What's wrong with the single-classed Ranger?

[Crothian]

Montes Ranger is ridiculous from a balance standpoint. Monte even stated that he wouldn't put his Ranger in the PHB if he could. Two good saves, spells, only three less bonus feats than a Fighter, a good skill list, tons of skill points, full Fighter BAB, all for just one less average hp per level when compared to a Fighter. Bleah. [/B]

Actually, it holds up pretty well. I'm not a better combat person then the fighter, and the rogue can still out sneak me. I've found both version to work very well.

 

[Pax]

Interesting. I never pictured Aragorn with black skin and white hair.

And in fact, Aragorn never wielded TWO swords. Ever.

Which is why the 1E, pre-UA ranger class did NOT get dual-wield ... and was based directly on Aragorn.

 

[Kai Lord]

And in fact, Aragorn never wielded TWO swords. Ever.

And who says the PHB Ranger has to? Nothing in the description states Rangers have an affinity for two-weapon fighting or take any time to train with that style. They simple have a talent for it, presumably as a by-product for being so in touch with their surroundings.

Which is why the 1E, pre-UA ranger class did NOT get dual-wield ... and was based directly on Aragorn.

And its still a template for Aragorn. Take Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Bastard Sword and Favored Enemy: Orcs to be followed up by Hobgoblin (Uruk-hai) and voila, enter Isildur's heir.

 

[Christian]

I've posted this comparison before, but I guess I'll do it again. The problem with the MC ranger isn't the power of a pure member of the class. It's that the front-loading problem, which is IMO the worst problem of the PH class, is made worse by Monte's version.

Here's an example that should be really easy to follow. Consider a character who takes one level of the MC Ranger class, then switches to Fighter, to one who is a straight Fighter. The character gives up:

• 2 hit points
• 1/3 of a point of Will save
  [/list=a]
  
  He gains:
  • a point and two-thirds of Reflex save
  • a point and a half of Fortitude save
  • half a fighter bonus feat
  • sixteen skill points
  • an improved list of class skills (for purposes of maximum skill ranks)
  • the track feat
  • one favored enemy
  • the ability to use wands of spells on the ranger list
    [/list=a]
    
    What possible reason could someone have to play a straight fighter when Monte's ranger is allowed in a campaign?!

 

[Crothian]

What possible reason could someone have to play a straight fighter when Monte's ranger is allowed in a campaign?!

Because a level of ranger doesn't fit the character. It's not all about min maxing you know.

 

[Christian]

It isn't?



Seriously, I know that. Still, the idea behind class balance includes defending against the munchkins ...

 

[Crothian]

It isn't?



Seriously, I know that. Still, the idea behind class balance includes defending against the munchkins ...

I don't think is should. If these type of people are abusing the class, then it's the people at fault and not the class.

 

[melkoriii]

I've posted this comparison before, but I guess I'll do it again. The problem with the MC ranger isn't the power of a pure member of the class. It's that the front-loading problem, which is IMO the worst problem of the PH class, is made worse by Monte's version.

Here's an example that should be really easy to follow. Consider a character who takes one level of the MC Ranger class, then switches to Fighter, to one who is a straight Fighter. The character gives up:

• 2 hit points
• 1/3 of a point of Will save
  [/list=a]
  
  He gains:
  • a point and two-thirds of Reflex save
  • a point and a half of Fortitude save
  • half a fighter bonus feat
  • sixteen skill points
  • an improved list of class skills (for purposes of maximum skill ranks)
  • the track feat
  • one favored enemy
  • the ability to use wands of spells on the ranger list
    [/list=a]
    
    What possible reason could someone have to play a straight fighter when Monte's ranger is allowed in a campaign?!

• • 
    
    I Totaly Agree!

 

[Chun-tzu]

I agree that Monte's Ranger isn't perfect, either. As I said, it's much more customizable, and that's something I want to see in ALL the core classes, not just the Ranger.

There IS something to the argument that Monte's Ranger takes a little more away from the Fighter. But it doesn't seem to go too far in that, from my perspective. Monte's Ranger isn't going to make the Fighter an endangered species. The bonus feats make the Ranger better in combat, but he's still not a match for the Fighter.

Would I be bothered terribly by players taking just one level of Monte's Ranger? No. At higher levels, it's insignificant. At lower levels, it's certainly more annoying, but I don't have a major problem with it.

 

[Celtavian]

Re

Class gives abilities that often don't apply in most modules for more than a few encounters.

Favored enemy rarely has a great effect. Track rarely has a significant effect. Skill points are too low. Two-weapon fighting really isn't all it's cracked up to be.

I haven't had a single player in the entire time I have been playing 3rd edition play a single class ranger, not one. I have been playing since the game came out, 2 years I guess from what you posted. There have been plenty of multi-classed rangers, but not one single-class ranger. There is not much of a compelling reason in my opinion to play a single-class ranger.

You lose out on feats. The Favored Enemy special ability really isn't that great. Ranger spells are not the best around either even with the release of Magic of Faerun. It is just not a very compelling class.

I am really hoping more folks play single-class rangers with the modifications I made to the Favored Enemy ability.