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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is the Ranger to you?
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="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7626604" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>I strongly agree with everything in your post, but I want to point out that the Ranger <em>does</em> have an archetype and that's why it <em>can</em> be a class. Nothing wrong with a class-less system, but the Ranger works fine in D&D.</p><p></p><p>I don't blame the game if lots of people just look at the mechanics instead of looking at the bigger picture, think that the Ranger is just a bunch of lesser abilities, then proceed to envision an even more watered-down concept based on a couple of skills or weapon choices, and finally conclude there is no need for a Ranger in the game... it's a problem they created themselves. And pretty much the same thing can be done (and is done, in fact) on every class, see the periodic rambling about wizards and sorcerer begin too similar, druids should be just a kind of clerics, bards should be just multiclass combinations, barbarians should be just a background, paladins not much different than fighter/cleric... but all these are just part of the hobby of bored gamers to try and re-think parts of the games when they aren't playing it. </p><p></p><p>So it's not really that a class-based system is stupid, or that a class-less system is stupid. What is stupid is wasting time trying to turn a class-based system into class-less or a class-less system into class-based.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As I wrote in my post, for me the Ranger = Aragorn + spells.</p><p></p><p>Even tho I said Aragorn/Strider, I should have said Dunedain in general, not just a single character.</p><p></p><p>The spells addition to the Aragorn baseline is important because it tunes the archetype to the more magical world of D&D, compared to the less-magical world of Tolkien, and because it emphasizes the mystical-otherwordly nature of Rangers, thus strenghtening the archetype.</p><p></p><p>But it really matters which spells. If it was a subset of druidic spells it would not be good at all, and in fact when it happens, it dilutes the Ranger archetype into "part-time druid" and even forces some religious aspect which is not needed and just gets in the way. If it's a mix of different classes spells it's only slightly better, but still it suggests the Ranger is just scraping up random stuff from others, instead of having something of her own.</p><p></p><p>Have a more unique spells list as in 5e, and the Ranger herself gains a stronger identity. It's not anymore like the Ranger learning other's abilities here and there, it's everybody else who will not be able to do the same stuff unless they pick up a whole Ranger's life.</p><p></p><p>Then of course, allow multiclassing in the game, and you can just throw everything out of the window, but that's for another topic.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 7626604, member: 1465"] I strongly agree with everything in your post, but I want to point out that the Ranger [I]does[/I] have an archetype and that's why it [I]can[/I] be a class. Nothing wrong with a class-less system, but the Ranger works fine in D&D. I don't blame the game if lots of people just look at the mechanics instead of looking at the bigger picture, think that the Ranger is just a bunch of lesser abilities, then proceed to envision an even more watered-down concept based on a couple of skills or weapon choices, and finally conclude there is no need for a Ranger in the game... it's a problem they created themselves. And pretty much the same thing can be done (and is done, in fact) on every class, see the periodic rambling about wizards and sorcerer begin too similar, druids should be just a kind of clerics, bards should be just multiclass combinations, barbarians should be just a background, paladins not much different than fighter/cleric... but all these are just part of the hobby of bored gamers to try and re-think parts of the games when they aren't playing it. So it's not really that a class-based system is stupid, or that a class-less system is stupid. What is stupid is wasting time trying to turn a class-based system into class-less or a class-less system into class-based. As I wrote in my post, for me the Ranger = Aragorn + spells. Even tho I said Aragorn/Strider, I should have said Dunedain in general, not just a single character. The spells addition to the Aragorn baseline is important because it tunes the archetype to the more magical world of D&D, compared to the less-magical world of Tolkien, and because it emphasizes the mystical-otherwordly nature of Rangers, thus strenghtening the archetype. But it really matters which spells. If it was a subset of druidic spells it would not be good at all, and in fact when it happens, it dilutes the Ranger archetype into "part-time druid" and even forces some religious aspect which is not needed and just gets in the way. If it's a mix of different classes spells it's only slightly better, but still it suggests the Ranger is just scraping up random stuff from others, instead of having something of her own. Have a more unique spells list as in 5e, and the Ranger herself gains a stronger identity. It's not anymore like the Ranger learning other's abilities here and there, it's everybody else who will not be able to do the same stuff unless they pick up a whole Ranger's life. Then of course, allow multiclassing in the game, and you can just throw everything out of the window, but that's for another topic. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is the Ranger to you?
Top