The King's Rangers! (Reprised)

[SHARK]

Greetings!

I have reprised this brief article for the enjoyment and inspiration of my friends here, and newcomers alike. I wrote this up when I was thinking about a particular group of Rangers in my campaign world, and their special place in history, and society. My thoughts also wandered to the frequent discussions about Rangers, and some of the percieved problems with the class.

I should note that in the background *skill focus* skills that I have provided for the standard Ranger in this part of the campaign world is my considered opinion that the standard skill-point assignments per class in the core rule books don't really do the different characters justice, as I see it. When I think of different characters--either player characters or NPC's, I am often frustrated and agree with my players that oftentimes the starting/standard skills aren't really enough to accurately represent the character.

Take for example, a Ranger, or a Fighter. Imagine a certain background, of various kinds, whether hunters/ranchers, or educated and scholarly, and the standard skills will be hard-pressed to do the two following goals:

(1) Accurately represent the character's detailed and unique background, of family teaching, mentored learning, and even tutors, scholars, or some other kind of formal or specialized training.

(2) Adequately equip the character to have a reasonable chance of survival and success in the upcoming challenges.

Thus, with these thoughts in mind, I think that it is worthwhile to assign some additional skills in appropriate areas, in addition to whatever the class itself provides. Observe carefully that most of the additional skills are in specific knowledges, that cover areas of life that either everyone knows about, or it covers areas of knowledge that members of the particular class would deemed be essential knowledge of, and yet, according to standard skill assignments, there would nowhere near be enough skill points to represent these ideas.

I also think that it is important to provide classes with a "philosophical home" if you will, right from the beginning, as it helps to place the character in a realistic manner into the setting, as opposed to the stereotypical "drifting mercenary." Not that I don't have drifting mercenaries in the campaign, for I do--but I think that one can admit that it's good to have some alternatives and variety in approaches. With that, here is my presentation of "The King's Rangers!"The King’s Rangers


The King's Rangers

The King's Rangers have an ancient heritage. They are a band of warrior-hunters formed in the early years of the Kingdom, to serve the King throughout the wilderness, and stretch forth his hand in all things. Even now, centuries later, with the Vallorean Empire wealthy and strong, the King's Rangers still serve. They remain one of the most elite fighting forces within the entire Empire, and continue to cherish their ancient motto:
"The King Shall Rise!"

The motto, and now famous war-cry, was first established in the early days of the Kingdom. During these savage years of war, the Valloreans were engaged in a great struggle with invading armies of Beastmen. During one of these great battles, which occurred as the onset of winter arrived, it came to pass that the King was terribly wounded in battle, and a group of elite scouts fought tenaciously to carry the King to safety.

As the battle raged over the next few days, the scales of battle looked bleak. The Valloreans were being slowly overwhelmed. The King lay dying, and the Valloreans had lost hope. Alas, the small group of elite scouts who had fought to defend the King, after so many of their number had been lost, strode swiftly among the encampments of the warriors, shouting to all that--
"The King Shall Rise!, The King Shall Rise!"

The scouts continued, tirelessly making the rounds throughout the encampments, trying to rally the morale of the beleagured troops. The King, lying upon his furs, eventually heard about the small group of brave scouts who had personally saved his life from the Beastmen, were travelling about, insisting that the King would not die, and that "The King Shall Rise!"

The King called for a Druid to annoint him, and to pray. The King called the scouts into his headquarters to pray, and just so he could look at them, and thank them.

There, in the firelight of the hearth, looking at the passionate, grim demeanor of the scouts, the King watched as the men wept for their King. They touched his hand softly as they prayed. The Druids had ministered to the King, and had done all there was to do. Only the coming dawn would really tell if the King would live, or die.

The early morning light reached through the trees, and the scouts were roused from their sleep. Standing amidst them, with his cloak draped over his blood-stained chain-mail, was the King! The scouts leaped up, and went to do their King's bidding. Joyously repeating their cry from days past, the scouts shouted--"The King Shall Rise!"

After resting more of that day, and conferring with his captains, all dressed in fine mail, and armed for war, the King of the Valloreans took the battlefield the next morning, with his small band of scouts around him!

The battle swiftly turned against the Beastmen as the Valloreans counter-attacked with a savage vengeance. The Valloreans were victorious.
Soon afterwards, the King recognized how important to victory the small band of scouts had been. Though their fighting skills, their dedication, and their passion, were all very important, and praise-worthy, it was their almost single-minded devotion to the King, and their unfailing loyalty, and faith, not only in him, their King, but in their righteous cause, and for what the King stood for. It was those things the King saw as especially important.
Though those early heroes were richly rewarded, they hardly needed such. Humble, yet passionate, loyal, and utterly dedicated to serving their King, and protecting the ancient forests that was their home, the early scouts were zealous in their faith to the gods, and to defending their tribe. It was from these early beginnings that the King's Rangers were formally organized.
From the beginning, the Rangers were educated and trained by supervising Druids, and the Rangers honed their woodland skills, as well as their skills in war.

Through the centuries, during the death and fire of war, or the duties of peacetime, the King's Rangers stand ready. The Rangers remain steadfast in their faith, that whether fighting in war, or executing justice, "The King Shall Rise!" Their loyalty unquestioned, their skills without peer, their dedication relentless,--the Rangers continue their ancient, noble heritage.

With this as an example of background, I have accounted for the Rangers having spells, woodland abilities, and training in war. The King's Rangers that I use in my campaign are the standard Ranger from the Player's Handbook. As part of their background training, I provide them with the following:

(1) Skill Focus: Provides a +3 Bonus to the following skills;
Knowledge: Vallorean Nobility
Knowledge: Local Geography
Knowledge: Nature
Knowledge: Hearth Wisdom
Knowledge: Local History
Knowledge: Religion
Knowledge: The King's Law
Knowledge: History of The King's Rangers
Wilderness Lore

(2) Toughness. (I've modified this feat to be as follows: Hit Point Bonus of 6+(3xCon Bonus.) Thus, typically, a Ranger will have the benefit of an average of an additional 12-15 Hit Points. (Con 15/+2 or Con 16/+3)

The King's Rangers serve throughout the Vallorean Empire in many capacities. Some serve in Ranger Companies within the Legions, fighting on the front lines of any war. Others, serve alone, or in small groups in pre-determined locations of frontier, patrolling and so on. Meanwhile, others serve in small groups that roam throughout the Empire, protecting the forests, patrolling the King's Road, pursuing criminals and brigands, as well as seeking to protect various communities from monsters and other horrors.
Wherever they go, the King's Rangers are loved and respected. They speak with the authority of the King, and no one save Magistrates, or ranking Nobles may command them. The people know that they have the King's Rangers looking out for them, and those who serve as Rangers are embraced as heroes.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

I should also note that as much as I may like the standard Ranger class, I have also developed different Ranger classes within my campaign. For example, Elves have access to the standard spell-casting Ranger, as so many Elves are Rangers, and it also provides many spells that make emminent sense for nearly any, or all Elves to possess.

Having said that, I have developed a non-spell-casting Ranger for use with most Human and non-Elven cultures. In discussions with my group, they too liked the idea, as they could see how many races might have Rangers, but they saw problems with every race having Rangers that all looked like the standard Ranger. They felt that my thoughts on developing different Ranger variants based on racial and or cultural aptitudes was pretty neat. Thus, most Humans have non-spell-using Rangers.

So far, I like the idea, but I'm always chewing on stuff, you know? What do *you* think?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[el Voz]

Shark,

Because you do std core class, do those that become RGRs use the TWF technique, or do you have alternatives to TWF?

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Good questions El Voz! Well, for both the non-spell-using Ranger, and the "standard Ranger" I have modified them to have bonus feats in either case so as to maximize the flexibility of the characters. Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity are still available, but not automatic. In addition, the Ranger of either type doesn't recieve proficiency in Heavy Armour, so that if a Ranger wants to wear heavy armour, he must develop the skill. In either event, though, such penalties to Move Silently and Hide, as well as a host of other skills usually keeps the Ranger character to a certain standard. After all, if he chooses to be closer to a heavily armoured warrior, who is going to be able to scout and raid effectively?

Having said that, there is also no mandate that *ALL* Rangers, of whatever type, be knowledgable in Two Weapon Fighting, or be Ambidexterous. Individuals can be so, but not every Ranger will have these abilities. Some rangers might want to be more skilled with the spear, for example, or have Skill-Mastery in Diplomacy, or Gather Information, or what have you.

I also like the fact that the Standard Ranger better typifies the abilities of Elves, where I have a more difficult time seeing every Human or other culture/race having Rangers that all essentially look alike in regard to spells and abilities. So I think that it works out quite well, in that it maximizes flexibility, and at the same time, provides enhanced realism in that different cultures and races would have different approaches to the Ranger class. The Fighter class, and the other classes, all have a superior flexibility and customization inherent within them, as opposed to the Standard Ranger. For example, by feats, spells, weapons, and so on, all of the other classes can easily look very different from each other, like different humans, elves, gnolls, or trolls for example. But with the Standard Ranger, as is, they all have the same grouping of feats, and the same spells. What if you have a culture that would use Rangers, but isn't necessarily magical? Though in my example of "The King's Rangers" I have provided a rationale for one particular group or culture of humans to have spell-using Rangers, I can't necessarily justify the same with other cultures or races. So, it seems to be not only flexible, but very interesting in how it contributes to individual characters, and also to different story-lines!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[Maldur]

Damn, Shark why do you live on the other side of the world? Id love a stroll thru your world(s).

Did you modify a lot of feats (like your alternate Toughness)?

If you have such a argumented place for the (core) classes in your world what is the place of "adventurers" or is "adventurer"not a career choice in your world?

I hope that last question made sense.

Maldur

 

[mmadsen]

I have reprised this brief article for the enjoyment and inspiration of my friends here, and newcomers alike. I wrote this up when I was thinking about a particular group of Rangers in my campaign world, and their special place in history, and society. My thoughts also wandered to the frequent discussions about Rangers, and some of the percieved problems with the class.

Your King's Rangers backstory makes a wonderful "just so" story for the PHB Ranger.

On the other hand, it doesn't solve the problem of having no generic woodsman class for scouts, outlaws, etc. And that's the real problem with the Ranger class, that it presents itself as a woodsman, but it provides a very particular "flavored" woodsman with Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Favored Enemies, and Spells.

I should note that in the background *skill focus* skills that I have provided for the standard Ranger in this part of the campaign world is my considered opinion that the standard skill-point assignments per class in the core rule books don't really do the different characters justice, as I see it. When I think of different characters--either player characters or NPC's, I am often frustrated and agree with my players that oftentimes the starting/standard skills aren't really enough to accurately represent the character.

I agree. On the other hand, I think you could collapse many of your King's Rangers' skills down into a smaller set of skills. For instance, your list includes nine skills:

Knowledge: Vallorean Nobility
Knowledge: Local Geography
Knowledge: Nature
Knowledge: Hearth Wisdom
Knowledge: Local History
Knowledge: Religion
Knowledge: The King's Law
Knowledge: History of The King's Rangers
Wilderness Lore

Most of those could be subsumed by a smaller list of "larger" skills:

Knowledge: Geography
Knowledge: History
Knowledge: Local
Knowledge: Nature
Knowledge: Nobility
Wilderness Lore

Those six skills are all from the PHB. Now, I understand why you'd want a list of narrowly defined, evocative Knowledge skills, but you can get the same effect by "qualifying" the broader skills with examples:

Knowledge: Geography (Vallorea and its Frontiers)
Knowledge: History (The King's Rangers, Vallorean History)
Knowledge: Local
Knowledge: Nature
Knowledge: Nobility (Vallorean Nobility, The King's Laws, Vallorean Courtly Ways)
Wilderness Lore

You're still left with far more skills than a PHB Ranger can (and will) take though -- and you're still left with the odd dichotomy between Wilderness Lore and Knowledge: Nature. There's not even a synergy bonus between those two. Also, it's still a bit nebulous what would be Local that isn't Geography or History. Maybe that could go too?

If you like a highly-skilled Ranger, I suggest a variant Rogue.

Take for example, a Ranger, or a Fighter. Imagine a certain background, of various kinds, whether hunters/ranchers, or educated and scholarly, and the standard skills will be hard-pressed to do the two following goals:

(1) Accurately represent the character's detailed and unique background, of family teaching, mentored learning, and even tutors, scholars, or some other kind of formal or specialized training.

(2) Adequately equip the character to have a reasonable chance of survival and success in the upcoming challenges.

The Fighter in particular gets too few Skill Points to have reasonable background skills. A knight, after all, would regularly hunt with hawks and hounds, would ride with absolute expertise, would know courtly ways and local history, would grow up climbing, jumping, maybe swimming, etc. A Human Fighter is hard pressed to have decent skills in Handle Animal, Ride, and one of Climb, Jump, or Swim. Knowledge skills and Wilderness Lore are cross-class skills for him.

Then there are all the Feats a real knight should have...

As for your second point, I think that's an issue of starting level. D&D clings to the notion that a first-level character is a fully-trained but starting adventurer, but I don't buy it. Unfortunately, given the one-hit-die-per-level concept that's still central to the game, it's hard to add a few Skill Points or Feats without doubling or tripling Hit Points. One more Feat (for a Fighter) means two more levels and 2d10 extra Hit Points.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Whenever I see silly hullaballoo about rangers needing to be more skilled, I like to hop in and point out that 1e rangers were fighter types with Avoid Surprise and Tracking, and 2e rangers were warriors who got Tracking, Hide in Shadows, and Move Silently, so it's really no surprise that the standard ranger in the DMG has Spot, Wilderness Lore, Hide, and Move Silently maxed out.

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Damn, Mmadsen! You and I think so much alike! Yes, I do see how the skills can be collapsed into larger skills--I initially didn't like the whole "larger skill" thing too much, because of it's obvious problems, thus I expanded the skills. However, now that you have pointed out how to narrow and focus the larger skills--I totally agree. I love it!

I also think that there needs to be a "woodsman" type character--that is why I have developed non-spell using Rangers, as well as the Standard Ranger. It is a salient weakness that the designers didn't consider, or they overlooked it. Still, it isn't hard to fix.

Mmadsen, I have gotten so frustrated with the rules limiting my creativity that I have provided a bonus of +2 Skill Points across the board, for every class. I also provide all characters with a bonus culture/Region feat, in addition to other feats based on class, and so on. It is also one reason why I really like the Feat Master mechanic, as it allows one to develop a short five-level "prestige class" that is totally compatible with any and all other classes, which has virtually no other benefits except to provide three bonus feats per level of Feat Master that is developed. It also gains 1d6 HP, and 2 Skill Points per level. Thus, it allows for example, the development of some of my Vallorean Legionnaires, that are Fighter 4/Feat Master 3, which provides them with basicly the 4th level survivability--maybe a little higher--with additional professional feats that such a professional military experience would provide.

I agree that the Knight example is desperately deprived of not only essential skills, but also several feats that suit the character type. I hate the fact that Paladins don't really fit the bill for a holy knight. They do as far as the colour, and some of the extraordinary abilities, but I'm talking about the skills and feats in particular, you know what I'm saying? A human paladin at 20th level will have a whopping total of eight feats. Yes, that's right. EIGHT FEATS! The limitations just don't do the character justice. Look at the seven-hundred and eighty feats or more that have been produced, and hell, just scanning some of the more popular sources, I can pick out at least 25 feats that I think every paladin should have. I'll tell you another thing--the paladin should have many of those feats long before he is 20th level, too! The way I sometimes feel, is that a paladin needs to have many of those feats in the *process* of rising to greatness and being the champion of righteousness for all the good land *BEFORE* he is 20th level, married, and has a cushy palace to live in. Do you see what I'm saying?

Aargh!

Mmadsen, what kind of tweaks have you made in your campaign to rectify some of these problems?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[mmadsen]

Damn, Mmadsen! You and I think so much alike!

And yet you constantly surprise me with cool new ideas! (Or cool ancient ideas...)

Yes, I do see how the skills can be collapsed into larger skills--I initially didn't like the whole "larger skill" thing too much, because of it's obvious problems, thus I expanded the skills. However, now that you have pointed out how to narrow and focus the larger skills--I totally agree. I love it!

Given the nature of the game (all skills are equally "expensive"), I like to make "useless" skills encompass as much as possible. Then I "flavor" them depending on the character in question. This came quite naturally while converting kith and kin to d20 CoC. "Hmm...he knows a heck of a lot about Thomas Jefferson and Nazi Germany, but those both fit under History. I guess I'll call it Knowledge: History (Founding Fathers, WWII)."

I also think that there needs to be a "woodsman" type character--that is why I have developed non-spell using Rangers, as well as the Standard Ranger. It is a salient weakness that the designers didn't consider, or they overlooked it. Still, it isn't hard to fix.

My solution is just an example of a larger solution I've found. I use a variant Rogue/Expert for just about everything (very CoC, by accident) with a Fighter-style Bonus Feat list. Thus, my Ranger (or Scout) is a variant Rogue with the Ranger's Skill list and Proficiencies and the following Bonus Feat list (one every other level, as a Fighter): Alertness, Endurance, Improved Critical, Point Blank Shot (Far Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Shot on the Run), Quickdraw, Run, Skill Focus (Class Skill), Track, Weapon Focus; Nature Sense, Animal Companion, Woodland Stride, Trackless Step; Sneak Attack, Evasion, Uncanny Dodge. (Some of those "Feats" are Special Abilities lifted from other classes.)

Mmadsen, I have gotten so frustrated with the rules limiting my creativity that I have provided a bonus of +2 Skill Points across the board, for every class. I also provide all characters with a bonus culture/Region feat, in addition to other feats based on class, and so on.

All the other d20 games seem to dole out a lot more Skill points, so it seems reasonable. I'm not sure the Rogue and Expert need even more though.

As for Feats, I think they're one of the best elements of the game, and they're certainly more evocative than an extra Hit Die. If anything, the game should hand out far more Feats.

It is also one reason why I really like the Feat Master mechanic, as it allows one to develop a short five-level "prestige class" that is totally compatible with any and all other classes, which has virtually no other benefits except to provide three bonus feats per level of Feat Master that is developed. It also gains 1d6 HP, and 2 Skill Points per level. Thus, it allows for example, the development of some of my Vallorean Legionnaires, that are Fighter 4/Feat Master 3, which provides them with basicly the 4th level survivability--maybe a little higher--with additional professional feats that such a professional military experience would provide.

Did you throw together this Feat Master, or did you pick it up somewhere?

I agree that the Knight example is desperately deprived of not only essential skills, but also several feats that suit the character type.

Absolutely. The mounted Feats are practically required, but even a Fighter can only pick them up slowly over many, many levels. If we're to believe a fifth-level Fighter is a great warrior, then we've got hundreds of knights who must be low level and thus aren't any better on horseback than their footmen would be; they don't have the Feats.

I hate the fact that Paladins don't really fit the bill for a holy knight. They do as far as the colour, and some of the extraordinary abilities, but I'm talking about the skills and feats in particular, you know what I'm saying? A human paladin at 20th level will have a whopping total of eight feats. Yes, that's right. EIGHT FEATS! The limitations just don't do the character justice.

Another variation I use: Paladins as Fighters. I added Divine Grace, Divine Health, and Aura of Courage as Feats. (I never liked Detect Evil, by the way.) Thus, a Templar of Pelor can start the game with those Feats or add them later, and he can be a solid warrior too. If he wants to perform overt miracles, he can multiclass into Cleric (as a Prestige Class).

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

I'm glad Mmadsen! You know, these are some really cool ideas. I don't want to sound arrogant, but many of the prestige classes for knights and fighters in Sword and Fist, and Defenders of the Faith just don't cut it, you know? I have had to do most all of my prestige classes as custom built, with the occasional transfusion of some ideas within the official prestige classes blended in. I don't mind, really, but I do wish the official prestige classes were designed better, and also more interesting. As it is, I shredded the Knight of the Great Kingdom, and blended Templar with it, to design a Knight-Templar prestige class that would be more appropriate. I've also transfused the Warmaster, and the Cavalier. They just don't do it. It's frustrating, especially when you could appreciate some things done by the official people that doesn't require you, as the DM, to perform major surgery in order for it to work. Argh!

The Feat Master was designed by a fellow known here as Tower. He hasn't posted here at all I think, and it has been ages since he was at EN-Boards under Eric Noah. Too bad, he was an excellent member of the community. At his website, he has some very cool stuff, ranging from feats, racial profiles, equipment, to generic prestige classes useable in any campaign. He also created the Feat Master mechanic, which is just brilliant! I've personally expressed such to him privately as well. I highly recommend his website.

http://www.geocities.com/towerthebroken

Combining the Rogue and expert sounds interesting Mmadsen. How have your players responded to your experiments? Have they responded well to such experimentation?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK