green slime
First Post
Cam Banks said:
On this I agree. A whole year between one and the other is plenty of time to chuck in a perceived bone to add what many may find as "cool flavour".
The origin of Rangers with Two-Weapon-Fighting
- Thread starter Shades of Green
- Start date
On this I agree. A whole year between one and the other is plenty of time to chuck in a perceived bone to add what many may find as "cool flavour".
green slime
First Post
Hypersmurf said:
I thought Drow were introduced in Fiend Folio? And there they were also described as often ambidextrous, or am I misremembering my youth?
The first Two Weapon Fighting rules widely used by my group back in 1e was the rule set published in Dragon Magazine and written by Roger Moore. This rule set I believe was made official in Unearthed Arcana.
If you had high Dex, you basically had no penalty. Everyone that had high Dex used 2 weapons in my group. Val Kilmer as Mad Mardigan in Willow helped exacerbate the trend.
Now if memory serves correctly 2e rules did not make 2 Weapon fighting as easy to do as those 1e rules... at least until the fighter power up book came out...then I seem to remember everyone being slashing specialized 2 weapon gurus or whatever the rules terminology was.
2E also saw the Ranger get out of Full Plate Armor, get some stealth skills beyond just being able to surprise people, and the general watering down and broadening of the Giant slaying element ala Favored Enemy.
Could Ranger's still specialize in 2e, I've forgotten? Bow specialization in 1e was /Yoda Very Powerful /Yoda
I just do not think it is QED that because Drizzt was popular, Rangers got Two Weapon Fighting...I can see it building a Niche for a class redesign.
Rangers and Bards were the most altered classes in 2e.
If you had high Dex, you basically had no penalty. Everyone that had high Dex used 2 weapons in my group. Val Kilmer as Mad Mardigan in Willow helped exacerbate the trend.
Now if memory serves correctly 2e rules did not make 2 Weapon fighting as easy to do as those 1e rules... at least until the fighter power up book came out...then I seem to remember everyone being slashing specialized 2 weapon gurus or whatever the rules terminology was.
2E also saw the Ranger get out of Full Plate Armor, get some stealth skills beyond just being able to surprise people, and the general watering down and broadening of the Giant slaying element ala Favored Enemy.
Could Ranger's still specialize in 2e, I've forgotten? Bow specialization in 1e was /Yoda Very Powerful /Yoda
I just do not think it is QED that because Drizzt was popular, Rangers got Two Weapon Fighting...I can see it building a Niche for a class redesign.
Rangers and Bards were the most altered classes in 2e.
green slime
First Post
Two-weapon fighting rules was included in the 1e DMG, but IIRC, it was buried deep inside, and listed as a kind of optional rule.
greywulf
First Post
I'm pretty sure it's a Drizzt thing. Two scimitars indeed. Ick.
IMC we consider Rangers to be more akin to Ronin. They're fiercely independent freemen who either use a Miyamoto Musashi style fighting technique (longsword + shortsword) or archery. Either way they're respected by most and considered to be the law in the otherwise lawless wildlands. A cross between Seven Samurai and the Magnificent Seven, if you will.
But then, we also turned the pansy-ass bard into a Knight Commander , so what do we know?
IMC we consider Rangers to be more akin to Ronin. They're fiercely independent freemen who either use a Miyamoto Musashi style fighting technique (longsword + shortsword) or archery. Either way they're respected by most and considered to be the law in the otherwise lawless wildlands. A cross between Seven Samurai and the Magnificent Seven, if you will.
But then, we also turned the pansy-ass bard into a Knight Commander , so what do we know?
The thought that the two (Drizzt and the rule change in 2e) were connected never crossed my mind at the time. I read the books first and just assumed that if there was a justification for Drizzt TWF'ing, it was because he was a Drow. I say if because by two weapon fighting rules of the time, a regular player couldn't use two scimitars - a scimitar was too big to be an offhand weapon.
When I later read the 2e PHB I assumed the ranger TWF change was for two reasons. The first was to give them a little more oomph in combat because Fighters were getting specialization. But I also saw it as an incentive to players to go along with what seemed like a recasting of what a Ranger was.
In the Greyhawk Adventures book, Duke Karll of Urnst is a 12th level Ranger, who appears to run around in Full Plate +4. And really, why wouldn't he? There was no reason not to wear the heaviest armor possible to give you the best AC.
But 2e tried to change that. Right off the bat, adding abilities to hide and move silently signified a shift in the archetype from Deluxe Fighter (because, like Paladins, we're simply better (statted) than you) to a more woodsy, skirmisher type - you know, like a Ranger
Two weapons had always been a good way to increase damage but it needed (or at least I thought at the time) that it required a high dex to make it work - a high dex that you usually didn't have as a fighter type having Str and Con as higher priorities. That change was a good incentive to get my ranger into studded leather - two weapons, heck ya that's cool!
And a final thought, is there any chance that Drizzt uses two weapons *because* they were planning to give it to Rangers in the new edition?
When I later read the 2e PHB I assumed the ranger TWF change was for two reasons. The first was to give them a little more oomph in combat because Fighters were getting specialization. But I also saw it as an incentive to players to go along with what seemed like a recasting of what a Ranger was.
In the Greyhawk Adventures book, Duke Karll of Urnst is a 12th level Ranger, who appears to run around in Full Plate +4. And really, why wouldn't he? There was no reason not to wear the heaviest armor possible to give you the best AC.
But 2e tried to change that. Right off the bat, adding abilities to hide and move silently signified a shift in the archetype from Deluxe Fighter (because, like Paladins, we're simply better (statted) than you) to a more woodsy, skirmisher type - you know, like a Ranger
Two weapons had always been a good way to increase damage but it needed (or at least I thought at the time) that it required a high dex to make it work - a high dex that you usually didn't have as a fighter type having Str and Con as higher priorities. That change was a good incentive to get my ranger into studded leather - two weapons, heck ya that's cool!
And a final thought, is there any chance that Drizzt uses two weapons *because* they were planning to give it to Rangers in the new edition?
green slime
First Post
diaglo said:
Well, it wasn't made into a big heading or anything. I seem to recall it was a small table/chart in the middle of a page of text. So it didn't leap out and grab you by the socks and fling you across the room as the book fell open to that page.
Back then, my impression was that there were so many inspiring things to read and tweak in that book.
Similar Threads
