Ranger - likes and dislikes?

[Klaus]

The Ranger in my last campaign (up to 11th level) was the frontline fighter, and dealed out SICK amounts of damage!

I like the d8 HD, the skill points and selection, full BAB, Tracking, Favored Enemy (if the DM plays along), the fighting styles (but I wish there were at least three more) and, with the advent of Nature Bond, the animal companion (I wish the PrClasses that add to Companion would say "levels in this class stack with your effective druid level for animal companion purposes"). I like the spells, but the spell-less Complete Warrior variant has its merits.

 

[Old Fart]

Like most of the posters so far, my dislikes are :
1. Animal companion - next to useless
2. Favored Enemy - very specific on campaign/adventures
3. Spells - without starteing a huge discussion on their usefulness or lack thereof, let me say that I've not personally seen a lot of use of them
4. Combat paths - not only a limited choice between two styles, but also - why would each and every woodsman want to specialize in a combat style, as opposed to something that would make them a better woodsman?

I guess that ultimately my biggest problem with Rangers is that the Scout class seems to fit the concept better in many cases. One exception being the BAB - but on the other hand, why would a woodsman be a specialist in kicking a** and taking names?

So when you have a class whose concept is better realised by another class . . . why . . . it's almost like you're playing a monk!

 

[Drowbane]

Dislikes (in no particular order)

* Ranger started in 3.x as a Base class instead of a PrC.

* HD nerfed to d8 in 3.5

* Animal Companion advances at 1/2 Level. Compare the power of a Ranger vs the Druid on all merits outside of thier Animal Companions... clearly it is the Ranger that needs the Animal Companion more. I could see Ranger getting it at level with the Druid getting it as Ranger -3. (And the Druid would still wtfpwn)

* No real niche.
1) Archer? The Fighter does it better.
2) Dual-wielder? The Fighter still does it better.
3) Stealthy Archer-or-Dual-wielder? Sounds like a Rogue.
4) Wilderness Warrior? That belongs firmly to the Druid.
Give the Fighter more skill points, and the ability to choose his skills and you can eliminate at least 5 "useless" Base classes.

* Ranger Spells (the following annoys me with Paladin, Assassin, Hexblade, etc also)... why is it that a Fighter/Caster hybrid gets unique spells that the True casters of thier type do not get? Surely clerics should have access to any spell a fighter/cleric-w/stick......err...paladin gets!

* Favored Enemy: Why is this a class feature?! Racial Hatred as a bonus to killing stuff clearly belongs in the FEATS department!

* ... I'm sure I'll think of more later

Likes

* Ranger is a damn cool Archetype.... just not one that really needs its own Base class.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Likes

Wonderful skill list. Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Spot, Survival... every single one comes up, and the first four probably show up every session.

Wonderful number of skill points. Indeed, it's perfect. My last ranger had Int 12 and was human and still couldn't max out all his skills. I think that's a good sign it's balanced.

Good Hit Die. Not like a fighter, but a ranger is a light warrior, and doesn't need the hit points.

Good saves. You're tough and you're a light fighter - I think the saving throw progressions fit quite well.

Dislikes

Being close to nature. That should be an option, not a requirement. Why do rangers get "wild empathy", an animal companion and spells? Rangers should be more flexible that way.

Limited combat styles. Two is not enough. A hundred is not enough, as the game designers aren't omniscient. There should be a list of feats, like the Iron Kingdoms ranger enjoys. You could then choose from the list. The combat styles don't work well for a lot of monsters, like gnolls and grimlocks. On that note, the TWF style is very weak, and doesn't fit a mobile warrior, either. In fact, it has nothing to do with rangers but copying Drizzt

Favored enemy. Short of precognition you can't make it useful enough. The DM can tell you "orcs will be common in my campaign" but after three adventures he changes his mind and sends you on urban missions where half-orcs are rare and orcs virtually unknown. Managing favored enemy is a lot of work for the DM and it's frustrating for the player.

Lack of damage-dealing options. Fighters and barbarians have obvious ones. Paladins get smite. Rangers get ... right, you have no control over when favored enemy shows up. The Scout did this very well, IMO.

 

[Land Outcast]

Being close to nature. That should be an option, not a requirement. Why do rangers get "wild empathy", an animal companion and spells? Rangers should be more flexible that way.
...
Lack of damage-dealing options. Fighters and barbarians have obvious ones. Paladins get smite. Rangers get ... right, you have no control over when favored enemy shows up. The Scout did this very well, IMO.

the answer to that would be to expand the Commando (PrC in the wizards' site, of which I can't find the link now) to create a base class...

 

[Mad Mac]

Two-weapon Rangers suck, but I think the blame lies more in the two-weapon path itself than the Ranger class. And Drizzit or no, I still like the image.

I won't argue that Favored Enemy is inherently hard to get right, being more DM dependent than any other combat ability I can think of. On the other hand, it's still tons better than the 2nd Edition version....remember choosing a single, hyper-specific favored enemy that you got a non-scaling bonus against? Nothing like being a 20th level Ranger with a +4 attack bonus vs pink carrion crawlers named Anastasia.

 

[The_Gneech]

Likes: Almost everything. I've been a ranger fanboy since 1e and I don't think that's likely to change. The 3.5 ranger is also vastly improved over the 3.0 ranger.

Dislikes: Only a couple of quibbles, really:

1) Balance oughta be a class skill. Rangers climb scrabbly slopes and run around in trees, don't they?

2) I'd like it if the animal companion was a little less flimsy at higher levels (they don't have to be a terror, but it would be nice to not have my horse of many adventures incinerated out from under me the first time I meet a dragon).

3) I wish the combat style improved at a slightly faster rate, or maybe just broadened a bit. As has been observed many times, an archery-based fighter is a much more effective archer than the ranger is.

I do rather prefer the "nonspellcasting ranger" variant in CW for most ranger builds, tho.

Also, I kinda resent that the Scout class seems to be built largely in an effort to out-ranger the ranger. But that's a rant for some other thread.

-The Gneech

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Two-weapon Rangers suck, but I think the blame lies more in the two-weapon path itself than the Ranger class. And Drizzit or no, I still like the image.

So long as it's treated as a character trait and not a ranger trait, I think it's cool and makes a nice image.

I won't argue that Favored Enemy is inherently hard to get right, being more DM dependent than any other combat ability I can think of. On the other hand, it's still tons better than the 2nd Edition version....remember choosing a single, hyper-specific favored enemy that you got a non-scaling bonus against? Nothing like being a 20th level Ranger with a +4 attack bonus vs pink carrion crawlers named Anastasia.

True, but there have been two chances to do it better, and it's still not right yet.

I like the spells, but the spell-less Complete Warrior variant has its merits

Would that be the class that has spells that just happen to be missing their components? That's not really spell-less.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Should have: d10 HD, more range of higher level abilities.

Should keep: full BAB, good skp (probably 6), lots of (relevant) class skills, Track, higher level abilities, martial weapons, light armour, wild empathy.

Shouldn't have: spells, animal companion (by default), such restricted (and only halfway decent) combat styles.

 

[Land Outcast]

What do you think about giving the ranger a choice?:
1-Get a Good (and improving) animal companion
2-Follow a Fighting Style (Better than the current options)
3-Get spellcasting as a Druid 1/2 (or 1/2+1) his level
4-Get niffty bonuses to survival/hide/move silently/climb/jump