Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Garnfellow" data-source="post: 2094646" data-attributes="member: 1223">Add me to the list of folks who vastly prefer the scout over all the alt. rangers, and the alt. rangers over the 3.5 ranger.I looked long and hard for an acceptable spell-less ranger, and there are probably a good couple dozen candidates out there. Many came very close . . . but they were all either a /little/ too strong or just a /little/ too weak.When I read the scout description, it seemed to hit the perfect pitch . . . just what I was looking for, and the skirmish ability is a elegant, innovative, but simple mechanic that really distinguishes the scout from the other base classes.To me, the scout makes the ranger irrelevant. Most of the ranger's "signature" abilities derive from feat chains that are accessible to anyone. A little multiclassing with fighter, rogue, and druid levels could produce a close substitute for the 3.5 ranger.Except . . . The one piece of the ranger class that cannot be currently be duplicated is the favored enemy ability, and part of me thinks favored enemy should be featable anyway. Why not have paladins sworn to battle a specific foe, or monks trained to defend their lands against a specific invader, or maybe even wizards who specialize in slinging spells on a hated enemy?</blockquote>