D&D General Which Edition Had the Best Ranger?

[Minigiant]

Basically what we have here is people who want a ranger to be heavily armed and armored but can't give examples of rangers actually doing that, real life or fantasy, contrasted to an entire list of real life and fantasy examples where rangers and scouts are lightly armed and armored.

What you want are fighters who go outside. Not rangers. Not by what the word actually means, or what the class description says. Or the inspiration behind the class.

No, what we have is peoplewho want rangers to have the option of being heavily armored or heavily armed when it makes sense for them to be.

A fighter trains with all armors and weapons and specializes in the ones that work best for his or her abilities.
A ranger trains with all armors and weapons and specializes in the ones that work best to fight his or her favored enemies.

When it comes for the ranger's exploration half, their arms and armors shouldn't interfere with that. It's a fantasy game. The ranger should be able to sneak and track in heavy armor or over loaded or exhausted. If a base class feature is too much, make it a spell.

D&D has to start realizing that rangers have to be as fantastic as the rest of the game. Only 1e and 4e did this but it did so by toning down the fantasy a lot. 2e, 3e, and 5e were reluctant to do the same until they needed to boost sales and let go of the reins and unmuzzle rangers.

 

[Don Durito]

Ranger would never wear heavy armour.

Although I like that Rangers generally wear light armour.

However, I think the whole armour system in D&D needs an overhaul. The points made about it beings impractical for rangers to go around everywhere in heavy armour upthread are valid but they apply just as much to Fighters for the things adventurers do on a daily basis. Plate armour is for going into to war - it's not for trekking through the wilderness.

Plus you get the whole perennial thing about sleeping in armour, which I find myself forced to handwave, because if I made players take 10 mins to put on heavy armour just so they could have any AC at all, then I would have nothing but Dex based characters.

I think I'd prefer everyone to get the option to armour up when appropriate and to not always wear the heaviest armour possible when it's not.

 

[ph0rk]

Ranger would never wear heavy armour.

Looks like half plate to me

 

[jmartkdr2]

I think I'd prefer everyone to get the option to armour up when appropriate and to not always where the heaviest armour possible when it's not.

This would work really well if they had a convenient way to carry around extra suits of armor/garnitures while they traveled.

 

[Don Durito]

This would work really well if they had a convenient way to carry around extra suits of armor/garnitures while they traveled.

Horses? Mules? Camels? Yaks? For most of history these were just a basic part of travelling.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Horses? Mules? Camels? Yaks? For most of history these were just a basic part of travelling.

I've never seen a horse in a cave. I suppose it must be possible with the right cave, but everything I know about horses suggests it isn't a very reliable solution.

 

[Don Durito]

I've never seen a horse in a cave. I suppose it must be possible with the right cave, but everything I know about horses suggests it isn't a very reliable solution.

Then no plate armour - you're caving.

Seems reasonable - you just need the system not to cripple you for not having it. Save the plate for when you're defending the town from an Orc attack.

 

[Lanefan]

Either way, you're focusing on the combat part again. The reason scouts wore light armor and weapons was because mobility and encumbrance is the number one concern.

Speaking from some level of experience here. Put on heavy armor and a greatsword and go on a wilderness hike.

You mean, just like every Fighter does every day when the party's travelling cross-country?

You'll ditch that stuff in a hurry, regardless of what you may encounter just like a modern scout platoons has more mobile vehicles than an M1A1 even though they can expect to face enemy battle tanks themselves. Just like the fictional ranger class, they take on and beat these larger opponents via hit and run, quick strikes, and ambushes. Not face to face slugfests.

If you want a heavily armed warrior, play a fighter.

Wondered how long it'd take someone to say this.

What I'm after is the heavy-Ranger concept. 1e did it just fine. No reason why it can't exist in more recent editions, provided Rangers are seen more as warriors-with-extras than light scouts and-or wilderness Rogues.

 

[Lanefan]

Plus you get the whole perennial thing about sleeping in armour, which I find myself forced to handwave, because if I made players take 10 mins to put on heavy armour just so they could have any AC at all, then I would have nothing but Dex based characters.

I'd never handwave this. Get attacked while you're sleeping? You're in trouble - you can either spend several minutes donning your heavy armour, or you can spend one action grabbing and donning your shield, or you can stand in unarmoured.

The heaviest normal armour I allow anyone to sleep in is leather; if someone's rich (or lucky!) enough to have mithril chain they can also sleep in that.

I think I'd prefer everyone to get the option to armour up when appropriate and to not always wear the heaviest armour possible when it's not.

I've had characters carry a spare suit of leather for light work - it's not that heavy. That said, packhorses and-or Bags of Holding are your friends.

 

[S'mon]

Basically what we have here is people who want a ranger to be heavily armed and armored but can't give examples of rangers actually doing that, real life or fantasy