D&D 4E What abilities and paragon paths would you like to see for the 4e ranger?

[FireLance]

I'd appreciate NOT having Two-Weapon Fighting an inherent class feature of the Ranger. That was a mistake since the development of 2e, when TSR, caught up in the Drizzt craze, forgot that Drizzt was a dual-wielder because he was a DROW, NOT because he was a Ranger. Dual-wielding should be accessible by Rangers, Fighters, Rogues and perhaps Paladins equally.

The great thing about talent trees is that they don't have to be class-specific. You could have a two-weapon fighting talent tree, and give rangers, fighters, rogues and maybe paladins access to it.

 

[Aristotle]

I'm hoping everything else gets buffed, and spellcasting gets nerfed. I like the idea of a veteran ranger who is in tune with the feywild and maybe able to use it's influence to work helpful rituals in natural places, but I'm less fond of the rangers with spell lists that we've seen in past editions.

 

[glass]

I'd appreciate NOT having Two-Weapon Fighting an inherent class feature of the Ranger. That was a mistake since the development of 2e, when TSR, caught up in the Drizzt craze, forgot that Drizzt was a dual-wielder because he was a DROW, NOT because he was a Ranger. Dual-wielding should be accessible by Rangers, Fighters, Rogues and perhaps Paladins equally.

Almost certainly Drizzt was dual-wielding because he's a ranger. Besides that.. racial genetic weapon proficiencies are pretty much the one thing even more silly than woodsmen with in-build ambidexterity.

Since Drizzt's TWF predates the 2e PHB by some margin, it is pretty clear that TSR made rangers into TWFers due to Drizzt rather than the other way around. That said, I don't think they forgot so much as made a deliberate decission based on the popularity of the character.


glass.

 

[Steely Dan]

A Ranger's "spellcasting"

I'm pretty certain, and I'm happy about it, that rangers will no longer have any (half-ass) spell-casting.

 

[Cadfan]

Things I want for the Ranger.

1: Finally, a solution to the quiver problem. You know, where your hasted 6th level character can shoot 4 arrows per round, but can only hold 20 in his quiver, and has to handwave the problem away. Realistically, a person not using magic can only carry so many arrows at once. The amount of arrows reasonably consumed between refills and the amount of arrows a person can reasonably carry need to match.

2: I don't mind spellcasting. A survivalist would be expected to know a little bit of nature lore, and in the relatively high magic world of D&D, "nature lore" = magic. I do wish it were a little more focused in terms of theme. I'd personally go with a very small amount of healing magic, and some tracking type magic. In a world where the most obvious solution to snakebite is a spell, the survivalist would be expected to learn the spell.

3: Tracking for free. Its a very abstract group benefit ability, not a personal benefit ability. Don't make the ranger pay for it by giving up something else. Tracking hogs even less glory than disarming traps, and that's very little glory.

4: Go light on the trick shots, please. Arrows don't really ricochet like bullets. I'm ok with stuff like shooting someone in the hand to make them drop their weapon (fort attack to disarm, maybe?), but less ok with stuff like shooting an arrow that bounces off a stone wall and hits someone hiding around the corner.

 

[Silvergriffon]

I would like to see paths for:

Scout (wilderness mobility, superior tracking and especially stealth)
Archer
Melee (melee powers, but with a choice to focus on dual wield or not)
Beast Master (animal empathy/companions)


As a side note, I was a little disappointed to see rangers listed as "ranged strikers". Hopefully, by the time 5e rolls around, if they keep the focus on Rangers being ranged strikers then they will change their name to something more appropriate like "Archer". "Ranger" implies only a skilled and highly mobile expert at wilderness survival, and I would rather have had them drop the assumption of rangers as bow specialists. There are actually people out there now who think that the word "ranger" refers to ranged weapons!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I would like to see paths for:

Scout (wilderness mobility, superior tracking and especially stealth)
Archer
Melee (melee powers, but with a choice to focus on dual wield or not)
Beast Master (animal empathy/companions)


As a side note, I was a little disappointed to see rangers listed as "ranged strikers". Hopefully, by the time 5e rolls around, if they keep the focus on Rangers being ranged strikers then they will change their name to something more appropriate like "Archer". "Ranger" implies only a skilled and highly mobile expert at wilderness survival, and I would rather have had them drop the assumption of rangers as bow specialists. There are actually people out there now who think that the word "ranger" refers to ranged weapons!

I know Rangers are described as Strikers (and I agree with that part), but is "ranged" also confirmed? (I wouldn't mind melee focused rangers!). The Rogue and the Ranger ganged up on the Scout and took his stuff, who got the movement based skirmish damage? I'd think that would fit the Ranger better then the Rogue, and I think movement related abilities make most sense with melee.
(That said: Archery should always be one of the primary options of a Ranger, since that's an association I can't shake off. Maybe it's because of the "Range" in Ranger? )

 

[Cadfan]

Oh yeah, I also want a strong skirmish based talent tree.

My reasons are unusual though.

The 3e Scout is the best shuriken-throwing-ninja class possible in 3e. Its a class where you make one ranged attack per round, and you gain bonus damage. Going from a shortbow to a shuriken costs one feat, loses you two points of damage, but gains you quickdraw. If your DM will permit you to gain Shuriken Proficiency for free, its worth it.

I want to keep that option available on 4e.

Like I said, my reasoning is a bit idiosyncratic.

 

[Silvergriffon]

I know Rangers are described as Strikers (and I agree with that part), but is "ranged" also confirmed?

I don't have it with me right now, but I am pretty sure that the phrase "ranged striker" was used in Races & Classes to describe the Ranger.

 

[Armadillo]

I'd like the various aspects of the ranger to be separated out into different talent trees.

Bow mastery? One tree.
Two weapon fighting? Another tree.
Wilderness warrior? One more tree.
Animal empathy/companion? Yet another.
Spellcasting? Another tree, or perhaps specific power selections.

That way, everyone can have something close to the ranger they want without coming up with their own variants.

Definitely. The Thieves' World sourcebook from Green Ronin has a Ranger along these lines that also has trees for mounted combat and another melee combat style, but no spells (as is appropriate for the setting).