What's a Monte Ranger?


log in or register to remove this ad

So, based on Tsyr's and mmadsen's comments, what do you guys think of the Favoured Terrain feat as I wrote it before? To recap, there are two options:

1) When in light armour or unarmoured and fighting in the favoured terrain, you get half your Dex bonus on every attack roll (this is based on the WoT woodsman); or

2) When in light armour or unarmoured and fighting in the favoured terrain, you gain bonuses as though you had 1/4 cover (+2 AC, +1 Reflex saves).

BOTH options also include a +2 competence bonus to Hide, Intuit Direction, Move Silently and Wilderness Lore while in the favoured terrain.

So which would you choose, then?
Honestly, I'd choose just the +2 bonus to the skills. I don't see how the to-hit bonus or cover-even-without-cover makes any sense. If you've got a Sneak Attack and you're in your Favored Terrain (which grants you a Hide and Move Silently bonus), it all works out; you fight better because you're more likely to gain surprise.
 

In my upcoming campaign, only elves will use the standard Ranger class...
And now that we've all seen the movie Legolas fight with two weapons quite a bit, I'm sure we'll be seeing more Legolas clones. Hey, at least they're not Drizzt clones! ;)
 

jester47 said:
He says nothing about the virtual feats. Granted they are not in the document. And I would agree that people should house rule it that the virtuals are not there. Still, it makes me wonder simply because he is talking about these changes explicitly and neglects to mention the change about the virtual feats which I think he intended to do. That is my beef.

In one of columns on his site Monte specifically stated that he intentionally left out the two virtual feats, and no I don't remember which one.
 

When Monte first posted his Ranger variant, 2-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity were included in the text. He quickly remarked that it was an editing oversight (I guess he cuts and pastes then edits) and removed them.
 

Remove ads

Top