Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kiznit" data-source="post: 916011" data-attributes="member: 3994">I say Ranger.And everyone thinks it's broken. Well, it is. Mechanically, the 3.0 ranger does totally blow. I've hardly ever even played one. But as a concept? It's the coolest!Almost all the best fantasy fiction has the hero playing a woodsy fighter with skills. We're talking skills here, not feats. Sneakin' around into enemy forts, shooting arrows at impossible distances, silently disappearing into the wilderness, living off the fat of the land, tracking lost companions, sometimes befriending (after wrestling to the ground) some hefty beastie. Yes sir. The loner. The ranger. Out of the wilds and able to handle anything. Woman swoon at the sexy leather and the guards don't even know he's there. And down the road you get a nifty spell or two without losing that BAB progression. The paladin is cool too, but is bound by that stick up his arse. The barbarian and the bard kinda have it going too for style, but I stand firm. The ranger always keeps his cool and never gets lost - put a dwarf in half-plate 20 feet out of his cave and he's wandering around in a daze, try to get the wizard's nose out of the spellbook, or the thief out of the city? ha.The ranger? Yes sir. Studded leather and a longsword for me. I hope the 3.5 version gives this undervalued and overstylish class the respect it deserves!</blockquote>