Besides, if the ability really bothers you, take Human as your primary enemy - you face plenty of them right?

I'm sure you do in Council of Thieves, but what do you propose one take in Rise of the Runelords where it seems the major enemy changes ever time you turn around.

With Favored Enemy a DM kind of has to go out his way to basically screw the Ranger over by making their favored enemy never show up for a fight. That would be like putting wizard into adventure where there is always magic dead zones so their spells are useless.

When it comes to prepackaged adventure the DM should inform the player of some suggested Favored enemies that are applicable to the adventure.

Favored Enemy is class feature not something that should be used to punish the Ranger.

The issue of Favored Enemies has come up before. Yes, it can be situational, but again, as has been pointed out before, the same argument could in theory be made of a Cleric that never faces undead not being able to use his channel ability, or a Rogue never encountering a lock or trap, or Paladin only ever encountering neutral enemies and not being able to use his Smite Evil ability. Honestly, Favored Enemy is NOT a 'broken' class ability.

Well, in almost all games undead and locks are common obstacles, but Aberations or Dragons might not be. EDIT: It's not that it's broken, it's just that there's a lack of choice that forces you to pick among a small number of common enemies.

Marc Radle 81 wrote:

The issue of Favored Enemies has come up before. Yes, it can be situational, but again, as has been pointed out before, the same argument could in theory be made of a Cleric that never faces undead not being able to use his channel ability, or a Rogue never encountering a lock or trap, or Paladin only ever encountering neutral enemies and not being able to use his Smite Evil ability. Honestly, Favored Enemy is NOT a 'broken' class ability.

Well, in almost all games undead and locks are common obstacles, but Aberations or Constructs might not be.

Absolutely. I was just trying to make a point. Besides, that's why I said if you are nervous about it or want to play it safe, go with Humans and then Undead etc.

Like I said, Favored Enemy IS a bit situational, but so are most class abilities to greater or lesser extents.

I can picture a player creating a Cleric and wanting to focus on the channeling positive energy / slayer of undead aspect of the class . He takes all kinds of feats to increase his abilities versus undead, picks his deity specifically because he gets domain powers geared toward this etc. The player is really excited about the character concept and can't wait to go down into ancient dungeons and crypts and start blasting undead. 6 months of gaming later and it turns out the DM is running a mainly city based campaign; the Cleric hasn't faced a single undead and is pretty disappointed. This situation could certainly happen, but it's not a flaw on the Cleric class, it's more of a disconnect between the player and the DM.

I just don't see the Favored Enemy ability as a problem. Some people may not LIKE it for whatever reason, and that's perfectly fine, but that doesn't make the ability broken. That's really the point I'm making.

Heck, I don't like bards much and particularly don't find the whole performance to buff etc aspect of the class very interesting or appealing at all. Doesn't make it broken - it's in fact a perfectly valid and flovorful class abaility ... it just isn't something I personally like. I see the Ranger's Favored Enemy ability the same way.

But "Channeling" has been changed from "scaring undead" to "exuding positive/negative energy" so it is now no longer situational.

Heck, I don't like bards much and particularly don't find the whole performance tobuff etc aspect of the class very interesting or appealing at all. Doesn't make it broken, it just isn't something I personally like. I see the Ranger's Favored Enemy ability the same way.

You not liking the mechanic doesn't make the mechanic situationally applicable like Favored Enemy is.

*evil dm voice* Oh yes, please, level to hit and damage to favored enemies.

*readies massive numbers of charm person's for the ranger with Favored Enemy (Human)*

But "Channeling" has been changed from "scaring undead" to "exuding positive/negative energy" so it is now no longer situational.

Yeah, sure, but it still deals damage to undead creatures (or heals living ones) so it is still to a large extent an ability geared toward fighting undead (as well as healing your companions) so it still could be called pretty situational. I think my hypothetical example is still perfectly valid.

I don't want to get mired in little specific arguments, honestly. I'm simply saying that, like pretty much any class ability, there are times that it comes into play and there are times it does not. The fact that a given class ability does not come into play all the time, or even most of the time, doesn't make it a bad ability.

Yeah, sure, but it still deals damage to undead creatures (or heals living ones) so it is still to a large extent an ability geared toward fighting undead (as well as healing your companions) so it still could be called pretty situational. I think my hypothetical example is still perfectly valid.

It previously didn't heal your companions at all, so if you wern't in an undead heavy campaign, it was useless. Now you can use it instead of blowing spells. Your example is not valid in Pathfinder because healing is only situational when you never get hurt.

Marc Radle 81 wrote:

Yeah, sure, but it still deals damage to undead creatures (or heals living ones) so it is still to a large extent an ability geared toward fighting undead (as well as healing your companions) so it still could be called pretty situational. I think my hypothetical example is still perfectly valid.

It previously didn't heal your companions at all, so if you wern't in an undead heavy campaign, it was useless. Now you can use it instead of blowing spells. Your example is not valid in Pathfinder because healing is only situational when you never get hurt.

Oh I know how it works in Pathfinder, thanks. My point was that a pretty big part of the ability (the part about dealing damage to undead) is lost if you never face undead. If you built your cleric around the concept of fighting lots of undead and then never face any, it's pretty clear the primary problem would seem to be GM - Player disconnect. This perceived Favored Enemy "problem" that a few people appear to have seems to be (to me, anyway) the same kind of thing. That's all I'm saying.

Look Cartigan, I've seen your posts in other threads and I am not interested in getting sucked into a back and forth argument over minutiae with you. I'm simply stating my opinion. I understand the rules very well, I promise, and I've played D&D for a long time, so I feel pretty secure in my opinion. You feel the Favored Enemy is too situational and therefore is a broken (or at least, sub-optimal ability). I agree that it can be situational but feel that it still is a very good class ability that adds a lot to the class. I'm sure there are people that agree with your point. I know there are people that agree with mine (in fact, just for fun, why not go back through this thread and read what everyone says if you'd like a small sample of where people's opinion would seem to fall on this?)

We both stated opinions - let's just agree to disagree and get back to having fun playing Pathfinder. Cool?

I always felt that the additional favored enemies chosen at later levels should always be as effective as the "primary" favored enemy level. In essence this allows a ranger to "grow with the circumstances". The favored enemy (plants) taken at level 1 is not so relevant at level 15+ - whereas taking favored enemy (dragons) isn't useful at level 1; but by the time it becomes useful a lot of time has been lost.

So, in short, all favored enemies should always have the "maximum" effect, rather than staggering later favored enemies.

I always felt that the additional favored enemies chosen at later levels should always be as effective as the "primary" favored enemy level. In essence this allows a ranger to "grow with the circumstances". The favored enemy (plants) taken at level 1 is not so relevant at level 15+ - whereas taking favored enemy (dragons) isn't useful at level 1; but by the time it becomes useful a lot of time has been lost.

So, in short, all favored enemies should always have the "maximum" effect, rather than staggering later favored enemies.

I agree with this one. In fact the first time read the Ranger in core rule book due to skimming I thought that was how it did work. But nope it's not. I think this could be nice fix for the ranger but not really need.

Now if you want to talk about hunter bond, that's need fixing. It's so useless it might as well not even be listed as a power unless you want to nerf you ranger.

"favored enemy" is a bad class feature, almost as bad as the cleric "turn undead" or paladin "smite".

What makes it bad is that it is in the hands of the GM as to when it gets used - much more so than other abilities. Actually, making it more powerful makes it less useful - because the GM is more prone to shy away from using the very monsters which make it useful (if you've ever seen a Sun Cleric in a campaign and the DM is hesitant to put Undead in the game for fear it'll make the encounter too easy, you know what I'm talking about).

If a ranger never sees his favored enemy then the DM is doing it wrong. It is the same as a paladin never seeing an evil opponent, or a cleric in 3.5 only seeing undead that are 1 hit die higher than he can turn with a natural 20 on the check.

All classes can expect to see a situation evey now and again where one of their tricks doesn't work right. Not ever monster can be hit by a sneak attack, nor is everything vulnerable to the wizard's favorite spell. However, if situations where class features are negated out of hand are the norm, then there is something seriously wrong with the game,

If a ranger never sees his favored enemy then the DM is doing it wrong. It is the same as a paladin never seeing an evil opponent, or a cleric in 3.5 only seeing undead that are 1 hit die higher than he can turn with a natural 20 on the check.

All classes can expect to see a situation evey now and again where one of their tricks doesn't work right. Not ever monster can be hit by a sneak attack, nor is everything vulnerable to the wizard's favorite spell. However, if situations where class features are negated out of hand are the norm, then there is something seriously wrong with the game,

I don't think you understand the psychology of what I'm talking about.

The GM is constantly tempted to say, "I know I need to add a monster of type X to the game sometime for this PC, but I don't want to add it in this particular encounter, I'll add it later".

People get hung up on what is "right" and what is "wrong" and it doesn't accomplish anything. Focus on what motivates people and what they are motivated to do. A GM can develop a fantastic encounter with cool tactics and an awesome setting and maybe even a cool piece of gear to pick up for the encounter and then, after spending all that work, he can populate that encounter with a type of monster which is going to make the encounter a cake walk for the PC, so that the player blazes right through it and goes on to the next encounter. Do you really think the GM is motivated to do that? Sure, they might do it anyway (and hate having to do it for a particular PC), but only because they feel obligated, not because they are getting any particular enjoyment out of it.
Again, people get hung up on what is "right" and "wrong", but you can understand social dynamics a lot better if you pay attention to motivation.

I see no problem with a Ranger encountering their favored enemy. All that does is make the ranger as useful. It's nothing to shy away from. In fact I find in my games if there is ranger with favored enemy they go out of their way to find adventure that deal with that enemy. So it's not like I have to even work that enemy into the adventure the player's character sets that for me.

You do have point if the power is not balanced to a point where it break the game then such a feature will be avoided by DM. I don't see that problem with the Ranger's favored class or the Paladin's smite.

You know - there've been a number of posts already, but I'm just chiming in about now.

I'm not exactly a fan of the Favored Enemy progression, BUT what if the bonus to hit/damage was a flat +1/2 Ranger Class level?

Additionally, what if the Ranger was able to simply add new "favored" at whenever he normally could, but there was NO difference at all in the progression (ie: new ones suffer the same +1/2 current ranger level bonus)?

Would either of those move towards "fixing" the feature?

It seems a small enough change to me - it won't equal the paladin's crazy damage out-put, or really anyone, mind you, but it does help out some and make the ranger shine in a way the ability doesn't really get many opportunities to at present.

It's almost stepping back towards the 1e days of full level to damage and a wide range of things it applied to (tone of one post I read somewhere anyway gives me this idea). Full level is on par with the Paladin, so that's too potent, but 1/2 level seems a good middle ground that keeps the ability scaling up with level and consistently relevant with the ability to add on more "critters" for full effect and use of the ability.

The following is only tangentially related to the thread subject. Spoilerized so it doesn't take up room.

-Skeld

Would either of those move towards "fixing" the feature?

The problem isn't that the bonus isn't high enough, it's well high enough. The problem is that the chance of running into the favored enemy is slim unless undead or human is chosen, in which case it's huge.

If the feature actually needs fixing (I'm not so sure), it should probably be a fix that makes it less circumstantial, not only stronger in numbers.
For example: At 1st level and every level beyond that, you gain three favored enemies known. At the beginning of every day, you can change your favored enemy prepared. You can prepare any of your known enemies, by refreshing your memory on them through reading/meditation/a few combat practices/whatever fluff you want for your ranger. You may only ever have one favored enemy prepared. The bonus is equal to the normal bonus for your highest favored enemy (2 + 2/5 levels).

Lets consider what all the Ranger actually gets.

The basics:
Full BAB/ d10 Hit Dice
6 + Int Skill points (15 skills all of which are nice except possibly handle animal)
Medium armor and shields (excluding tower) and all simple and martial weapons
Two Good Saves

6 bonus feats -- which he doesn't have to meet prerequisites for, one of which is chosen for him (endurance) which lets him sleep in his medium armor.

Spell casting -- Arguably one of his weakest class features however it does have several good spells on the list and at decent level too. His caster level is better than it has ever been before so that's a perk too.

Evasion, woodland stride, HiPS, Camoflage, Quarry, Improved Quarry, and Hunter's Bond, swift tracker, Tracker, Wild Empathy

And now we get to favored enemy and favored terrain.

I think with everything else the ranger does get, it's a bit understandable if these are slightly limited in some of there effects to only double the bonuses you get from weapon training (that also applies to several skill checks), and scope.

I've always felt that, for a naure-based/outdoor campaign or game, the druid and ranger (not necessarily in that order) are like Jordan and Pippen: very strong, and can often carry the rest of the team. But indoor/dungeon/non-nature campaigns or games, they are more like Rodman and Kerr: important role players (no, not like us) but not central, waiting their turn to be useful. Not sure if that's a bad thing or good thing, and of course it's a general rule I've observed, not always true.

Since the concept does exist for favored terrain, for which you get initiative and skill bonuses...a great addition, I think. It would be an interesting option to be able to throw your combat bonuses into terrain, as well, and not worry so much about favored enemies...the idea being that creatures you specialize in are more a function of the terrain specialty. So if you were a swamp specialist, you would kick ass agaist black dragons, lizard folk, and adders...but not blue dragons, minotaurs, or cobras.

EDIT: Unless you also chose desert or subterranean, for example...like favored enemy, you choose several favored terrains over your career.

As usual, Abe's got some solid points.

Still, there are people out there not liking the way it works (not me - I'm just playing devil's advocate and tinkering 'cuz I like that stuff).

What if, instead of Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain, it worked exactly as Carjay says - do away with Favored enemy outright (sacred cow the sucker!) and instead ran it the same way described in that ANY creature native to the environment selected is subject to the Favored Enemy bonuses?

Leave the progression alone, only apply it to the whole environment instead?

How would that mesh with/play with things for those that are dissatisfied?

Let me throw something against the wall and see if it sticks.

How about changing the ability so that it adds something other than to hit/to damage?
For example, each round, the Ranger can make a knowledge roll for the appropriate monster type. If he makes that roll, he can gain an extra move action. Of course, this would make an archer Ranger particularly vicious, so the DC of the knowledge roll will need to be set high enough.

You know - there've been a number of posts already, but I'm just chiming in about now.

I'm not exactly a fan of the Favored Enemy progression, BUT what if the bonus to hit/damage was a flat +1/2 Ranger Class level?

Additionally, what if the Ranger was able to simply add new "favored" at whenever he normally could, but there was NO difference at all in the progression (ie: new ones suffer the same +1/2 current ranger level bonus)?

Would either of those move towards "fixing" the feature?

It seems a small enough change to me - it won't equal the paladin's crazy damage out-put, or really anyone, mind you, but it does help out some and make the ranger shine in a way the ability doesn't really get many opportunities to at present.

It's almost stepping back towards the 1e days of full level to damage and a wide range of things it applied to (tone of one post I read somewhere anyway gives me this idea). Full level is on par with the Paladin, so that's too potent, but 1/2 level seems a good middle ground that keeps the ability scaling up with level and consistently relevant with the ability to add on more "critters" for full effect and use of the ability.

This. Heck I'd be happy with this even if you took the bonus to hit away, at level 20 you'd have a +10 to damage vs all favored enemies instead of just one.

I've always felt that, for a naure-based/outdoor campaign or game, the druid and ranger (not necessarily in that order) are like Jordan and Pippen: very strong, and can often carry the rest of the team. But indoor/dungeon/non-nature campaigns or games, they are more like Rodman and Kerr: important role players (no, not like us) but not central, waiting their turn to be useful. Not sure if that's a bad thing or good thing, and of course it's a general rule I've observed, not always true.

Since the concept does exist for favored terrain, for which you get initiative and skill bonuses...a great addition, I think. It would be an interesting option to be able to throw your combat bonuses into terrain, as well, and not worry so much about favored enemies...the idea being that creatures you specialize in are more a function of the terrain specialty. So if you were a swamp specialist, you would kick ass agaist black dragons, lizard folk, and adders...but not blue dragons, minotaurs, or cobras.

EDIT: Unless you also chose desert or subterranean, for example...like favored enemy, you choose several favored terrains over your career.

The problem with making it a favored terrain bonus is that, in some campaigns, it means the Ranger will gain his bonus against everything, all the time.

The Speaker in Dreams wrote:

You know - there've been a number of posts already, but I'm just chiming in about now.

I'm not exactly a fan of the Favored Enemy progression, BUT what if the bonus to hit/damage was a flat +1/2 Ranger Class level?

Additionally, what if the Ranger was able to simply add new "favored" at whenever he normally could, but there was NO difference at all in the progression (ie: new ones suffer the same +1/2 current ranger level bonus)?

Would either of those move towards "fixing" the feature?

It seems a small enough change to me - it won't equal the paladin's crazy damage out-put, or really anyone, mind you, but it does help out some and make the ranger shine in a way the ability doesn't really get many opportunities to at present.

It's almost stepping back towards the 1e days of full level to damage and a wide range of things it applied to (tone of one post I read somewhere anyway gives me this idea). Full level is on par with the Paladin, so that's too potent, but 1/2 level seems a good middle ground that keeps the ability scaling up with level and consistently relevant with the ability to add on more "critters" for full effect and use of the ability.

This. Heck I'd be happy with this even if you took the bonus to hit away, at level 20 you'd have a +10 to damage vs all favored enemies instead of just one.

So - this a "reasonable" fix for the dissatisfied then? Gain +10 to damage(level 20 example)vs all favored enemies?

Gambit wrote:

The Speaker in Dreams wrote:

You know - there've been a number of posts already, but I'm just chiming in about now.

I'm not exactly a fan of the Favored Enemy progression, BUT what if the bonus to hit/damage was a flat +1/2 Ranger Class level?

Additionally, what if the Ranger was able to simply add new "favored" at whenever he normally could, but there was NO difference at all in the progression (ie: new ones suffer the same +1/2 current ranger level bonus)?

Would either of those move towards "fixing" the feature?

It seems a small enough change to me - it won't equal the paladin's crazy damage out-put, or really anyone, mind you, but it does help out some and make the ranger shine in a way the ability doesn't really get many opportunities to at present.

It's almost stepping back towards the 1e days of full level to damage and a wide range of things it applied to (tone of one post I read somewhere anyway gives me this idea). Full level is on par with the Paladin, so that's too potent, but 1/2 level seems a good middle ground that keeps the ability scaling up with level and consistently relevant with the ability to add on more "critters" for full effect and use of the ability.

This. Heck I'd be happy with this even if you took the bonus to hit away, at level 20 you'd have a +10 to damage vs all favored enemies instead of just one.

So - this a "reasonable" fix for the dissatisfied then? Gain +10 to damage(level 20 example)vs all favored enemies?

I don't think it solves anything. You've -still- got the problem of the GM rarely throwing in a favored enemy.

I don't think it solves anything. You've -still- got the problem of the GM rarely throwing in a favored enemy.

Then we might have to go with a system where you create a "pool" of favorite enemies at 1st level, adding more at certain increments, and limiting favored enemies to times per day.

I remember discussing with someone back when 3.5 came out about an alternate FE for the ranger.

The idea was basically this. The Ranger at level 1 either selected Fixed Favored Enemy (which worked normal), or 'Variable Favored Enemy' which allowed them to 're-align' their favored enemy by studying the corpse of a downed enemy (deducing the right spots to hit, etc) combined with a Knowledge (Nature) or Healing check (depending on the corpse).

Now, instead of +2 they only got +1 for each bump, so the bonuses were cut in half, but they could change their layout at any time. Basically representing how much detail they could keep track of at one time.

Another alternate method we thought of was to allow the ranger to 'reallocate' his FE bonuses at each level up. He couldn't change his FE's, but he could change them so that if he had Human and Orc, he could put +2 into Orc and +4 into Human this level, and next level switch it the other way. As he went up in level, he had more to play with. So, if he was fighting a lot of orcs and humans he could split it evenly as a +3/+3.

6 bonus feats -- which he doesn't have to meet prerequisites for, one of which is chosen for him (endurance) which lets him sleep in his medium armor.

That's just over half as many as the fighter, but unlike the fighter he doesn't have to worry about the prerequisites -- he can just take what he wants from the list. That is a HUGE advantage in his favor.

Except it isn't. The list is limited between two forms of combat and include ZERO other feats not relating to those two forms. And you cannot switch back and forth. You have to choose a combat style then you can choose SOME feats in that combat style line. That is NOWHERE near the advantage Fighter feats provide.

And don't get me started on the extremely limited & barely applicable spellcasting.

PS. He only gets 5 specific style combat feats.

Cartigan I was counting total bonus feats, not combat specific ones.

You are correct he has to choose one style and stick with it... but then both styles have enough feats to fill all six slots without needing to take any feats that aren't good, and again you have more attribute points free since you don't have to have high stats in everything to qualify for all those feats (unlike the fighter).

You missed several points on the spell list, and there are enough spells on it that are good of each level to satisfy me personally -- I can always use Resist Energy, or Longstrider among others, and it still allows you to craft your own magical equipment without the master craftsman feat unlike the fighter.

Two good saves, bonus damage to specific foes, bonuses on terrain, evasion, spells, HiPS, bonus feats, more skill points...

Ranger has plenty going for it as it stands.

I don't think it solves anything. You've -still- got the problem of the GM rarely throwing in a favored enemy.

Well ... doesn't it at least take steps towards that? I mean, you've got what, 5 different enemies by level 5. Chances are you'd be varied enough to deal with something (unless the GM was a straight jerk about it).

I'm not feeling all that sympathetic to this particular complaint as many of the classes with significant damage boons like this have some pretty severe limitations on function/application of their bonuses.

If it's not evil, Pally can't do it, AND he's limited in uses/day; Rogues have to get a flat-footed target or they're bonus dmg is useless - or need a partner in a particular location to flank; why should ranger's get a pass on their limitation? Especially considering the myriad of other options and boons they've got going for them?

LilithsThrall wrote:

I don't think it solves anything. You've -still- got the problem of the GM rarely throwing in a favored enemy.

Well ... doesn't it at least take steps towards that? I mean, you've got what, 5 different enemies by level 5. Chances are you'd be varied enough to deal with something (unless the GM was a straight jerk about it).

I'm not feeling all that sympathetic to this particular complaint as many of the classes with significant damage boons like this have some pretty severe limitations on function/application of their bonuses.

If it's not evil, Pally can't do it, AND he's limited in uses/day; Rogues have to get a flat-footed target or they're bonus dmg is useless - or need a partner in a particular location to flank; why should ranger's get a pass on their limitation? Especially considering the myriad of other options and boons they've got going for them?

"evil" isn't a very limiting factor in most campaigns. I hope we can agree that it isn't nearly as limiting as "Construct", "Undead", "Fey", "Gnoll", or nearly every other favored enemy type.