Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steverooo" data-source="post: 571848" data-attributes="member: 9410">Rangers in combatWe agree, totally!Nor did I.  The arguement was about what Ranger would use Medium armor, and whether or not they should have it.  Both the Ranger and Rogue, at first level, will be prone to take Hide & Move Silently, maxed out.  If the Ranger takes light armor, he will be weaker than BOTH the Fighter, AND the Rogue...  The Fighter has better AC (and probably a better CON bonus), and while the Ranger is as lightly armored, the Rogue has backstab.  So the first level Ranger can't go toe-to-toe with the Fighter.  He may or may not be able to go toe-to-roe with the Rogue, depending upon skills chosen and the armor the Ranger selects.Combat IS an important part of the game, and it does make a difference in the power level of PC classes.  If a class is less survivable in combat than another, it is unbalanced, at least in that respect.Now a first level Fighter (F1) against a Rogue with backstab is fairly even...  The Rogue will sneak and hide, try to backstab, and do 1D6+1D8 if he succeeds in sneaking and getting a hit against the Fighter's armor.  If hr misses, he had better use that faster movement to run!A Cleric is a good match against the Fighter, probably haveing the same AC.  His weapons are limited, but the heavy mace does as much as a sword, and he also has spells.The Mage (Sorcerer/Wizard) is weak, compared to a Fighter, in combat, but with spells thrown in, might or might not be, depending upon which they chose.  She is at least potentially as strong, if only for a few rounds.  After that, they'd better use their faster movement (unarmored) to run, or be a Human with Ambi/TWF, a staff, and have damaged the Fighter.A Druid will be weaker, and their spells generally won't be as much help.  They have a better weapon than the mage (Scimitar), poor AC, but probably a wolf to help out.Barbarians have as good weapons, and worse AC, but can Rage.  If that fails, they run away at 40 movement.Paladins are on a par with F1s.  Same armor, weapons, BAB, etc.Monks I don't know about...  Never played a 3e Monk.  They are unarmored, but get an AC bonus, and poorer weapons (all 1D6, IIRC).  They also get a possible stunning attack, which might or might not help...  They also have Hide & Move Silently, though, so...  I dunno.Rangers, though, if in Medium Armor, are on par with the Fighter; same AC, same weapons, same BAB.  If he gives that up for Light armor (so as to not lose his plusses to Armor Check Penalties), then he can sneak as well as the Rogue, but when he gets up close enough to the Fighter, will only WOUND him, then have to roll for Initiative in the non-surprise round.  Oh well... at least the Fighter's armor will slow him, if the Ranger needs to run.The 3e Ranger, at least, would get an extra 1D6 attack (IF it hits, with -2 BAB to both attacks, making him weaker than the Rogue)!  CB's Barbarian/Ranger doesn't even get that, Argo.So is there another class that is as weak as the Ranger?  Yep, sure enough!  It is the OTHER class that folks complain is too under-powered: The Bard.  If he chooses light armor to sneak and hide, he will probably have one good weapon (longsword), but his only "spells" are a few cantrips.  If he chooses longsword and Medium Armor, he will be only slightly weaker than the Fighter (worse BAB and probably CON).Soya see, comparing the classes in combat isn't all that ridiculous.  The Ranger needs Medium armor use, and something to increase damage potential, early on.  Otherwise, he had better stay out of melee, and just be a sniper.  That, to me, doesn't fit the archetype.(PS: In LotR, Aragorn used mail and a large shield - and it obviously wasn't mithril, either.  Even if it was masterwork, its Armor Check Penalty was still -1!)</blockquote>

Verification