Ranger variant Ninjas

[Thanee]

I also think the ranger is rather cool in 3.5, a nice mix between a capable fighter (of course not as capable as the barbarian or fighter) and quite a skillmonger at the same time. Favored Enemy is also more noticeable now.

Of course, if you simply neglect skills, than the ranger is just a weaker fighter.

And about the lack of cool class features... there are 15 entries in the special abilities column over 20 levels. Those include nice stuff like Woodland Stride, Evasion, Camouflage and Hide in Plain Sight.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Nifft]

Our old 3.0e group had a Ranger, and it was liked okay, but we ended up using Monte Cook's variant Ranger for all of 3.0e.

When 3.5e came out, our Ranger guy moved into a Core Ranger with the Archery path. And all was good.

So, IMHO as a DM: Rangers are just fine. Of course, that's in my world, with my monster palette (lots of Evil Outsiders, Undead, and Goblinoids with class levels).

I wonder if a Ninja-Ranger would be just a Ranger with no Favored Enemies, but with +1d6 Sneak Attack at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th & 20th levels, and no Animal Companion but instead some sort of Poison Use starting around 4th level, and bonus to Fort saves vs. poison (like an Assassin, but slower progression).

-- N

 

[Sejs]

and no Animal Companion but instead some sort of Poison Use starting around 4th level, and bonus to Fort saves vs. poison (like an Assassin, but slower progression).

Hm, there's an idea - taking another note from UA, the trading class features one in this case: maybe replace the animal companion with a couple ranks of sneak attack? +1d6 each time the ranger's animal companion would normally advance, say.


Actually, hmm.. let's see here. Rangers normally get an animal companion at 4th, and their effective druid level for AC advancement is 1/2 their ranger level. So they get the AC at 4th, and it gets advancements at 6th, 12th, and 18th. A 2 level gap between sneak attack advancement seems far too short compared to the 6 level gap otherwise. Maybe get Poison Use at 4th, 1d6 sneak attack at 6th, 2d6 at 12th, and 3d6 at 18th? That seems a bit more balanced.



...'course, that being said, I'd just make ninjas as Rogue/Assassins, maybe with a monk level thrown in. But that's just me.

 

[Plane Sailing]

However, the spells that rangers get are completely unsuitible. I'm inclined to simply give them the assasin spell list, but I'm afraid that this would unbalance the class.

I've done this in my campaign, called them the "spy" but it was basically a ranger who prepared spells like a wizard and used the assassin list. Didn't turn out to be overpowered, did turn out to be interesting.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Absolutely, but I understand where he's coming from.

I, too, would like the Ranger to, while remaining somewhat close to stereotype, become an interesting class that someone would like to play.

This was my feeling in 3.0, but the 3.5 changes made all the difference IMO.
"Can't wait to get the fighting style at 2nd"
"Can't wait to get the next favoured enemy. We've been facing a lot of xyz and we know that we are going to have a big push into their kingdom. I'll get +4 favoured enemy against them"
"I'm so glad that I've got all those spot and listen ranks, I'm one of the few guys who never gets surprised"


I have an elf ranger at present whose favoured enemies are Magical Beasts +2, Humans +4 and at next level will be Evil Outsiders +4 too. The new favoured enemy scheme gives a meaningful bonus to damage and it can grow organically with the campaign (assuming the DM isn't actually out to screw you over and has some logic in the campaign it doesn't require collusion with him - it just becomes apparent from the way the campaign develops what the kind of challenges are that you are fighting (in most cases at least, I'd wager))

Plus two good saves, plus evasion, plus camoflage, plus hide in plain sight, other stuff Thanee mentioned...

People consider taking ranger all the way now in my group, in 3.0 they didn't. It has some pizazz at last!

 

[Li Shenron]

However, the spells that rangers get are completely unsuitible. I'm inclined to simply give them the assasin spell list, but I'm afraid that this would unbalance the class.

I agree that Assassin spells are better than Ranger ones. However, do you plan to have this variant class an arcane spellcaster with preparation, an arcane spontaneous caster, a divine spellcaster? It could make a difference as long as not all spells from the list will be known by a character. Furthemore, unless you give it a special class feature, an arcane caster would suffer from ASF.

If you take animal companions and wild empathy away (I would keep woodland stride for a ninja), even with no ASF in light armor I think the class wouldn't be too good as long as the spells known are limited for example just as an assassin (obviously spread over 17 levels instead of 10). Otherwise if it's still too good for you, try keep ASF and remove light armor proficiency.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

The new wilderogue is indeed a nice class, but a ranger, it ain't.