Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ConcreteBuddha" data-source="post: 554856" data-attributes="member: 3139">Re: Re: CB's Pseudo-RangerLuckily we don't disagree about everything. (The worthlessness of Favored terrains is something we agree on.) They don't. Since most woodsmen are actually experts with wilderness lore as a class skill. Also, if your woods are crawling with L7 rangers, their ability to leave no tracks is probably the least of your worries. The ability to not leave tracks? But casting spells is okay? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" /> Well, since he is running the whole way without sleep or rest, I think maybe it had more to do with the fact that DnD speeds are out of whack. So you are comparing a good BAB class with a caster? That is kinda silly. I'm not comparing paladins to clerics now am I? LOL!  That is how you determine game balance? By dueling classes and seeing who does the most damage? By your determination of game balance, a fighter is the best class at level 1 out of all classes. Your comparison would also defeat rogues and bards and clerics and wizards and sorcerers and monks and paladins. (Not druids, though, because they tend to have a wolf.) I look at it more like how effective the PC in question would be in a party fighting an equivalent CR (and helping in non-combat situations as well).L1 fighter:one featmedium armorshieldsequipment: (150 gp)7 l. wood shield40 scale mail15 long sword75 long bowL1 rranger:better skillsbetter skill pointstrackequipment: (150 gp)10 leather75 longbow5 longspear (or 50 greatsword)So in a party, the rranger would be able to do one thing that you failed to mention: Spot. That is something that the fighter is sorely lacking. The ranger will rarely be surprised, he can sneak good enough past goblins and orcs (this is L1 afterall.) And he can use his tracking to follow trails and notice potential ambushes. The fighter, on the other hand, is a tin can. 20 ft move. Woopee. I'm sorry, but since orcs have 4 hps, the ranger is going to deal enough damage in the surprise round to drop at least one of them. Yes, I do. Yes. I define balanced as how effective the PC in question would be in a party fighting an equivalent CR (and helping in non-combat situations as well).How do you define it? Well, your point wasn't valid, because you mentioned spells, which a ranger doesn't get at first level, last time I checked.And as for the power level at later levels, it's quite good (but not too good.) If you'd like, I can compare it to the PHB Ranger and Barbarian for you. That is silly. I have never seen a ranger with heavier than a MW chain shirt. (Mithral breastplate exempted.) DM problem, not the game system's fault. At 7th level, you should have 19,000 gp. A mithral chain shirt costs 1,250 gp. Your DM is being stingy. Read the whole paragraph next time... *My RRanger doesn't get proficiency with shields. That doesn't mean he can't use them. A MW small shield or a mithral large shield are still open to the character.  ...before you accuse me of this: The first is a handwave to keep an already lame PHB ranger from being a munchkin's wet dream. (Besides the idea that virtual feats are stupid to begin with.) The second is not consistent with the idea of a ranger. (Whereas it fits the focused paladin and monk rather well.) Your jab at the fighter has zero to do with game balance. The PHB ranger doesn't get the first +3 bonus to FE until L10. This bonus at L1 would be overpowering. Nothing to do with game balance. Nothing to do with game balance. Catch up? No. They are on par the whole way. Why would a druid for that matter? What the heck! Let's get rid of everything because barbarians are too stupid to see the benefit of never being tracked or being able to pass through overgrown areas! Your DM is a miser. Not the game system's fault.  What is the archtype then, please? Your giant post at the beginning of this thread had this to say: So, I've got track, fast movement (the ranging part), woodland stride (range), trackless step (range), the good skills and skill points (wilderness lore, spot, listen and craft, search), good BAB (hunting), uncanny dodge (the escape and evasion part and the dodge bonus vs. traps),  DR (because rangers are rugged *grin*), and a bunch of versatile special abilities that a player can use to mold to his own specific version of a ranger. So how does this class not "fit the archetype very well, at all"? I think now you are just being stubborn... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> You, too. And a happy New Year!</blockquote>

Verification