The 3.5 Revised Ranger

[Steverooo]

 

[takyris]

Ummm... I apologize for making you sad?

-Tacky

 

[Kai Lord]

Hey Morrus, I say just go ahead and post what you've heard on the new Ranger. Worst case scenario its all wrong, but at least it'll satisfy that growing 3.5 "fix". For a little while.

 

[Skullfyre]

Hey Morrus, I say just go ahead and post what you've heard on the new Ranger. Worst case scenario its all wrong, but at least it'll satisfy that growing 3.5 "fix". For a little while.

I agree with Kai Lord.
So if it is wrong, so what. at least it will keep all the ranger fanatics drooling and craving for more..

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I've heard that the 3.5 ranger does exactly what you would expect -- at around 2nd level you choose which "virtual" feat chain you want to be dedicated to (two-weapon fighting or archery) and you get a smattering of "virtual" feats from this chain as you go up in levels.

Remember, it's only a rumor!

What if the ranger wants to use a two handed weapon, or a sword and shield? Or just a single weapon in one hand? This still straight jackets the ranger, albeit giving him a choice of two two fighting styles instead of one.

 

[MerricB]

I think there's a feeling that ENworld should be a place for reputable rumours.

As opposed to repudiatiable rumours.

Cheers!

 

[Saeviomagy]

My favourite ranger, and where I'd like to see the 3.5 ranger go is the www.athas.org ranger - a skills based wilderness warrior (focus on wilderness rather than warrior).

If you want magic on your ranger, why not multiclass? If you want more fighting ability... multiclass!

That's another thing I hope gets dropped - multiclass XP penalties.

 

[Morrus]

Well, OK, this is what I've heard. Folks, this has not been confirmed! If it turns out to be wrong, then it ain't my fault!

1. Eric's description above matches what I've heard. There are two alternatives (2-weapon or archery) and each has 3 stages which the ranger reaches as levels are attained.

2. Beefed up Reflex save, more skill points, lower hit die.

3. A significantly more varied list of class abilities, including things like animal companions, hiding and tracking. Generally more wildernessy.

4. Spells probably much the same.

So, basically, it's looking like a more wilderness-oriented class with a wider range of abilities. The above does make it look like the ranger has been "improved" significantly (which should satisfy those who thought the class was weak), and it certainly seems less front-loaded.

But I'll say it again - this is just rumour, guys! If you get your revised PHBs and you find something different to this insode, then remember that I warned you!

 

[jasamcarl]

What if the ranger wants to use a two handed weapon, or a sword and shield? Or just a single weapon in one hand? This still straight jackets the ranger, albeit giving him a choice of two two fighting styles instead of one.

In that case you multiclass fighter. Rangers are fighters with a greater emphasis on situational and class abilities. If you want a greater degree of fighting specialization, you go with the fighter.

 

[Starman]

According to my sources, if you want to be a ranger you must first be a drow. Then you have to dual-wield scimitars. Last but not least are the alignment restrictions: CA (chaotic angsty). Anyway, that's just what I heard. Make of it what you will.

Starman