So they went and butchered the 3.5 ranger...

[Steverooo]

Ranger Paths

So far, all we REALLY know is that the Ranger A) Has more skill points, B) Isn't front-loaded, and C) Has a choice of at least two paths. We also know D) That it's been extensively reworked (according to Skip). What that all means, we'll have to wait and see...

Now what I would suggest is giving Track and a Special Ability at first level, and then two Bonus Feats at second and third, with the TWF, Archery, etc. Feats included, for backwards compatability. The list should be substantially different from the Fighters' list, for flavour, and include some Ranger-only abilities.

My personal solution is to give several Feats, mostly at higher levels, from the following list (new Feats not included, here).

Bonus Feats: Beginning at second level, the Ranger may choose occasional Feats from the following list, as indicated by the above chart.

Alertness,
Ambidexterity (regardless of Dexterity, for the sake of backwards-compatibility),
Blind-Fight,
Combat Reflexes,
Dodge (Dex. 13+)
(Mobility, Spring Attack),
Endurance,
Exotic Weapon Proficiency* (Base Attack Bonus +1 or higher),
Expertise (Int. 13+)
(Improved Disarm, Improved Trip, Whirlwind Attack),
Favored Enemy (See below)
(Enmity Avoidance (See below), Damage Production (See below), Favored Enemy Critical Strike (See Below), Favored Enemy Strike (See Below)),
Great Fortitude,
Improved Initiative,
Improved Stability (See below),
Improved Unarmed Strike
(Claw (See below), Deflect Arrows (Dex. 13+), Hammer-Hand (See below)),
Iron Will,
Lightning Reflexes,
Mounted Combat (Ride skill)
(Mounted Archery, Trample, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge),
Point Blank Shot
(Far Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Shot on the Run),
Power Attack (Str. 13+)
(Improved Bull Rush, Sunder),
Quick Draw (BAB 1+),
Run,
Spell Penetration,
Toughness**,
Two-Weapon Fighting
(Improved Two-Weapon Fighting),
Weapon Finesse*,
Weapon Focus*,
Weapon Specialization: Axe (any)/Bow (any)/Crossbow (any)/Dagger/Spear (any)/Sword (any)
Weather-Wise (See below)
Any Ranger-Specific Feat, below.

<HR>

You will notice, here, that some Fighter Feats are included (Combat Reflexes, etc.), others are excluded (Cleave, etc.), some new General Feats were added (Weather-Wise, etc.), and there are quite a few Feats for Rangers (and Druids), only.

The TWF Path is still there. The Archery Path is there. The Mounted Path is there... If you don't like either of those, you could take Spell Penetration or the "Speed Path" (Improved Initiative, etc.), or even an Unarmed Path. You'll also note a return to 1e Unearthed Arcana, in that Weapon Specialization is available in ANY type of sword (including one- and two-handed), a handaxe, greataxe, battleaxe, any type of bow or crossbow, and/or any type of Spear... I think that such a list should satisfy anyone.

A Ranger who like the current version can take Ambidexterity at second level, and Two-Weapon Fighting at third. He is a little slower to get to where the 3e Ranger starts, but can get there (and certainly isn't front-loaded).

A bowslinging Ranger can take Point Blank Shot at second, and an archery Feat at third.

A two-handed Ranger can take Weapon Focus at second, Power Attack at third, and then spend a regular Feat on Weapon Specialization (Tw0-Handed Sword) later on.

Someone who wants to use Longsword & Shield can take Weapon Focus (Longsword) at second, and a Feat of their choice at third (Maybe 3.5e will even add some shield-use Feats, and the Ranger list could include them, who knows?).

Anyhow, I think that's the way to go... YMMV. Choices, not restrictions!

 

[Celtavian]

Re

I don't like the virtual feats either. A ranger should wear light armor because they don't want major skill penalties, not because of virtual feats.

If a ranger learns how to fight with two weapons or use archery feats, armor should not hinder that type of training.

 

[Ranger REG]

I like virtual feats, whether it's for the ranger or the monk. I like the fact that they're giving the ranger more options in this fantasy role-playing game.

 

[Frostmarrow]

The virtual feats remind me of Player's Option. "You can pick an extra ability if you pick a drawback". Only with the virtual feats you get a built in drawback. It's just one step away from a Merits and Flaws-system. We don't want that, people.

Wearing armor already has drawbacks. There is no reason to add more. In fact I feel the penalties to speed hurt the character so much not even my fighters will wear medium or heavy armor. In my mind it's better to aim for a lot of hitpoints and maneuverability than aiming for high AC.

However, I think the virtual feats will be gone. There will not be two feats for TWF and Ambi. They'll be combined into one feat with a steeper penalty. At least that's what previous threads have led me to believe.

 

[mistergone]

Well, here you're looking at someone (me) who kinda thinks the entire rules system should be set up around say, four classes. Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Wizard. Then take a ton of feats and other options and customize them to whatever you want. Or maybe have a lot of pretige classes. Or.. oh wait.. but that's not D&D anymore, eh?

<Prays to some wise game company to make an OGL fantasy game with D20 rules where you can point-buy and customize your characters>

 

[S'mon]

Re: Ranger Paths

Now what I would suggest is giving Track and a Special Ability at first level, and then two Bonus Feats at second and third, with the TWF, Archery, etc. Feats included, for backwards compatability. The list should be substantially different from the Fighters' list, for flavour, and include some Ranger-only abilities.

My personal solution is to give several Feats, mostly at higher levels, from the following list (new Feats not included, here).

(snip)

Brilliant list Steveroo, thanks - I've just used it to knock up my own variant non-spellcasting Ranger class in half an hour.

This will likely primarily be for NPCs (like the Blood Hand Rangers of the Northwoods, who fight the forces of Chaos) but is intended to be balanced with other PC classes - they get 2/3 as many bonus feats as the Fighter, plus Ranger skills. I've removed some feats from the list for balance reasons.


EAN RANGER CLASS

Normal Rangers on Ea, like the Blood Hand of Lord Alidarn, do not get spells, but are famed for both their wilderness skills and combat abilities.

Alignment: Any, usually Good.
Hit Die: d10.
Skill Points: 4/level. Class Skill selection as standard Ranger (PHB pg 45).
Weapon & Armour Proficiency: Rangers are proficient with simple & martial weapons, light & medium armour, and shields.

At 1st level the Ranger gets the Track feat for free.

At 2nd level, 5th, 8th,11th, 14th, 17th & 20th the Ranger may choose 1 additional Feat from the following list:

Alertness,
Ambidexterity
Blind-Fight,
Combat Reflexes
Dodge (Dex. 13+)
(Mobility, Spring Attack),
Endurance,
Exotic Weapon Proficiency* (Base Attack Bonus +1 or higher),
Expertise (Int. 13+)
(Improved Disarm, Improved Trip),
Favored Enemy (+1 dmg etc vs favoured race, PHB pg 45, may be taken multiple times)
Great Fortitude,
Improved Initiative,
Improved Unarmed Strike
(Deflect Arrows (Dex. 13+)),
Iron Will,
Lightning Reflexes,
Mounted Combat (Ride skill)
(Mounted Archery, Trample, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge),
Point Blank Shot
(Far Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Shot on the Run),
Quick Draw (BAB 1+),
Run,
Toughness,
Two-Weapon Fighting
(Improved Two-Weapon Fighting),
Weapon Finesse,
Weapon Focus

 

[Zander]

...the best possible thing they could do to the ranger is strip any mention of TWF from the class description... {It has} nothing to do with the concept of a woodland skirmisher/border guard.

I'm not so sure. As Kamikaze Midget points out, it isn't practical for woodsmen to wear heavy armour. For the same reason, they wouldn't use shields. So that leaves the ranger with a free hand. What better use could he put his free hand to than another weapon? I can easily imagine an outdoorsman with a military weapon in one hand (such as a sword) and a utilitarian weapon/tool in the other (such as a hand axe or hunting knife).

Although not a pure ranger (he was previoulsy an assassin), you might want to check out the Nasir (sp?) character from the 1980's British TV series Robin of Sherwood. Nasir hand ranger skills such as tracking but fought with two scimitars (or with a bow). There was nothing implausible about the character in that regard. In fact, everyone I knew at the time who watched the programme thought Nasir was the coolest character.

 

[wighair]

Well, here you're looking at someone (me) who kinda thinks the entire rules system should be set up around say, four classes. Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Wizard. Then take a ton of feats and other options and customize them to whatever you want.

Personally, that is the way I'd go too, but I guess we are a small minority. To me it would be more flexible and more coherant.

 

[hong]

What about the Archer-Ranger from the Best of Dragon 1st ED. That and the Bounty Hunter were two of the most frequently chosen classes in my game "back in the day."

*cough*

Three Arrows for the King


Hong "check out that funky intuitive archer d00d, willya" Ooi

 

[Anime Kidd]

I personally like the idea of having the ranger choose between different combat paths. In the WotC snippet, they said that they would have some D20 Modern quirks in 3.5e. My guess is that the ranger is going to have something similar to D20 Modern's Class Talents. With something like that it would make the ranger more versatile than the "Super TWF Fighter".
I had an idea for such a ranger class, but it didn't work out to well. Couldn't figure out how to keep it balanced.

Also a few questions regarding the ranger archetype itself.

#1 - What was the inspiration for the Ranger into D&D? Was it the early 'Mountain Men' that explored America's west or just the old Woodsman character?

#2 - Why did the ranger have TWF at all? I'd figured they be more archers than the now whirling blades of death.

And #3 - And why did they have spellcasting? Was it just something to give 'em more abilities or just what?