The 3.5 Revised Ranger

Kai Lord said:
So...now that its been confirmed that the Ranger has been revised...do you think they'll do away with the TWF "pigeon hole" and possibly cater to a more archery related wilderness warrior?

:D

So, instead of one pigeon hole, they'll make the ranger fit into another pigeon hole? Or offer us the option of which pigeon hole to chose?

And this is supposed to be a fix?!

Yuck. I'm sick of "alt rangers" that are little more than Fighters with pre-chosen feats and a better skill selection.

Rangers should excel at RANGING--leading expeditions, avoiding or hunting monsters, stalking and survival. They should not excel at Fighting. That's the domain of (duh) the Fighter.

-z, ranting
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Here's what I heard:

First, they got rid of the two-weapon fighting. It wasn't really giving the ranger what people wanted. People wanted a wilderness-oriented character, and 3.5E is going to meet that need.

They changed the skill points to give a more wilderness theme, dropped the hit dice to d8, and lowered the attack progression. After all, rangers aren't expected to fight as well as fighters, right?

On the other hand, to compensate for those weaknesses, rangers now have a MUCH better spell selection. You can augment your light armor with Barkskin, heal yourself with Cure Light Wounds at a MUCH lower level, and even use your ranger skills and magic to make areas difficult to get through for anyone without training, using spells like "Spike Stones" and "Wall of Thorns".

Finally, they really put more flavor into the class. Who can forget how Aragorn was able to blend into the crowd during his tenure as Strider? Well, high-level rangers will now get the ability to disguise themselves as an innate ability, blending into their surroundings. They'll also gain the ability to tell whether natural food is healthy or poisonous with just a glance, strong bonuses to checks made to identify or communicate with natural creatures, and even -- you're going to love this -- the ability to use shamanic magic to shapeshift INTO animal form a few times per day, like a kind of natural polymorph!

With all of these changes, the ranger was looking a bit different, so they've renamed it "Druid" in order to really let it sink in.

:)

-Tacky
 



takyris said:
With all of these changes, the ranger was looking a bit different, so they've renamed it "Druid" in order to really let it sink in.

:)

-Tacky
That was brilliant, man. You fooled me until the last sentence, when I knew I'd been had. :D

That was also great commentary on all the ranger complaints too.
 

Tacky, you rule. You had me nodding in agreement, readjusting my paradigm so the Ranger was more of an Alt-Druid than an Alt-Fighter, wondering if things were going too far with the spells thing, definitely thinking things were going too far with the wildshape thing, and then finally laughing out loud.

Nice!

-z
 


Well, since there's not a lot of hard information out there, I figured that some good-natured BSing couldn't hurt. :) Glad to get the laugh.

And yeah, I've always sort of thought that the ranger suffers from being the class that gets the most baggage attached to it. You've got the people who want sneaky rangers, the people who want archer rangers, the people who want more druidic rangers, the people who want hack & slash rangers, and the people who want arcane-type rangers from 1E -- and no one is satisfied with multiclassing.

And honestly, that's the best thing and the worst thing about the Ranger. In a way, it's the closest thing to classless D&D as we can get, given the number of edits it's gotten. :)

-Tacky
 

Remove ads

Top