Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="paladinm" data-source="post: 5895675" data-attributes="member: 6687937">As everyone knows, there was no discrete "ranger" class in BD&D/BECM.  Considering how rangers were built in the Strategic Review (and 1e), that was probably a good thing.  The early builds of rangers were way overpowered, IMHO.That being said, there were a couple of attempts at "simulating" rangers in BECM, at least in the "official" supplemental materials.  The Gazetteers introduced the concept of "foresters", humans who had much the same fighter/mage abilities as elves.  The Princess Ark series in Dragons introduced the concept of the "druidic knight", sort of a "prestige class" like the paladin that could cast druid spells at 1/3 the level of the character.While elves were a class in themselves (the fighter/mage combo), there were also provisions for fighter-only elves and mage-only elves; but the mages were "treekeepers", the elvish equivalent of clerics, unless they were human-trained.  Treekeepers used a combination of mage and druid spells.With all that in mind, I would like to suggest the following:1.  Elven mages should all use the "treekeeper" spell list, unless they are human-trained, in which case they would use the normal mage list.2.  Human foresters (rangers), because of their close association with elves, can cast elf/treekeeper spells at 1/3 their level.  They can also detect danger as druidic knights and track as AD&D rangers.2.  The typical "elf class" is actually the elven forester class.What this gets us:1.  More separation of race and class, which is what Gary G. and company intended all along (according to OD&D).2.  A balanced "ranger" equivalent for BD&D/BECM, which includes mage and druidic features from AD&D without all the extraneous stuff.3.  A truly unique elven mage-variant.Any thoughts?</blockquote>

Verification