Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kerrick" data-source="post: 5090832" data-attributes="member: 4722">InNteresting concept. I think I saw someone else bring that up recently, too.It's not what they do in combat, it's what they do outside of combat. Rogues have a very different skillset than rangers - they're focused on finding and disarming traps, breaking in and stealing things, gathering information about marks, etc. Rangers, OTOH, are focused around the wilderness, survival, hunting, and generally living off the land. At the most basic level, it's urban (rogue) vs. wilderness (ranger). &nbsp;You could make &quot;hunter&quot; a PrC that builds off the base ranger concept - someone who's experienced in hunting a wide variety of creatures, and gets more favored enemies, along with other abilities that help find/kill them. My <a href="http://project-phoenix.wikidot.com/classes:hunter" target="_blank">Hunter PrC</a>, while not exactly what I just stated, might be close enough to what you're looking for here.Maybe... except that the abilities and skillsets are quite a bit different, as I noted above.What I did was change each domain ability to be usable 1 + Cha bonus times/day; all the cleric abilities work thus, drawing from a single pool of uses (which you can expand with a feat).I've heard that before, a few times; the other stance is that they should be PrCs (I think people's opinions are pretty evenly split on keeping them as base classes vs. making them PrCs). The RAW paladin certainly gets little more than a fighter/cleric (and actually, the latter is better off, since he gets access to higher-level spells and has better saves - all he loses is 3 points of BAB).Thanks. Making it better wasn't hard to do, really, but I think it's something worth playing now - certainly better than a fighter/cleric.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kerrick, post: 5090832, member: 4722"] InNteresting concept. I think I saw someone else bring that up recently, too. It's not what they do [I]in[/I] combat, it's what they do [I]outside[/I] of combat. Rogues have a very different skillset than rangers - they're focused on finding and disarming traps, breaking in and stealing things, gathering information about marks, etc. Rangers, OTOH, are focused around the wilderness, survival, hunting, and generally living off the land. At the most basic level, it's urban (rogue) vs. wilderness (ranger). You could make "hunter" a PrC that builds off the base ranger concept - someone who's experienced in hunting a wide variety of creatures, and gets more favored enemies, along with other abilities that help find/kill them. My [url=http://project-phoenix.wikidot.com/classes:hunter]Hunter PrC[/url], while not exactly what I just stated, might be close enough to what you're looking for here. Maybe... except that the abilities and skillsets are quite a bit different, as I noted above. What I did was change each domain ability to be usable 1 + Cha bonus times/day; all the cleric abilities work thus, drawing from a single pool of uses (which you can expand with a feat). I've heard that before, a few times; the other stance is that they should be PrCs (I think people's opinions are pretty evenly split on keeping them as base classes vs. making them PrCs). The RAW paladin certainly gets little more than a fighter/cleric (and actually, the latter is better off, since he gets access to higher-level spells and has better saves - all he loses is 3 points of BAB). Thanks. Making it better wasn't hard to do, really, but I think it's something worth playing now - certainly better than a fighter/cleric. [/QUOTE]

Verification