Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is/should be the Ranger's "thing"?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6671091" data-attributes="member: 92511"><p>It certainly<em> could.</em> It would depend on the implementation. There is also the fact that the ranger, like the Fighter and the Thief, need to have 2 starting/level 1 features. Now, knowing your preference, I guess that would be Expertise and Spellcasting. FOr the non-spell-based ranger fans, it would need to be Expertise and something else.</p><p></p><p>If you are asking if "Expertise" could replace both Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy...I would say, then, say no. But "Expertise" in wilderness situations, perhaps called Wilderness Expertise (as in my own ranger write-up, if you'd give that a look <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /> ) is most certainly a reasonable feature for the class to have...imo. </p><p></p><p>My current iteration of the Wilderness Expertise feature for my ranger rewrite grants the ranger their Proficiency bonus added to Nature, Survival and Stealth rolls...in any terrain. In their chosen terrain, the prof. bonus is doubled. So, useful all of the time. Better/superstar in their chosen terrain. That work for everyone? No one's arguing against that kind of thing, it seems.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I suppose. Though I recall some unwritten/unspoken rule about choosing things like "humans, elves, etc..., [PC races]" as favored enemies. Not explicitly "not allowed", but in "bad taste/poor game sportsmanship". Naturally, that was several editions ago and modern editions don't give concern to such things.</p><p></p><p>I don't think you could make "an organization" their favored enemy. How do they fight "Mages" or "Thieves", "Clerics of Ool", "the Dark Paladins of Badguy", etc... I could see the classes becoming fair game. So, if you can fight thieves well...whether they're in a guild, or even specific singular guild, or not shouldn't really matter. </p><p></p><p>But, does it fit the flavor? Yeah, sure. I suppose.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See no reason why it couldn't be. So you could have 1 favored enemy and 1 favored terrain...or 2 favored organizations or 1 terrain and 1 organization, etc etc..., you mean? Yeah. Could be. <em>Should </em>be?...not sure about that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Based on the terrain? I would rather not go here. This kind of thing is better left to player wishes and common sense.</p><p></p><p>I am really not interested in getting into arguments over the coastal ranger player's assertion that they are able to swim in their armor...or that they're AC is not diminished being unarmored in the water...or why/how heavy armor has to do with arctic conditions/keeps them warmer...whatever/however that would go.</p><p></p><p>Just seems like...on its face, a cool/flavorful idea that...in practice would end up opening more unnecessary cans of worms than its worth. In other words, the opportunities/chances for abuse/argument/problems...overall "detracting from the game" will/would eventually outweigh whatever the feature is aimed to add.</p><p></p><p>But I could be wrong.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6671091, member: 92511"] It certainly[I] could.[/I] It would depend on the implementation. There is also the fact that the ranger, like the Fighter and the Thief, need to have 2 starting/level 1 features. Now, knowing your preference, I guess that would be Expertise and Spellcasting. FOr the non-spell-based ranger fans, it would need to be Expertise and something else. If you are asking if "Expertise" could replace both Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy...I would say, then, say no. But "Expertise" in wilderness situations, perhaps called Wilderness Expertise (as in my own ranger write-up, if you'd give that a look :p ) is most certainly a reasonable feature for the class to have...imo. My current iteration of the Wilderness Expertise feature for my ranger rewrite grants the ranger their Proficiency bonus added to Nature, Survival and Stealth rolls...in any terrain. In their chosen terrain, the prof. bonus is doubled. So, useful all of the time. Better/superstar in their chosen terrain. That work for everyone? No one's arguing against that kind of thing, it seems. I suppose. Though I recall some unwritten/unspoken rule about choosing things like "humans, elves, etc..., [PC races]" as favored enemies. Not explicitly "not allowed", but in "bad taste/poor game sportsmanship". Naturally, that was several editions ago and modern editions don't give concern to such things. I don't think you could make "an organization" their favored enemy. How do they fight "Mages" or "Thieves", "Clerics of Ool", "the Dark Paladins of Badguy", etc... I could see the classes becoming fair game. So, if you can fight thieves well...whether they're in a guild, or even specific singular guild, or not shouldn't really matter. But, does it fit the flavor? Yeah, sure. I suppose. See no reason why it couldn't be. So you could have 1 favored enemy and 1 favored terrain...or 2 favored organizations or 1 terrain and 1 organization, etc etc..., you mean? Yeah. Could be. [I]Should [/I]be?...not sure about that. Based on the terrain? I would rather not go here. This kind of thing is better left to player wishes and common sense. I am really not interested in getting into arguments over the coastal ranger player's assertion that they are able to swim in their armor...or that they're AC is not diminished being unarmored in the water...or why/how heavy armor has to do with arctic conditions/keeps them warmer...whatever/however that would go. Just seems like...on its face, a cool/flavorful idea that...in practice would end up opening more unnecessary cans of worms than its worth. In other words, the opportunities/chances for abuse/argument/problems...overall "detracting from the game" will/would eventually outweigh whatever the feature is aimed to add. But I could be wrong. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is/should be the Ranger's "thing"?
Top