31 réponses à ce sujet

[WhiteTiger]

I would like to give some benefit to the ranger class.

 

Any idea?

[WhiteTiger]

I thought about a new feat that can be picked from rangers to improve their aim with the bow. but my module is NO-HAK, so I can not create a new feat?

[Shadooow]

imo there is no need to boost him this way

 

you can:

- add some strong animals that can be lured with animal empathy so he can use them

- do not penalize ranger/druid XP (that much) for having dominated animal in party/animal companion

- allow ranger to skin animals/craft their skins/etc.

[henesua]

if you are a no hak module, Shadooow's suggestions are the way to go.

 

I added the following for our rangers:

Tracking feat automatically awarded at level 1 (selectable by other "wild" classes)

a few new spells that enable a ranger to better lead a party over difficult terrain

6 skill points per level

[WhiteTiger]

we have some strong animals in game. I was not sure that mastering an animal could cause XP penalty. to abstain this, would be necessary use SetXP() instead of GiveXPToCreature() for rangers/druids? And how so craft a skin?

[Terrorble]

Rangers have a few spells specific to them that can be modded without a hak.  Or, mod some of their spells to give a specific benefit for rangers.

 

A bonus AB via their OnEquip event when using a bow is doable.

 

I've done some work with traps to modify their DCs based on set/disable trap skill, trap quality, and class level.  It's certainly expanded that dimension of trap-using classes.

[MagicalMaster]

1. Allow them to dual-wield while in non-light armor.  I developed a system for that if you want it.

 

2. Boost DW slightly (which is incorporated into that system I mentioned).

 

3. Let them harvest wild items (only Druids/Rangers can do it).

 

4. Give them an item which lets them summon an animal "companion" at level 1 and then which you remove once they get the actual animal companion feat.

 

5. Can simply apply a bonus to bows or other weapons if you wish.

[Grani]

From my experience, rangers do just as good in melee as fighters. While they can't specialize in a weapon, Favored Enemy feats make up for that. Of course that applies only to fights in which you face your favored enemy, but if you take many ranger levels, you can pretty much have half of all races as your favored enemies and the bonuses for this are significant.

 

Still, what I didn't like about rangers, is that they inherently are no better archers than fighters. Rangers are trackers and hunters. It would seem almost obvious they DO know how to shoot well, better than a class focused merely on (melee) combat.

 

That's why in my module I've given rangers Shortbow Weapon Specialization at level 3 and Epic Shortbow Weapon specialization at level 25. This makes them inherently better archers than fighters (who CAN become just as good, but would need to waste two feats for this) and gives some value to shortbows, since there was really no reason to specialize and focus in shortbows rather than longbows before.

Other than that, I never saw rangers as inferior to other melee classes.

[WhiteTiger]

I like Terrorbles' idea consisting to work with OnEquip/OnUnequip events to add some AB to rangers using bow. However, I believe that other builds using no bows will become in disadvantage. We can not give an extra AB merely when equipping a bow. Would be interesting to make the player choose where he would like to receive extra AB (like in shortsword, rapier, etc.).

 

I thought of adding a skin to rangers after character creation with an Unique Power Spell and make him able to use it multiple times. Swiching the power, he receives AB using melee or bows. The problem is that you can not find your own skin and use its unique power. (or we could use a Player Tool -  can we see the feat this way? Do not remember)

[Terrorble]

If you want, I can show you the way to add +1AB to rangers when equiping a bow, then remove it when they unequip it.  Or, you can add a bonus for any weapon the same way.  You can make the bonus increase with ranger levels if that's what you're looking for.

 

I

[WhiteTiger]

I was inspired in your idea to give +2 AC (edited written wrong way, I would say AC) when equipping a bow and I came to a perfect solution. What about to give +"2" AC to rangers if they have weapon focus in the equipped weapon and if they are not using shields? Because they are able to defending better with the weapon focus 

[tobtor]

While I sympathise with trying doing more with the ranger-class, I dont think what they need is a combat bonus, and giving out +2AB (offense) or AC (defense) seem a bit high. Why should they be better at fighting whith weapon focus than others?

 

Instead maybe focus more on their role as rangers, that is their wildlife/survival skills. Let them find berries that for a short time boost their abilities or something else that has with survival in the wild as a theme. Perhaps boosting the trackless step feat at some point (like at level 8 or 12 or something) adding something like the barbarian fast movement (if possible, I have no idea how to modify anything, I am just suggesting) in wilderness areas. That would be very ranger-like (hunting down prey, running from enemies while stopping and sending arrows after them)

 

If combat bonus is aplied (AB/AC) is it possible to make it dependent on being in a wilderness area? To immitate that the ranger was better at finding his footing and using his surroundings in the fight. That way you would have rangers that "ruled" combat in wilderness situations, but was more average in towns or indoors.

 

So my basic thought is: if the ranger needs a boost, somehow tie it to something ranger-like.

[MagicalMaster]

The main problem rangers have is that they're basically just flat out inferior to fighters until favored enemies start racking up and you get the animal companion (if the module is low enough magic for the companion to be useful).

 

You can't go strength dual-wielding due to only being able to wear light armor, going 2H strength is just less powerful than a fighter, dex-dual wield is weaker at low levels and a fighter does just as well at it, and bow is the same as fighter.

 

Paladins/Barbarians get other benefits like Saving Throws and Rage while Rangers get nothing really useful.

[Grani]

The main problem rangers have is that they're basically just flat out inferior to fighters until favored enemies start racking up and you get the animal companion (if the module is low enough magic for the companion to be useful).

 

You can't go strength dual-wielding due to only being able to wear light armor, going 2H strength is just less powerful than a fighter, dex-dual wield is weaker at low levels and a fighter does just as well at it, and bow is the same as fighter.

 

Paladins/Barbarians get other benefits like Saving Throws and Rage while Rangers get nothing really useful.

 

You're right, though a high level ranger fighting against his favored enemy will fare much better than same level fighter.

Fighters have versatility when it comes to fighting, while rangers specialize. I do believe this is a kind of balance, too.

[WhiteTiger]

imo there is no need to boost him this way
 
you can:
- add some strong animals that can be lured with animal empathy so he can use them
- do not penalize ranger/druid XP (that much) for having dominated animal in party/animal companion
- allow ranger to skin animals/craft their skins/etc.

 
thats so natural solutions
 

The main problem rangers have is that they're basically just flat out inferior to fighters until favored enemies start racking up and you get the animal companion (if the module is low enough magic for the companion to be useful).
 
You can't go strength dual-wielding due to only being able to wear light armor, going 2H strength is just less powerful than a fighter, dex-dual wield is weaker at low levels and a fighter does just as well at it, and bow is the same as fighter.
 
Paladins/Barbarians get other benefits like Saving Throws and Rage while Rangers get nothing really useful.

 

players tend to pick up only a few levels of ranger (like max 20)

 

There are so many different races and the ranger can specialize in one, two, three... Hardly he will fight in advantage.

[WhiteTiger]

You're right, though a high level ranger fighting against his favored enemy will fare much better than same level fighter.

Fighters have versatility when it comes to fighting, while rangers specialize. I do believe this is a kind of balance, too.

 

Why are we comparing the ranger to fighter?

[Grani]

In low-magic settings, I disagree with you, White Tiger.
And in higher magic settings rangers still don't fare bad.

If we're talking about low-magic setting, levelling a pure ranger (or an almost pure ranger, like 36-39 levels) will give you the benefit of a not so bad animal companion.
And that's one reason to level a ranger, another being favored enemies.
Altogether, 40lvls of tanger will allow you to be pretty overpowered against 9 out of 25 races. If you're a PvE oriented ranger, you can focus on races common as NPC enemies, such as dragons, giants, etc.
If you're a PvP player, you can have all PC races as player characters and two more (which you can use to cover some popular polymorphs).

Even if one is to take only 20lvls, like you said, it's still five favored enemy races and +5 bonuses, which is definitely a worthy addition to any other 20lvls of melee class.
I do believe, though, that a ranger fares the best as a pure class in low-magic environments.

[Shadooow]

BTW Comparing rangefr to a fighter is really not right, also its bad idea to give anyone weapon specialization as a bonus feat because you can always multiclass with fighter - so doing this will break any combo with fighter for weapon specialization (15ranger/4fighter/1rogue etc.)

 

Pre-epic fighter has +2dmg on specialized weapon starting at level 4, +6 at level 21 with epic weapon specialization.

Ranger has 1 +1/5level dmg bonus with every weapon against 1 favored enemy/5levels and +2ab and +2k6damage with bane of enemies at lvl 21.

 

Against his favored enemies, ranger has much higher damage than figher. Of course, thats only against his enemies so anytime he fights something not specialized against he has no bonus which is quite bad. But even though there are lots of races, some racial types are more favoured than others. For example outsiders cover really big number of monsters, undeads are second huge category, while monstroust humanoids or beast and magical beast are very rare to encounter and contain only a few creatures.

 

Anyway, you can easily multiclass ranger with fighter as you need only 4fighter levels to get the most of him. Fighter is not viable pure class, rather than best class to multiclass with, while ranger is very good pure.

[Grani]

Well, I recently changed my mind regatding shortbow weapon sprcialization in my module. Rangers would no longer gain epic shortbow specialization as I said earlier (since I decided it would be too much of a free bonus), but I still give them shortbow specialization for free (at level 25 now, not to make rangers an inherently better choice for arcane archers).

I don't understand, Shadooow, why you think it breaks ranger/fighter builds. Rangers still don't get specialization in any melee weapon (or any weapon other than a shortbow, for that matter), so they will still need to multiclass to specialize in melee.

I've used this method with assassins and dagger specialization, too, but this is not related to this topic.

[Shadooow]

I don't understand, Shadooow, why you think it breaks ranger/fighter builds. Rangers still don't get specialization in any melee weapon (or any weapon other than a shortbow, for that matter), so they will still need to multiclass to specialize in melee.

I've used this method with assassins and dagger specialization, too, but this is not related to this topic.

if you give them the weapon specialization for free they don't have to multiclass in fighter / this turns out to be actuallz advantage for players of course, but fact is that multiclassing into fighter is no longer advantaging (to a point, of course if you trying to boost ranged combat, they will still might want to take fighter for shortsword etc.)

[WhiZard]

if you give them the weapon specialization for free they don't have to multiclass in fighter / this turns out to be actuallz advantage for players of course, but fact is that multiclassing into fighter is no longer advantaging (to a point, of course if you trying to boost ranged combat, they will still might want to take fighter for shortsword etc.)

 

Or they could get EWS through champion of Torm.  No need for a melee weapon then (except a melee weapon focus feat to qualify for COT).

[WhiteTiger]

What makes any class good is the possibility to pick a feat. This is the base of all classes. The difference is that there are different feats available to each one class

Modifié par WhiteTiger, 19 novembre 2014 - 05:02 .

[MagicalMaster]

You're right, though a high level ranger fighting against his favored enemy will fare much better than same level fighter.

Fighters have versatility when it comes to fighting, while rangers specialize. I do believe this is a kind of balance, too.

 

Hence why I said "until favored enemies start racking up"

 

But until Bane of Enemies Rangers are basically just worse.

 

 players tend to pick up only a few levels of ranger (like max 20)

 

Then they're doing it wrong, a level 35-40 ranger is extremely powerful -- at least 9 favored enemies with +2 AB and 16 bonus damage versus those enemies.

 

Why are we comparing the ranger to fighter?

 

Because fighters are viewed as the baseline -- they have no special tricks or traits, they simply get more feats (except for Weapon Specialization which is fairly minor).  Thus the question becomes "If you're just flat out worse than a fighter in most/all situations, why not just be a fighter?"  It's the generic comparison.

 

Altogether, 40lvls of tanger will allow you to be pretty overpowered against 9 out of 25 races. If you're a PvE oriented ranger, you can focus on races common as NPC enemies, such as dragons, giants, etc.

 

You can actually take even more favored enemies than that -- you get 10 Epic Ranger bonus feats alone plus 5 favored enemies pre-epic.  You'll likely take EWF/EP/AS with three but that means you can easily get 12 Favored Enemies if you wish while also getting Great Str VII and EWF/EP/AS.  And can drop a Great Str or two for even more favored enemies.

 

Fighter is not viable pure class, rather than best class to multiclass with, while ranger is very good pure.

 

It's a perfectly viable pure class unless you're balancing around Fighter 12s/Rogue 3/WM 25.  Is it slightly weaker?  Sure.  Is it still strong?  Yes.

[tobtor]

Magical master: while you are most likely correct in your points, I do wonder if you miss the point? Yes the ranger is "just flat out inferior to fighters" when it comes to fighting (at low lvls or against monsters not favoured enemy. But if fighters are not even to be allowed to be the best at fighting simple hand-to-hand combat (ok, they are not, I know...), what the point of the fighter? If you make the ranger as good as the fighter in combat, what is the point of the fighter?

 

I think ranger should have a different role, than the fighter. In a heavy combat module this is hard to do, because there are limited functions and they are already taken (damage-dealing, healers, someone to soak up damage and a wizards controlling the combat etc). But saying that a ranger is inferior to fighters in direct combat is a bit like saying a rogue is - of course it is. Rogues of course adds all the trap-stuff, lock-picking etc. So what is needed is to give the Ranger a unique role, not just bump up its AB and AC to equal it with the fighter

 

Here it is important to add useful animals for combat and quest solving (talking to them), and make the extra skill-points useful in the story somehow. Or add more ranger oriented stuff (hunting, tracking, etc.).

[MagicalMaster]

If you make the ranger as good as the fighter in combat, what is the point of the fighter?

 

I never said you should.  My point was that low level rangers lack the animal companion, spells, and favored enemies, so you go from low level rangers being much worse than fighters in most situations to high level rangers being much better than fighters in most situations.

 

In your example, the rogue doesn't go from being worthless with locks/traps at low level to being amazing at high level -- that's his role/advantage the entire time, in exchange for being weaker at combat.

 

If the ranger feat didn't limit rangers to DW in light armor only (and, like I said, I've made a script system to get around this limitation) and if they got their animal companion at level 1, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion   The problem would still exist (favored enemy going from +1 damage versus one enemy race at level 1 to +16 damage/2 AB to nine or more + races at level 40) but to a lesser degree.