D&D 5E Themes: What 5E Can Learn from the Ranger

[jshaft37]

I've always thought of ranger as more of a rouge than a fighter. As a theme it could be applied to either and play a bit differently.

 

[CleverNickName]

Gods, no. Weapon styles are the stupidest thing they ever came up with. Why must a ranger dual wield? Or choose between dual wielding and archery? Even a mage can choose his fighting style. A ranger (and every other class) should not be shoehorned into any one weapon choice. It should be a player choice. If I want to go sword and board or swing a two-handed weapon, I shouldn't have to ignore class features to do so.

This is my custom Samurai class that I made for a Final Fantasy IV campaign. It uses the weapon syles mechanic of the ranger to help give it a more historically accurate feel. (After all, not every samurai fought with a katana.)

I guess I'm trying to say, weapon styles aren't all bad. You can do a lot with them.

 

[GX.Sigma]

This is my custom Samurai class that I made for a Final Fantasy IV campaign. It uses the weapon syles mechanic of the ranger to help give it a more historically accurate feel. (After all, not every samurai fought with a katana.)

I guess I'm trying to say, weapon styles aren't all bad. You can do a lot with them.

It works for a very specific archetype like the samurai, but it doesnt work for something as broad as the Ranger.

I dont want them to force my ranger to be Drizzt.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Pet theory:

TWF is a theme. Archery is a theme. "Woodsman" is a background. Anyone can pick up any of these.

Seriously, rather than have BOTH a tempest fighter and a TWF ranger, make TWF something anyone can pick up.

And then you have a TWF wizard! And a TWF cleric! Not that they'd be as good as a fighter or ranger.

Beastmaster could also be a theme. "My Assassin HAS A BEAR FOR A FRIEND!"

Rangers, then, as a class, get multi-attack powers (better use of TWF or more arrows from archery), mobility powers (running through difficult terrain), ally-buffing powers (magic fangs), extra accuracy, probably some nature magic...

 

[CleverNickName]

Seriously, rather than have BOTH a tempest fighter and a TWF ranger, make TWF something anyone can pick up.

And then you have a TWF wizard! And a TWF cleric! Not that they'd be as good as a fighter or ranger.

I hope they go a little more broad-brush with themes than this. After all, any character with sufficient Dexterity can take the TWF family of feats, and not have to deal with weapon or armor restrictions. Rangers don't have a monopoly on archery or dual-wielding.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Right. So if themes are effectively feat chains...

 

[Savage Wombat]

But you can't just call it the "two weapon fighting" theme. It's got to have a cool name, like "slayer" or "avenger" or whatever.

"Reaper" maybe.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'm detecting very little interest or excitement on the subject of themes...

 

[YRUSirius]

Hey, hey... I'm excited. That they got some ideas from the Dragon Age RPG.

-YRUSirius

 

[Neonchameleon]

Yep, that's the sort of thing I am talking about. I would like to see that get extended to other classes as well. We could condense the class list considerably this way. Seriously: how many different "arcane spellcaster with sword" classes do we need, anyway?

According to 4e, the Bladesinger, the Swordmage, the Hexblade (who summons weapons using rods as implements - effectively lightsabers) and arguably the Bard and Artificer. Yes, that's too many - and the bladesinger in particular needs to go. That said, all the classes in 4e have subspecialties - for Warlocks for instance it's what you made your pact with.

Gods, no. Weapon styles are the stupidest thing they ever came up with. Why must a ranger dual wield? Or choose between dual wielding and archery? Even a mage can choose his fighting style. A ranger (and every other class) should not be shoehorned into any one weapon choice. It should be a player choice. If I want to go sword and board or swing a two-handed weapon, I shouldn't have to ignore class features to do so.

They needn't stick to one or the other. They just can specialise in certain things - but the 4e ranger range includes archery, two weapons for melee, melee and offhand throwing weapon, and double handed weapon. Oh, and the specialisation giving a beast companion. That's almost a complete set other than shields.