Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CleverNickName" data-source="post: 9083889" data-attributes="member: 50987">The ranger is a confusing mashup of idioms and character concepts.&nbsp; Some folks think it should be more like Aragorn, others suggest it should be more like Legolas (Archery-focused, vs. Two-Weapon Fighting focus.)&nbsp; Others still would like it to be closer to Arwin or Geralt (with spells, or without.)So maybe a good way to handle it would be to keep all of the things these four concepts have in common (skill proficiencies, hit dice, save throws, proficiencies, favored enemy, favored terrain, etc.) in the core class, and then move everything else into four subclasses: two for spells/not spells, and two for archery/TWF:<table style='width: 100%'><tr><td></td><td>With Spells</td><td>Without Spells</td></tr><tr><td>Archery</td><td>A nature-themed archery subclass.&nbsp; Like the 
Arcane Archer, but with druid &amp; ranger spells.</td><td>A hunter-themed subclass (like Legolas maybe).&nbsp; A subclass 
that focuses on stealth, camouflage, and ranged attacks.&nbsp; The 
Hunter subclass as-written would be a good starting point.</td></tr><tr><td>Two-Weapon 
 Fighting</td><td>&quot;Witcher&quot; clones.&nbsp; Weapon experts with a magical 
origin.&nbsp; Like an Eldritch Knight, but with 
druid spells.&nbsp; Geralt maybe.</td><td>Woodland warriors.&nbsp; Wardens.&nbsp; Protectors of the forest, 
monster hunters.&nbsp; Aragorn.</td></tr></table>Move all of the spellcasting progression (if any) out of the core class, and into the Subclass: sort of like how the Arcane Archer and Eldritch Knight do it.&nbsp; For the no-spells subclass, give them fighter maneuvers and other non-combat features instead of spells.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CleverNickName, post: 9083889, member: 50987"] The ranger is a confusing mashup of idioms and character concepts. Some folks think it should be more like Aragorn, others suggest it should be more like Legolas (Archery-focused, vs. Two-Weapon Fighting focus.) Others still would like it to be closer to Arwin or Geralt (with spells, or without.) So maybe a good way to handle it would be to keep all of the things these four concepts have in common (skill proficiencies, hit dice, save throws, proficiencies, favored enemy, favored terrain, etc.) in the core class, and then move everything else into four subclasses: two for spells/not spells, and two for archery/TWF: [TABLE] [TR] [TD][/TD] [TD][B]With Spells[/B][/TD] [TD][B]Without Spells[/B][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD][B]Archery[/B][/TD] [TD]A nature-themed archery subclass. Like the Arcane Archer, but with druid & ranger spells.[/TD] [TD]A hunter-themed subclass (like Legolas maybe). A subclass that focuses on stealth, camouflage, and ranged attacks. The Hunter subclass as-written would be a good starting point.[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD][B]Two-Weapon Fighting[/B][/TD] [TD]"Witcher" clones. Weapon experts with a magical origin. Like an Eldritch Knight, but with druid spells. Geralt maybe.[/TD] [TD]Woodland warriors. Wardens. Protectors of the forest, monster hunters. Aragorn.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Move all of the spellcasting progression (if any) out of the core class, and into the Subclass: sort of like how the Arcane Archer and Eldritch Knight do it. For the no-spells subclass, give them fighter maneuvers and other non-combat features instead of spells. [/QUOTE]

Verification