So they went and butchered the 3.5 ranger...

Vaxalon · Feb 27, 2003

What it came from is that in *1e* the most powerful melee character you could make at first level was a ranger (2d8 hp) with 18 dex wielding two weapons (hand axes were the fave in my group). There was almost no penalty for TWF, if your dex was high enough.

(Psi)SeveredHead · Feb 27, 2003

I've been tutored by someone who knows the history of TWF.

1) 1e project starts, they give TWF to rangers for reasons unknown. (Very bad decision!)

2) They contact Salvatore and tell him about TWF and rangers. Since Drizzt will be a ranger (and is a drow) he gets TWF. Hence the myth of the Drizzt-clone. The more accurate term is Ginsu-clone.

3) 1e released.

4) 2e released. Rangers still have TWF, which was broken in 2e.

5) 3e released. Rangers still have TWF, despite the cool new feat system which gives players choices, and is also front-loaded. Rogues rejoice.

6) Many complaints about Drizzt... er, Ginsu-clones.

7) Many variant rangers appear, many without free TWF.

8) Rumors of 3.5 rangers surface, to some extent confirmed.

9*) 20 (?) years from now, hopefully 4e will not make the mistakes of 1e/2e/3e.

Anyway, virtual feats don't bother me. I treat them like class abilities. As for rulings like you can't use virtual TWF for quarterstaves, house rule it. The DMG says you're allowed to do that.

Jeremy Ackerman-Yost · Feb 27, 2003

Re: Ambi./TWF

Steverooo said:
Okay, so you're not really saying that the Ranger should be treated differently, just that you think the Feats should disallow heavy armor... That's a totally separate arguement.

No, I'm looking for just a touch of realism in the rules.

As for what can and can't be done in armor, I will simply refer you to Ewart Oakeshott's quote of the requirements for becoming a soldier of the period (which I would post, if I could find which box it's in). Two of the requirements were to "climb the chimney" in full armor, and to place one hand on a mount's saddlehorn, the other on its withers, and then jump up and through your arms - again, fully armored![/B]

Uh huh. Have you ever even SEEN heavy armor?

Let us assume for a moment that the quote you're referring to is accurate. Even if it is, how many of those soldiers were wearing heavy armor. Zero. Your average soldier never got anything that falls in the category of heavy armor as D&D treats it. It was cost prohibitive, for one thing. And soldiers were generally considered disposable. Unless they were nobility, of course.

Olgar Shiverstone · Feb 27, 2003

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
I've been tutored by someone who knows the history of TWF.

1) 1e project starts, they give TWF to rangers for reasons unknown. (Very bad decision!)

2) They contact Salvatore and tell him about TWF and rangers. Since Drizzt will be a ranger (and is a drow) he gets TWF. Hence the myth of the Drizzt-clone. The more accurate term is Ginsu-clone.

3) 1e released.

Rangers didn't have TWF in 1E.

Drow did, but it wasn't until Unearthed Arcana came out that there were even TWF rules for them.

It's a 2E changeover thing, certainly, but don't blame the TWF Ranger on 1E. He was OK back then.

Henry · Feb 27, 2003

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
I've been tutored by someone who knows the history of TWF.

I respectfully request that your source checks his facts.

1977 to 1980 - First edition (penned by Gary Gygax) did NOT feature Rangers with automatic two weapon fighting. The only place fighting with two weapons is mentioned is in the 1E DMG, where it is noted that the base penalty is -2/-4; your reaction adjustment from your dexterity reduced this penalty, all the way down to 0/-1 for a user with an 18 DEX.

1985 - In Unearthed Arcana (a 1st edition product), Dark Elf PC's were given the ability to use two weapons without penalty, regardless of DEX. This is because in Gary's D1-D3 and Q1 Series, he allowed Drow elf NPC's to use Short sword and Dagger together with no penalty.

1987 - Drizzt Do-Urden is created by R.A. Salvatore. I do not have the scoop, but it is easy to see that Gary's Dark Elf precedent is likely what Salvatore picked up on for his novel.

It is unclear what happened after this point - possibly the Ranger's two-weapon ability had something to do with Drizzt's popularity, I do not know. I do know the conscious decision was made to remove the Dark Elf and all special powers from viability as a PC race. In the 2E PHB it is stated that an elf can be any subtype (dark, wood, gray, etc.) but that their abilities are the same as high elves. Perhaps they wished to keep Drizzt's ability with two weapons legal? Unknown.

But in 1st edition, Rangers did NOT have any special abilites with two weapons that other classes did not.

In 1E, Even CLERICS could wield two weapons, as long as one was shorter than the other!

(Psi)SeveredHead · Feb 27, 2003

Thanks for the TWF replies.

Ranger REG · Feb 27, 2003

Henry said:
It is unclear what happened after this point - possibly the Ranger's two-weapon ability had something to do with Drizzt's popularity, I do not know. I do know the conscious decision was made to remove the Dark Elf and all special powers from viability as a PC race. In the 2E PHB it is stated that an elf can be any subtype (dark, wood, gray, etc.) but that their abilities are the same as high elves. Perhaps they wished to keep Drizzt's ability with two weapons legal? Unknown.

My theory is that it is a case of using a popular fictional figure to reshape the game mechanics.

Although they could have retained the two-weapon abilities as a trait for all drow elves from 1st edition (UA) to 2nd edition, but they want the standard PC race to emulate Drizzt.

Remember, nonhuman race cannot dual-class, only multiclass. According to Dark Elf Trilogy, Drizzt did not become a ranger until he reached the surface, so he can't really be a multiclass ranger from the start, not even under the 2nd edition multiclass combination rules, where they have a list of acceptable multiclassing by race.

Thanks goodness for 3e.

DonAdam · Feb 27, 2003

1987 - Drizzt Do-Urden is created by R.A. Salvatore. I do not have the scoop, but it is easy to see that Gary's Dark Elf precedent is likely what Salvatore picked up on for his novel.

I asked Salvatore this last fall.

He said that his memory is vague, but he's almost certain that Drizzt fights with two scimitars because the drow could in the 1E books.

Kichwas · Feb 27, 2003

DonAdam said:
I asked Salvatore this last fall.

He said that his memory is vague, but he's almost certain that Drizzt fights with two scimitars because the drow could in the 1E books.

Which is what the guy you quoted also said... so why repeat him (like I'm doing now with you)?