Ranger versus Scout

The Shaman said:
They replaced spells with spell-like abilities - it's not the "no-magic" ranger I wanted to see for my games.

I haven't seen the scout so I can't comment on the relative merits.

Exactly my sentiments regarding the alt-ranger. I've looked over the Scout for a while and have decided that I like the class and am allowing my players access to it (with the slight modification that they get Disable Device as a class skill - I've read the arguements for leaving it out and am unconvinced - this class should have it).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Psychic Warrior said:
I've looked over the Scout for a while and have decided that I like the class and am allowing my players access to it (with the slight modification that they get Disable Device as a class skill - I've read the arguements for leaving it out and am unconvinced - this class should have it).

I'm convinced it's an error that WotC doesn't want to admit to yet. My Scout (well, Fighter/Scout -- I'm thinking there are going to be a lot of Fighter 2/Scout X characters, mostly to get shoot on the run and/or spring attack faster, and better weapon profs) is buying disable device cross-class for now, but I fully expect that will change when the errata for Complete Adventurer comes out.
 

drothgery said:
I'm convinced it's an error that WotC doesn't want to admit to yet. My Scout (well, Fighter/Scout -- I'm thinking there are going to be a lot of Fighter 2/Scout X characters, mostly to get shoot on the run and/or spring attack faster, and better weapon profs) is buying disable device cross-class for now, but I fully expect that will change when the errata for Complete Adventurer comes out.
Well, the designers said that it was intentional, and this isn't exactly the same type of thing as the BAB-less Halfling Outrider. THAT didn't make since, but Scout without Disable Device does. He can find them, but you still need a good Rogue to deal with them.

If anything, its good to keep the Scout from out Rogueing the Rogue
 

The thing is a scout can still disarm traps. They get loads of skills so spending on a cross class skill is not that big a deal for them. And the skill is Dex based, the attribute scouts will probably have the highest in. I mean it is not like they have zero ability to disarm traps, just not as good as the guy that's best in the game: the rogue.
 


From playing a ranger from 2nd edition to 3rd edition and no converted over to 3.5. I think that 3.5 has it down pretty well what I think a ranger should be like. Some things I see as problem is when wielding two weapons and light hit points and light armor restictions, you are asking for a wooping. I have to admit though that I love the 3.5 edition ranger. I looked at the scout and there is plenty of room for it as well. It seems they are trying to make a comprimize with the public in making a hybrid rogue ranger. I would like to see a better selection of spells for rangers. I do find animal companion to be one of the most useless things out there. Unless you are a druid, it pretty much sucks..... To me I think they should add something else in there for animal companion, any body have some ideas.....
 

gemini25 said:
From playing a ranger from 2nd edition to 3rd edition and no converted over to 3.5. I think that 3.5 has it down pretty well what I think a ranger should be like. Some things I see as problem is when wielding two weapons and light hit points and light armor restictions, you are asking for a wooping. I have to admit though that I love the 3.5 edition ranger. I looked at the scout and there is plenty of room for it as well. It seems they are trying to make a comprimize with the public in making a hybrid rogue ranger. I would like to see a better selection of spells for rangers. I do find animal companion to be one of the most useless things out there. Unless you are a druid, it pretty much sucks..... To me I think they should add something else in there for animal companion, any body have some ideas.....
Yeah, d10 hit dice. I'm still sore about that.
But in all, I like the Borderer from Conan (yeah, I know it's d20 and not D&D, but it works with a little tinkering) for a non-spellcasting ranger. I do use the 6 skill points though, but again, I have funny views on game balance. And the dodge and parry bonus get chucked, too, since they aren't used.
 

I have not yet seen the scout, but I do have a keen interest in alt.rangers. I think my favorite no-magic ranger options to date are still Ken Hood's Bushfighter and Midnight's Wildlander. Path of the Sword's Outdoorsman is an interesting take, too, although perhaps a bit too specialized to serve as everyone's alt.ranger with no spellcasting. I think either the Bushfighter or the Wildlander would do that, though.

All in all, the scout sounds like it's a wilderness rogue, just like Masters of the Wild introduced the urban ranger. Just a tweak to the rogue class, mostly. Although, like I said, I haven't yet seen it.
 

Roman said:
I have always thought of a ranger as a scout and disliked the concept of a ranger getting spells.

The ranger class in the Iron Kingdoms guide is a spelless class...you might like that one.
 

I someday would like to run a D&D 3.5 game that had only 4 classes: Fighter, Scout, Warlock (complete arcane) and Spirit Shaman (complete divine). No multi-classes. No prestige classes. No scrolls, wands, staffs or magical books, manuals, tomes, etc. I think that these restrictions might make high-level play a bit saner, and low-level play more survivable.

But then, this may never, ever happen. :) Maybe players would like to try it as a one-shot...

But to your first post, I think that the Scout is closer to how I want the Ranger to be than either the 3.5 ranger or the alt-ranger in Complete Warrior. But that is just me. I tend not to like minor spellcasting abilities, and I REALLY like how the Warlock handles magic. (The Spirit Shaman is sort of a compromise until Wotc comes out with a "divine warlock" equivalent).
 

Enchanted Trinkets Complete

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top