What's wrong with the single-classed Ranger?

How does being able to hide help the ranger? he gets no bonus than any other character in fact the stealth rogue pops up and hits you for extra xd6 while the ranger gets no particular bonus.

The basic ranger is no where near the archer that a fighter can be. the fighter gets bonus feats and weapon spec. in it. He can have all bow related feats way before the ranger. No matter how much you try and make it otherwise. However his hide skill will be useful when he has to run away because his summoned chipmunks have failed him at taking out that pesky cr 5 creature.


if you're playing a wilderness campaign sure he has some nice abilities but, that's where his advantage ends.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The problem, h4xor, is that you're trying to compare each of the ranger's facets to the class that does them best. Yes, fighters beat out rangers at fighting, they beat out everyone at fighting. Just as rogues beat out everyone at skills and benefitting from them. Just like druids benefit from naturey spells.

The ranger is 1/2 fighter 3/8 rogue and 1/8 druid. And that's not too bad. In general I think that makes a ranger about 7/8 as good as any of the "pure" classes, since the 1/8 druid really isn't helping out that much, but that doesn't include the ranger specific bonuses (minor as they may be). So on the whole, perhaps rangers are on level ground with the rest of the classes (except clerics).

I think the problem with the ranger is that it doesn't have enough style on its own. Paladins have ridiculous saves, special mounts, lay on hands, detect evil, and smite evil. That's a lot of style. Rangers have... favored enemies and a couple virtual feats. That's not a lot of style. I think they're balanced, because they have really good skills, they're just a little boring compared to paladins and bards (not that bards are breaking the balance tree here either).

-The Souljourner
 

i understand and agree souljourner, I've seen many alt rangers that fix the problems and make it just as good as any other core class. As written i see it was a weak attempt to force every ranger into that drizzt mold of a twfer in little armor and in 3e that will make you one dead character at most levels.
 

Rangers ... blah

It's not that ranger spells are worthless, it's just that they're nearly so at the rate they are given. Yes, you can tell me the virtues of hunter's mercy and entangle, but when those are your ONLY spells at level 7 I'm just not that impressed.

It's not that rangers are bad skills, they're ok. But they can't really support the int for high skills, and 3/4ths of their base points are already spoken for (hide, move silently, wilderness lore).

It's not that ambidexterity and TWF suck, it's just that they're definitely not amazing without sneak attack and being decked out with nice weapons. It's that the class gets three feats at level 1, and ever after only only has TWO special abilities, neither of which are that great. Both sides of that point to the fact that rangers end up being used for exactly one level by most any person who cares to min/max even a smidgeon.

Favored enemy is nice, anywhere from 1 to 3 encounters out of 20 or so. It's a toy ability. Fun to have, but only barely enhances the class.

All in all, everything measures up to being blah and mediocre. The class is forced. It gets arbitrary combat feats that don't really make sense. It uses other classes spells, and gets them really slowly. It has one unique ability that isn't very powerful.
If anything, it has no style. Sure, you can bring a lot of style to the class yourself, but you're not getting any help by the rules. There is a very broad selection of fiction featuring very interesting ranger types to draw on, and the PHB ranger hardly draws from any of it. In campaigns I've played in, I have watched several rangers struggle both to feel basically competent in combat, and to feel that their character had abilities that matched what they wanted their character to be.

It's no coincidence that on Icewind Dale 2 boards I have seen person after person give the same advice: 1 level in ranger is great, more than one is stupid. Min/max and balance really comes out in that setting and though the ranger was fairly faithfully rendered in the game, it just isn't up to snuff.

Monte's ranger goes on to have other problems. Firstly, it's overpowered. Secondly, it just tries to make up things for the ranger by giving it more. Not really interesting stuff, but just more feats, more skills, and more saves. To do the ranger right will require giving the class more original content and more inherent style.

---
StGabriel, the Taoist saint.
 

Kai Lord said:

A Ranger can max out his Hide and Move Silently skills and still have much more skill points than a Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Sorcerer, or Paladin. BAB of a Fighter, Stealth skills of a Rogue, plus spells and skill points to spare.

How did fighters, clerics, wizards, sorcs and paladins enter into a comparison of a ranger and a rogue?


Which is easier, preparing a few Stealth spells in the morning, or hunting down a Wand of Forestfold?

Hunting down a cloak and boots of elvenkind. Besides which, every stealth spell you prepare is one less buff spell that you might need if the sh*t hits the fan.
 

hong said:
How did fighters, clerics, wizards, sorcs and paladins enter into a comparison of a ranger and a rogue?

A grasping argument was made that by equalling a Rogue's Hide and Move Silently skill ranks, the Ranger was paying a great cost in skills, rendering him less than effective in any environment other than a vacuum. So the counterpoint was made that he still had more skill points than more than half the classes in the game. Got it?

hong said:
Hunting down a cloak and boots of elvenkind.

Good for the Rogue. Now he has a +10 to Hide and Move Silently compared to the +20 the Ranger gains to each skill from Forestfold.
 

Kai Lord said:

A grasping argument was made that by equalling a Rogue's Hide and Move Silently skill ranks, the Ranger was paying a great cost in skills, rendering him less than effective in any environment other than a vacuum. So the counterpoint was made that he still had more skill points than more than half the classes in the game. Got it?

So what? None of those other classes ever intended to compete with the rogue in terms of stealth. You, on the other hand, have lots of other things to do with your skill points, _and spell slots_, in addition to skulking around.

Good for the Rogue. Now he has a +10 to Hide and Move Silently compared to the +20 the Ranger gains to each skill from Forestfold.

I've never heard of forestfold, and frankly, I don't give a damn about it. Even if I did, the rogue can get a wand of forestfold as well.
 
Last edited:

How does being able to hide help the ranger? he gets no bonus than any other character in fact the stealth rogue pops up and hits you for extra xd6 while the ranger gets no particular bonus.

Picture this:

It is a cool morning. While savoring the delights of the last morsel of man flesh, the hill giant smiles as he wiggles his toes effectively smearing the dew and grass between them into a paste that mats his toe hair.

He thinks back to his mornings hunt for breakfast, thinking the bear he found would be easy pickins he caught sight of some smoke over the next hill. Apparently, there was a small group of rodent sized humans (well rodent-sized in comparison to his mighty bulk) that had the shame to walk in his hills without his permission and without giving one of themselves up first as last nights dinner. In a rage he charged the sleepy few into gorish mess. Picking up the peices he thought - what every smart hill giant would think - what an opportunity, they now know what happens when they go on my land without permission, and I just got myself some tastey breakfast.

Well, in the midst of his musings he was rudely and sharply interrupted with a searing pain in his lower back. It felt like a stirge had just pricked him. Reaching behind he could feel the shaft of an arrow sticking a few inches out of his thick hide. By the size he knew one of those pesky human peices must not have learned their lesson. In a snort of rage he screamed and turned around. Suddenly another arrow flew from cover of the foliage. The location of the infidel was obvious - that thick patch of bushes and trees maybe 100 yards or so away. unforutantely at that distance he could not make out anything specifically. As he began his charge forward to smite the pesky creature under his great club, another shot hit him in the shoulder.

THAT HURT!

He redoubled his efforts, in a matter of seconds he was there. He started rummaging through the foliage smashing trees here and there. WHERE WAS THIS PESKY RAT. He saw and heard nothing.

After a couple of minutes he gave up on his search. With a glance over his shoulder, he figured he must have scared the creature into submission, it was not the first time something like that had happened. With a hurrumph, he slung his club on his shoulder and began walking proudly back to his cooking fire - he still had desert - the really tiny human he had kicked. The one female in the group seemed to get really upset by this - maybe she wanted to eat him - who knows.

On his way back, he felt another searing pain in his back - now he was angry. He ran faster than before back to the glade. In a rage he literally tore the glade limb from limb. Only the huge mightly oak could withstand his blows. Another searing pain - this time in his side - but this was not a little prick. He looked down and saw a lightly armored figure removing his longsword from the giants kidney and with two more thrusts and a slice from his short sword, the giant lay eviscerated at the ranger's feet.

While sneak attack is incredibly useful with stealth, it is not the end all or be all of stealth - and it has a severe limitation within 30' for ranged attacks - meaning if you want to continue to hide you get a -20 to your roll where as the opponent only gets a -3 for distance.

The ranger can use stealth efficiently at range (as efficiently as a rogue, but has no incentive to get closer).
 

hong said:
I've never heard of forestfold, and frankly, I don't give a damn about it. Even if I did, the rogue can get a wand of forestfold as well.

Wow. Now that's a good point. How will I ever respond? Hmm, how about with "Which is easier, preparing a few Stealth spells in the morning, or hunting down a Wand of Forestfold?"
 

Kai Lord said:

Wow. Now that's a good point. How will I ever respond? Hmm, how about with "Which is easier, preparing a few Stealth spells in the morning, or hunting down a Wand of Forestfold?"

For the rogue? Hunting down a wand of forestfold.

It's either very easy, or impossible.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top