Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 7680600" data-attributes="member: 92511">Just for shameless self-promotion, I will direct those disinclined to visit the Homebrew forum to check out my stab at rewriting the ranger...and while I haven't given this latest attempt by WotC a thorough once over yet, this thread leads me to believe I will not be pleased and will continue to work with what I already have. Maybe some of you will enjoy it more/better as well... Comments always welcome (but make them there, please, so as not to further derail this thread). <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?465488-Ranger-Rehash/page4" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?465488-Ranger-Rehash/page4" target="_blank">Rehashing the Ranger </a>&quot;Final&quot; version is post #37.Shout out to co-conspirator (at least for a spell-less ranger base), fellow class-creator/homebrewer, and most consistent and challenging critiquer, @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=20323" target="_blank">Quickleaf</a> 's excellent take on the ranger as well. Whether you like mine or not, definitely also worth a look-see.<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?465557-Class-variants-ranger-fighter-and-others-(-quot-Class-X-quot-series)" target="_blank">Quickleaf's Rangers (and some Fighter) archetypes</a>Not to worry, <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> , a thorough review of [my opinions on] the latest &quot;new&quot; ranger is imminent (perhaps tomorrow if not later today).Happy Friday, all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 7680600, member: 92511"] Just for shameless self-promotion, I will direct those disinclined to visit the Homebrew forum to check out my stab at rewriting the ranger...and while I haven't given this latest attempt by WotC a thorough once over yet, this thread leads me to believe I will not be pleased and will continue to work with what I already have. Maybe some of you will enjoy it more/better as well... Comments always welcome (but make them there, please, so as not to further derail this thread). [URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?465488-Ranger-Rehash/page4"] Rehashing the Ranger [/URL]"Final" version is post #37. Shout out to co-conspirator (at least for a spell-less ranger base), fellow class-creator/homebrewer, and most consistent and challenging critiquer, @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=20323"]Quickleaf[/URL][/U][/B][/I] 's excellent take on the ranger as well. Whether you like mine or not, definitely also worth a look-see. [URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?465557-Class-variants-ranger-fighter-and-others-(-quot-Class-X-quot-series)"]Quickleaf's Rangers (and some Fighter) archetypes[/URL] Not to worry, :p , a thorough review of [my opinions on] the latest "new" ranger is imminent (perhaps tomorrow if not later today). Happy Friday, all. [/QUOTE]

Verification