The ranger is...

[Jack Daniel]

Psst... quick hint.

#1 is wrong because the ranger is not a fighting style.
#2 is wrong for the same reason.
#3 describes exactly what the class is, and has been since OD&D.
#4 describes what the ranger isn't, and never has been, yet it's what people seem to want.
#5 is the munchkin choice

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

Psst... quick hint.

#1 is wrong because the ranger is not a fighting style.
#2 is wrong for the same reason.
#3 describes exactly what the class is, and has been since OD&D.
#4 describes what the ranger isn't, and never has been, yet it's what people seem to want.
#5 is the munchkin choice

Pssst... quick hint.

When you designed this "clever trap", you forgot to include the clever part.


Patrick Y.

 

[Jack Daniel]

You fell for it, Mr. Insult McInsulty.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

#3 describes exactly what the class is, and has been since OD&D.

So? That doesn't mean it was good.

And TWF? What does that have to do with a magical foe-slaying warrior?

#4 describes what the ranger isn't, and never has been, yet it's what people seem to want.

If you want to be a successful game designer, give the people what they want.

#1 is wrong because the ranger is not a fighting style.
#2 is wrong for the same reason.

So, why does it sound like you want to stick with the 2e/3.0e ranger?

Pssst... quick hint.

When you designed this "clever trap", you forgot to include the clever part.

You fell for it, Mr. Insult McInsulty.

Look at the maturity level of this thread.

 

[Quinn]

Psst... quick hint.

#1 is wrong because the ranger is not a fighting style.
#2 is wrong for the same reason.
#3 describes exactly what the class is, and has been since OD&D.
#4 describes what the ranger isn't, and never has been, yet it's what people seem to want.
#5 is the munchkin choice

Wow, thanks for the hint. I'm glad to know that there is a RIGHT answer.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

You fell for it, Mr. Insult McInsulty.

Actually, no. I didn't vote.

And it isn't insulting to point out that your little trap poll isn't particularly clever.

It is, however, insulting to create a poll who's only purpose is to bring people in so you can tell them they're "wrong", particularly when you start dropping the word munchkin into the equation.

If you want to offer out flat declarations of what the ranger is, do so honestly, without pretending to solicit opinions for the purposes of getting "a cross-section once and for all."

Patrick Y.

 

[Kaffis]

All of the above, but not necessarily at the same time. I would categorize them as an expert at thriving in the wilderness through their knowledge (particularly of their home environment) of flora and fauna, their ability to spot and pursue the subtlest tracks, and their mastery of the weapon style and type of their choice. They also are alert and adaptable, and adept at reading signs of all types, whether in use of tracking, or to infer information about the lay of the land around them, making them excellent scouts. They may or may not be so attuned and familliar with wildlife and nature that they can speak to or befriend animals in uncanny ways and/or cast druidic style magic.

 

[Quinn]

2) Favored enemy is a central focus of the class. Aragorn, the prototype for DnD rangers, had this ability, but most other rangers didn't. Not everyone wants this ability.

It's also hard to balance, and is much stricter than sneak attack when it comes to who can use it. Broadening the array of targets while decreasing the damage wouldn't work either - that's basically the same thing as Weapon Specialization. This ability works like a great prestige class ability or a feat chain, not a core class ability.

I've always thought that the favored enemy ability was fairly weak since it requires the DM to supply the appropriate enemy to be of any use, and it is rapidly outpaced by other classes' ability (+4 to hit giants compared to a rogue's 8d6 sneak attack, for example). I'd favor a bonus that went towards whatever creature the ranger was tracking. This would bring greater focus on the ranger's tracking ability, and reflect the knowledge that he's gaining of the creature as he tracks it. Perhaps something similar to an assassin's death attack in the respect that he must observe his opponent for a certain number of rounds. I think it'd have a little more flavor than a base bonus against a particular creature type.

 

[Angcuru]

Well, consider this. The ranger's job is to track down and take out things/people, and to be able to sustain himself without the aid of society. I.E. He has these abilities to help him find things to destroy/slay/kill/make dead. Here I shall explain:

1 - Favored Enemy - You have certain types of creatures that you hate &/or fear so you train to be able to take them down easily.

2 - Auto-Gained Track - To be able to hunt down beasties and bad guys to .....kill them.

These are basically the trademarks of the Ranger, so it makes sense to say that the Ranger is combat-heavy. As for the TWF part of the problem, I believe I have found a simple solution. Instead of giving the Ranger these icky-icky-horrible 'virtual feats', give him bonus feats a' la fighter, but not so often. Instead of every other level, how about every 4 levels, starting with 1st level? I.E. 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20. The bonus feats list should be identical to that that the fighter uses. I think this should apply to barbarians and paladins, as well.

Another thing that I have been wondering about. What's the deal with only fighters being able to take weapon specialization? why can't characters of other classes be able to train with a single weapon to the point that they are specialized? Maybe there should be a prerequisite that the character be Total Level 8 before being able to take this feat, twice that required for the fighter. The other classes focus on combat about half as much as the fighter, at MOST, so this does not seem unreasonable to me.

 

[Remathilis]

The real answer is...

The Ranger is Dead.

R.I.P. Ranger 1974-2002



(Sincerely, someone who argued in that god-aweful thread on WotC's boards)