaigns since then, and I have had at least one scout in three of the four (in one I had three, a pure scout, a barbarian/scout, and a druid/scout, this incidently was the last campaign I allowed the scout in), we had a new player for this one who played a ranger (my version with out faster woodland stride or trackless step, eventually he killed off his character and played the Scout/Druid) other than that I haven't seen a rogue or ranger since then. The only campaign I didn't see the scout in was the one they were banned from play (as a base class anyway).
Hate the scout, absolutey love the skirmish damage ability though. Sorry for the rant.
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
