Level Up (A5E) The Sadness that is Wilderness Lore (Ranger 12)

[lichmaster]

Heh--in 2e, rangers and paladins were fighter sub-classes.

No, in ad&d 2e they were classes on their own, but part of the warriors class group

 

[Corinnguard]

No, in ad&d 2e they were classes on their own, but part of the warriors class group

3e's Unearthed Arcana also had them as 15-level Prestige Classes alongside the Bard. Pg. 69-72. To be a Prestige Ranger, you had to have a Bonus Attack of +4, 2 ranks in Knowledge (Nature), 4 ranks of Survival, several feats (Endurance, Track and either Rapid Shot or Two-Weapon Fighting) and be able to cast calm animals as divine spell as your prerequisites.

4 levels of Fighter and a 1 level dip into Druid?

 

[scaramouche]

People have brought up a really good point that's inherent to the current Ranger design ethos, which is that the way they approach Ranger + Exploration is to allow the Ranger to counter their environment. ie. They tend to eliminate from play the thing that they're best at. And a more interesting design direction might be to exploit and leverage their environment.

Instead of various terrain masteries that let them maintain normal movement / resist weather / gain supply, for instance, perhaps they get Terrain Maneuvers. Er, maybe maneuver is the wrong word since that's already in use. Terrain Exploits? Tricks? Basically, moves they can do that either benefit combat (in addition to exploration) or set up future success in tangible ways. Or hell, maybe we do go with a Tradition of terrain mastery, and let Rangers get fighter-style exertion discounts when in favored terrains?

I also agree with folks saying rangers occupy a weird liminal spot that has never been properly defined. I personally would not be sad if in the future we ditched it as a full class entirely but I suspect there are ranger lovers out there who would be quite sad.