(D&D) What are Rangers to you?

gleichman · August 24, 2012, 03:24:12 PM

Quote from: Silverlion;576231I've got a game about that, someday I'll finish it, though it is a side project. Fantasy police procedural+SWAT+D&Dish universe run rampant.

Does it include Phoebe Cates? Because really, that's all that matters.

Oh, and Shadowrun beat you to it. Just run Lone Star characters.

Silverlion · August 24, 2012, 04:26:07 PM

Quote from: gleichman;576238Does it include Phoebe Cates? Because really, that's all that matters.

Oh, and Shadowrun beat you to it. Just run Lone Star characters.

Not yet. Maybe I'll make a Halfling version of her....

Elfdart · September 03, 2012, 07:39:49 AM

Quote from: jibbajibba;575096The ranger is just a fighter that lives in the wilderness.

They should have armour restrictions and in return get a set of bonuses or NWPs that relate to the wilderness. Survival, Tracking, Animal handling, Herbalism, etc. They should not get spells by default spells should be available to them to learn just liek they shoudl be available to fighters if they are willing to devote vast study to it and thus take a drop in their core martial progression. I don't think this needs to be done via multiclassing but by having a core mechanism that allows crosss skilling between classes at a cost.

They should probably focus on ranged combat as its far better for wilderness survival. Two weapons style make no sense for rangers and is much more fitting for gladiators, dualists and specialist figthers.

Aragorn is a ranger he has no spells. He has some herbalism.
Davy Crocket maybe a ranger.
Hawkeye is a ranger.

Exactly!

The druid spells given to rangers in D&D are meant to simulate the skills and traits that one might expect from a wilderness hero: first aid, understanding animals, having a wild animal for a pet, finding food/water, treating snakebites, etc.

The magic-user spells were meant to let PCs be like Aragorn: reading crystal balls and magical runes, etc.

Personally, I think rangers would work better as a fighter kit, just as paladins would work better as a cleric kit.

Quote from: JRR;575286bullshit snipped

You know LoTR by rote. Aren't you special?:rolleyes:

Elfdart · September 03, 2012, 07:46:40 AM

Quote from: Bill;575198I see Rangers as a hunter, wilderness expert flavored warrior.

Don't think they should have spells. (1E ranger had Mage spells..say what?)

Druidic spells make some sense, but I still don't like spell casting Rangers.

Drizzt should not have been a Ranger.
The writer kind of shoehorned the poor dark elf warrior into training with a blind ranger for no reason.

I actually like Salvatores books, but Drizzt was a perfectly good fighter character. Not a Ranger.

So you know the character better than the guy who wrote the book? Get da fuck outta here!

RPGPundit · September 04, 2012, 03:47:08 PM

I don't have a problem with the AD&D 1e ranger, but I have to admit its not my preference of how to present the class. I've never thought the addition of magic stuff made much sense.

So in Arrows of Indra, for example, you have the Scout (a fighter subclass), which is basically the "Ranger" of that game; and has no magical abilities.

RPGPundit

deadDMwalking · September 04, 2012, 03:49:19 PM

I see them as a one- or two-level dip to give my fighters some useful wilderness, survival, and tracking skills.

RPGPundit · September 05, 2012, 01:54:50 PM

Quote from: deadDMwalking;579758I see them as a one- or two-level dip to give my fighters some useful wilderness, survival, and tracking skills.

You sicken me.

RPGPundit

Sacrosanct · September 05, 2012, 02:05:18 PM

I remember when levels actually meant something significant. Not something you "took a dip into" to min/max your character. And when you actually had to find someone to train you, rather than instantly being granted a skill as soon as you "dinged".

deadDMwalking · September 05, 2012, 05:09:22 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;580082You sicken me.

RPGPundit

I know, but the 3.x Fighter sickens me. It can't DO anything. Rangers at least get some useful skills.

flyerfan1991 · September 05, 2012, 05:23:50 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;580087I remember when levels actually meant something significant. Not something you "took a dip into" to min/max your character. And when you actually had to find someone to train you, rather than instantly being granted a skill as soon as you "dinged".

Ugh. Even World of Warcraft is doing away with class trainers; you automatically get new skills granted to you. When I found that out the other day, I had more than a few choice words to say.

RPGPundit · September 06, 2012, 07:10:45 PM

Quote from: deadDMwalking;580143I know, but the 3.x Fighter sickens me. It can't DO anything. Rangers at least get some useful skills.

Well, LotFP's fighters are absolutely kick-ass.

Arrows of Indra's fighters will be pretty awesome too.

RPGPundit

Randy · September 24, 2012, 10:38:56 AM

I like my rangers like Aragorn.

Elfdart · September 25, 2012, 11:13:35 PM

There's only one true ranger:

And he can fuck up werewolves like no one else with those silver bullets.