The Ranger: to Spell or not to Spell

[Janaxstrus]

I'm fine with the ranger casting spells. However, just like the Paladin, if they are going to cast spells, they need their own list.

Using the druid list is just too much for what the ranger is supposed to be. I'd like to see them have certain druid spells that make sense for a wilderness fighter/archer/tracker, and then their own special spells.

 

[Mercule]

If rangers get spells, I would prefer to see them not labeled explicitly as "divine casters". The ranger spells were originally more reflective of resourcefulness and study, not reverence or fellowship. I think it's much more appropriate to name them arcane casters, albeit very strange arcanists.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

If rangers get spells, I would prefer to see them not labeled explicitly as "divine casters". The ranger spells were originally more reflective of resourcefulness and study, not reverence or fellowship. I think it's much more appropriate to name them arcane casters, albeit very strange arcanists.

Now in all my combinations, that's one that I don't think I explored before. It creates some interesting ideas, hearkening back to actual effects (if not categories) of AD&D spells. If you make arcane a big part of "strange lore" from which wizards get spells (and other stuff) while other "arcane" characters may get something else, it works. Meanwhile, "divine spells" are an aspect of the supernatural power that some characters can wield, such as clerics. Paladins may have other supernatural effects.

Then a druid takes on the arcane/divine slot! It may be named differently, but it could stick with that flavor and be a heck of a lot like the early D&D druids.

In effect, rationales run this way, reverse from what is often there:

• Fundamental thing - Strange Lore; expressions arcane spells, heroic knowledge, enchanting, etc.
• Fundamental thing - Supernatural Power; expressions divine spells, typical paladin powers, etc.
• Fundamental thing - Heroic Physique; expressions melee and ranged combat prowess, heroic athletics, etc.
• Fundamental thing - Heroic Cunning; expressions sneaking, trickery, etc.

Druid shapechange can easily come from the supernatural or the strange lore side. Same mechanics, but the flavor changes considerably. Meanwhile, the core fighter and rogue fundamentals have been broadened enugh to allow some trades when making hybrids.

I think I like that set!

 

[Minigiant]

In my 3.5E games, I give the player a choice: (s)he can play a ranger as-written in the SRD, or (s)he can play a ranger with d10 Hit Dice and no spells. The player almost always chooses the no-spells version.

Whoever the player ism no offensem picked the weaker choice. One HD size increase is just ~1 HP per level. Level 1 spells are awesome.

If rangers get spells, I would prefer to see them not labeled explicitly as "divine casters". The ranger spells were originally more reflective of resourcefulness and study, not reverence or fellowship. I think it's much more appropriate to name them arcane casters, albeit very strange arcanists.

I'd prefer it be whatever the druid uses. Ranger's spells/nature powers are like a skilled learned out of necessity. Wild animals and poisonous plants everywhere, gotta be able to charm/hide from/detect the beasts and remove the poison.

 

[pemerton]

Uh.

Hmm.

What?

Virtually half of that is "animal empathy," the other half is "having good Charisma and Wisdom" and a sprinkling of "Main Character Prophecy Power." Oh yeah, "excellent Heal and Craft skills."

Agreed. The following quotes especially stood out to me:

"Many evil things there are that your strong walls and bright swords do not stay. You know little of the lands beyond your bounds. Peace and freedom, do you say? The North would have known them little but for us. Fear would have destroyed them. But when dark things come from the houseless hills, or creep from sunless woods, they fly from us. What roads would any dare to tread, what safety would there be in quiet lands, or in the homes of simple men at night, if the Dunedain were asleep, or were all gone into the grave?" FotR:286.

How, with no spells?

<snip>

There are also at least two instances where Aragorn wakes up out of a sound sleep, somehow sensing that something is wrong... This "sounds" like the use of an Alarm spell, to me.

<snip>

'Come hither!' said Faramir. 'Look at me! Do you know the name of this place? Have you been here before?'
Slowly Gollum raised his eyes and looked unwillingly into Faramir's. All light went out of them, and they stared bleak and pale for a moment into the clear unwavering eyes of the man of Gondor. There was a still silence. Then Gollum dropped his head and shrank down, until he was squatting on the floor, shivering. 'We doesn't know and we doesn't want to know,' he whimpered. 'Never came here; never come again.'
'There are locked doors and closed windows in your mind, and dark rooms behind them,' said Faramir. 'But in this I judge that you speak the truth.'"

If, in a high fantasy game, warriors can't cause the dark things to fly from them without using spells, then something has gone wrong.

Likewise if Conan, Aragaorn etc can't wake from sleep in response to danger unless they've cast Alarm. Or if a charismatic and powerful leader (like Faramir) can't discern the contents of Gollum's mind without ESP magic.

If D&Dnext heads in an "all heroic fantasy tropes must be spells" direction (except for the plot protection of hit points, which for some reason always get a free pass) then I think it will be a much weaker RPG than the one it is replacing.

The most important benefit of a 3.5 ranger's spellcasting ability is that he can use wands of cure X wounds.

And this is a sad thing.

 

[CleverNickName]

The most important benefit of a 3.5 ranger's spellcasting ability is that he can use wands of cure X wounds.

Whoever the player is [no offense] picked the weaker choice. One HD size increase is just ~1 HP per level. Level 1 spells are awesome.

Perhaps our gaming style differs from most, but we tend to use healing potions a lot more, and healing spells a lot less, than other groups. My players don't care for wands and scrolls all that much because they aren't as versatile...they would rather buy potions that everyone can use, instead of magic items that are restricted to certain classes.

So for our particular play style, the d10 HD, no-magic ranger makes perfect sense.

 

[Sadras]

So for our particular play style, the d10 HD, no-magic ranger makes perfect sense.

Only technically speaking the "spell casting" ability is more beneficial than the hp gain. However words are sometimes misleading - I do not like calling the ranger a spell caster - perhaps he communes with nature on the lines of nature rituals and the like.

However I do like the take of your players - not the usual power-hungry munchkins I have unfortunately encountered!

 

[kinem]

Favored enemy makes little sense and needs to be completely overhauled or gotten rid of.

I think that it should all be handled with options and multiclassing.

Barbarian = woodsy fighter
Druid = woodsy cleric

Paladin = fighter/cleric
Ranger = woodsy fighter/rogue/cleric

Monk = unarmed style fighter/rogue

 

[drothgery]

Perhaps our gaming style differs from most, but we tend to use healing potions a lot more, and healing spells a lot less, than other groups. My players don't care for wands and scrolls all that much because they aren't as versatile...they would rather buy potions that everyone can use, instead of magic items that are restricted to certain classes.

So for our particular play style, the d10 HD, no-magic ranger makes perfect sense.

At list price, wands are much cheaper per casting of Cure X Wounds than potions (and scrolls are cheaper than potions) in 3.x. Hence minor divine casters' (and bards') ability to use wands of Cure X Wounds is rather handy.

 

[CleverNickName]

At list price, wands are much cheaper per casting of Cure X Wounds than potions (and scrolls are cheaper than potions) in 3.x. Hence minor divine casters' (and bards') ability to use wands of Cure X Wounds is rather handy.

You are totally right, of course. It's not like we never noticed the price difference...we just don't like the thought of a wand-wielding Faramir or a scroll-scribing Aragorn. It's a style preference.