|
This was mentioned in another thread and I thought it might be interesting to explore it further.
We all know the classic "monsters killed my family and burned my village" motivation. Yes it has been overused as a justification, but it is still powerful when used properly.
Two of my other favorite motivations to justify having a favored enemy are bounty hunter and soldier. One of my rangers cut his teeth is the wars against the greenskins so Orc was a natural favored enemy choice. Another is essentially a half-elf manhunter.
What ingenuitive and creative ways have you used or seen used to explain a ranger's favored enemy?
Shane
Racist lunatic.
raving Leprechaun ranger loads his crossbow with a click when asked why he took all of the humanoid favored enemies and shouts "Why?..BECAUSE THEIR ALWAYS AFTER ME LUCKY CHARMS!!!!!"
seriously though you could draw inspiration from other places I like the I am one of them/spent time with them option that you would see maybe from the movie that shares the same name of our beloved roleplaying game, or avatar or if the fellow Nathan from the last samurai decided to turn on the samurai, maybe you were their captive for a while, maybe granpappy lost his leg in the ooze wars, maybe just because they smell funny.
favored enemies implies a lot of time spent studying your foe, perhaps you don't hate them at all maybe you are fascinated with them and have just happened to pick up on their weakness through your pursuit of them.
|
Half elven Ranger grew up feeling like a second-class citizen raised in the village with his elvish mother, a recipient of pity and condescencion from the full blooded elves. He grew up despising his human father for tainting him with this cursed human blood, making him less than his pure-blooded elven kin, and an embarrassment to his mother. She never said as much, but he could see the sad look in her eyes when she thought he wasn't looking.
His first favored enemy was humans, and he hoped that his father was still alive, having convinced himself that if he could plant an arrow in the despoiler's heart, he could somehow kill the humanity within himself, and prove himself to be fully elven in spirit, if not in blood.
When he succeeded at this mad quest, and brought his father's head back to throw into the gathering of elves who had treated him like a leper all of those years, only to see the revulsion and horror in their eyes, he chose his second favored enemy.
Elves.
|
|
As a young gnome, there were three obvious choices; Kobolds (humanoid - reptilian), Goblinoids or Giants.
Taking the obvious choice is the true sign of a bleachling waiting-to-happen, so you picked Aberrations and then Magical Beasts. That way, no matter what sort of crazy creature you found yourself facing, it would always be new and fascinating!
|
|
You could always follow the philosophy angle. I strive to be the best in one on one combat, so although I am human, my 1st favored enemy is human. That angle almost removes the enemy from favored enemy and treats it as special training to combat a specific class of foe - one which you have no malice against, just need to be able to defeat.
Racist lunatic.
Seriously, where can I nominate this guy for funniest poster on the Paizo boards?
...moving right along
I always figured Favored Enemy was just someone you dealt with all the time. It's not like you HAVE TO intensely hate them, you just kind of are an expert in them. I mean, FE Human is arguably the best overall if you don't know the scenario, right? Well, it also makes the most sense since a lot of people would be interested in knowing how to off a human, since they're so bloody prevalent. Blasted cockroaches.
|
My main character in PF Society started out as a barbarian, but after facing so many undead in his first scenarios, he decided that he needed to learn how to fight them... thus a level of ranger. His very next mission dealt with a trap-filled tomb... and a rogue companion that had zero ranks in Disable Device ("I'm not that kind of rogue.") So now he has determined to never fall into that kind of situation again... prompting him to learn the path of the rogue.
His whole build has been rather organic, to date.
One time I played a few sessions in 3.0 as a kobold sorcerer/ranger with favored enemy: dragons just b/c he was the ultimate fanboy of dragons and wanted to become JUST LIKE them. So he got some understanding of them that way.
How about a Ranger with a "The Most Dangerous Game" angle? He doesn't HATE his favored enemy, he admires and respects them greatly, but believes that in order to prove himself the greatest hunter of all, he must be able to defeat them. Such a character would of course have to pick something really scary as his FE.
|
|
How about a Ranger with a "The Most Dangerous Game" angle? He doesn't HATE his favored enemy, he admires and respects them greatly, but believes that in order to prove himself the greatest hunter of all, he must be able to defeat them. Such a character would of course have to pick something really scary as his FE.
For the few rangers I've played, I followed this angle and picked favored enemy Outsider(Evil) and favored enemy Dragon. Those two have some of the scariest high end crap in the game. Nothing like an enemy that is a better fighter than a fighter whilst being as good of a caster as the sorcerer, having more health than the barbarian and better saves than the monk.
In a setting I've been putting together for an edition-neutral (somewhat) game:
Half-orcs, humans, and half-elves typically take either elves or orcs as their enemy. All three - especially half-orcs - come from the Ravorian Imperial Army, where the two biggest threats to the country are either unallied elf slavers or orcish warbands.
Elves tend to take Humans, or Undead. Since the Shattering (a big setting-destroying event that happened in the past), elven jungles are rife with undead. Humans for above mentioned reasons.
Halflings and shifters strongly take Magical Beasts or animals, as they two live together as islanders, only their islands float in the sky since the Shattering - not much on the islands that are a threat. They also have giant flying whales tamed.
Dwarves and gnomes take the other. Only with the Shattering did their ages long war against each other end, and the two now fading kingdoms lie in a state of cold war, with Ravorian diplomats and merchants trying to engage in trade on both sides. Dwarves also lean against constructs (due to gnomish arcane engineering), and gnomes lean against fire and earth Outsiders (due to dwarven summoning rituals).
ALL races, if they don't pick the above, usually take aberrations or fey. Most fey that exist now are berserk and uncontrollable beasts, and aberrations have been appearing more and more commonplace and need to be exterminated.
My half-elf ranger has taken favored enemy human and undead so far.
Human because he's taken so many human bounties it's fairly easy to read them, track them, predict their tactics, etc. Plus, humans can be so frail. A shot between the ribs to the lungs, just the right amount of force to the neck, slicing major arteries on the legs...he's gotten good at killing them. Not because he hates them. Just because practice makes perfect.
Undead because he figures anything that's devoted to snuffing out the flame of life isn't likely to listen to reason, so it's generally best to just put them back in the ground as soon as possible.
|
just curious- given no setting info, no warning- what are the 5 MOST encountered enemies in Golarion?
So as to make a ranger effective against the widest range of enemies.I'm thinking
1- Human
2- Monsterous Humanoid
3- Giants (only +2 here since giants have lower ac's for their CR)
4- Abberations
5- Magical BeastsWhat are your preferences and order?
Probably
1 Human2 Undead
3 Giants
4 Magical Beast
5 Outside(evil)
Probably in that order but 3 and 4 might swap depending on the campaign.
As for why my character picks a particular FE, it just depends. It's often just simple expedience, this is the most dangerous creature I've bumped into.
Paranoia. In an evil mini-campaign some years ago, I played a mad elven ranger that was sure all animals (especially canines!) were after him. He also had some issues with voices in his head, animal voices.
I had a human, silver-dragon descended(from UA) ranger in Greyhawk who's Favored Enemy was Dragons; not out of spite, but from years of studying them in trying to learn more about his heritage. He even had ranks in Knowledge: Arcana. He was simply more effective against them, because he had spent so much time studying their ecology. Eventually he was granted a wish, and used it to become a half-silver dragon.
I had a human, silver-dragon descended(from UA) ranger in Greyhawk who's Favored Enemy was Dragons; not out of spite, but from years of studying them in trying to learn more about his heritage. He even had ranks in Knowledge: Arcana. He was simply more effective against them, because he had spent so much time studying their ecology. Eventually he was granted a wish, and used it to become a half-silver dragon.
Interesting to me that a fair number of posters here seem to be trying to invent justifications for taking FE Human, as they believe it will be the most useful over the long run (and I would say they are generally right in that regard, although some campaigns may differ). To me this is a clear example of starting with the mechanics and then trying to form a story around it.
Here's a thought. Why don't you start with your character's backstory and then create the mechanics around it? I think you'll end up with more unique and memorable character that way, rather than one of a million cookie-cutter rangers with FE Human.
I had a ranger that hated the undead because she was turned into one. She was a vampire for a while, died, and got resurrected. She hunted them forever after. Her other favored enemies were various critters or organizations that ticked her off. She formed an adventuring band opposed to Zhentarim expansion into the Savage Frontier, got captured and tortured by Sememmon (Zhentarim); fought against an orc horde that descended and hit the High Forest (Humanoid: orc), saw her first husband die when ambushed by a cadre of Red Wizards; watched her second husband die to a dracolich during the Rage of Dragons. Wasn't real fond of the Cult of the Dragon at that point either.
|
|
1) Human
2) Abberation
3) Evil Outsider
I pick both for frequency and fear factor; aberrations are top tier encounters; and mid-to-low highs most campaigns revolve around evil outsiders. Humans are always pests.
As to "why" there doesn't really have to be a hateful reason; you study them to know how to beat them.
I had a human, silver-dragon descended(from UA) ranger in Greyhawk who's Favored Enemy was Dragons; not out of spite, but from years of studying them in trying to learn more about his heritage. He even had ranks in Knowledge: Arcana. He was simply more effective against them, because he had spent so much time studying their ecology. Eventually he was granted a wish, and used it to become a half-silver dragon.Interesting to me that a fair number of posters here seem to be trying to invent justifications for taking FE Human, as they believe it will be the most useful over the long run (and I would say they are generally right in that regard, although some campaigns may differ). To me this is a clear example of starting with the mechanics and then trying to form a story around it.
Here's a thought. Why don't you start with your character's backstory and then create the mechanics around it? I think you'll end up with more unique and memorable character that way, rather than one of a million cookie-cutter rangers with FE Human.
Well, a lot of DM's frown upon players making up their own game mechanics. Not sure why you quoted me, since I didn't take FE Human like in your explanation, and my FE was based purely upon background info, not game advantages...
Interesting to me that a fair number of posters here seem to be trying to invent justifications for taking FE Human, as they believe it will be the most useful over the long run (and I would say they are generally right in that regard, although some campaigns may differ). To me this is a clear example of starting with the mechanics and then trying to form a story around it.
Here's a thought. Why don't you start with your character's backstory and then create the mechanics around it? I think you'll end up with more unique and memorable character that way, rather than one of a million cookie-cutter rangers with FE Human.
Well, some of have done that. That is, created our backstory and took the favored enemy that seemed to be the most appropriate choice. Sometimes that means that the FE will be humans.
In my case, I have a ranger/mage who took FE: Human. His backstory indicated that he wanted to be a Korvosan Guard or Sable Company Marine (his preference) when he grew up. As the only real enemy that those two groups have fought against have been the Shoanti Tribes (humans), his obvious choice was humans.
Well, a lot of DM's frown upon players making up their own game mechanics. Not sure why you quoted me, since I didn't take FE Human like in your explanation, and my FE was based purely upon background info, not game advantages...I had a human, silver-dragon descended(from UA) ranger in Greyhawk who's Favored Enemy was Dragons; not out of spite, but from years of studying them in trying to learn more about his heritage. He even had ranks in Knowledge: Arcana. He was simply more effective against them, because he had spent so much time studying their ecology. Eventually he was granted a wish, and used it to become a half-silver dragon.Interesting to me that a fair number of posters here seem to be trying to invent justifications for taking FE Human, as they believe it will be the most useful over the long run (and I would say they are generally right in that regard, although some campaigns may differ). To me this is a clear example of starting with the mechanics and then trying to form a story around it.
Here's a thought. Why don't you start with your character's backstory and then create the mechanics around it? I think you'll end up with more unique and memorable character that way, rather than one of a million cookie-cutter rangers with FE Human.
Apologies. I hit reply instead of new post by accident and then sloppily didn't notice it.
To clarify, I wasn't referring to creating new mechanics, just to choosing your FE based on your backstory, rather than the other way around. I could have been clearer.
Interesting to me that a fair number of posters here seem to be trying to invent justifications for taking FE Human, as they believe it will be the most useful over the long run (and I would say they are generally right in that regard, although some campaigns may differ). To me this is a clear example of starting with the mechanics and then trying to form a story around it.
Here's a thought. Why don't you start with your character's backstory and then create the mechanics around it? I think you'll end up with more unique and memorable character that way, rather than one of a million cookie-cutter rangers with FE Human.
Well, some of have done that. That is, created our backstory and took the favored enemy that seemed to be the most appropriate choice. Sometimes that means that the FE will be humans.
In my case, I have a ranger/mage who took FE: Human. His backstory indicated that he wanted to be a Korvosan Guard or Sable Company Marine (his preference) when he grew up. As the only real enemy that those two groups have fought against have been the Shoanti Tribes (humans), his obvious choice was humans.
Fair enough. I'm just a bit tired of players taking FE human for the sole reason that it is likely the best choice mechanically. I actually wish that it were not an option, to force people to be a little more unique and creative. However, I suppose tha same player who is always looking for the most mechanical advantage is just going to pick the next best FE mechanically then.
My last ranger's favored enemy was Animals. Because she was a hunter, see.
(Sorry. I know I'm very boring.)
Every time I see this thread in the listing, I can't help hearing the following...
OH, my ranger has a first enemy, it's O.S.C.A.R.
My ranger has a second enemy, it's M.A.Y.E.R.
;)
|
|
Fair enough. I'm just a bit tired of players taking FE human for the sole reason that it is likely the best choice mechanically.
Make it not the best choice. Mix up your palette of low-level encounters. There's plenty of room for animals, goblinoids, reptilian humanoids (kobolds, lizardfolk, etc.), gnolls, a few monstrous humanoids, vermin (an Aliens-esque 'bug hunt' in a giant ant warren, to rescue some kidnapped people, can be fun at 1st level) and / or undead at the lower levels. Just include some humans, too. No reason to punish the player for playing the game.
Seriously, where can I nominate this guy for funniest poster on the Paizo boards?
How about here?
|
|
FE humans makes the most sense in most worlds; you train to beat what you fight the most. In their city starts most PCs have seen few humans. You don't hav to justify too much beyond that. Rangers are fairly underpowered as it is; you don't want to nerf it further by picking an obscure enemy and never using the power.
Because one day... long ago... someone looked at him funny.
|
|
FE humans makes the most sense in most worlds; you train to beat what you fight the most. In their city starts most PCs have seen few humans.
For a rural Ranger, as a woodsman and hunter and tracker, Animals might be the most logical choice for a first favored enemy, to provide meals for the table.
For an urban 'city ranger' bounty hunter, Human all the way, but how many Rangers really grow up in cities?
For a village that is the frequent target of goblin raids, goblinoid. Ditto reptilians and kobold raids.
But the game does allow a 1st level Ranger to start with favored enemy dragons, which suggests that one doesn't have to actually ever fight a member of one's favored enemy to learn from more experienced hunters how to most effectively deal with them. It might be 10 levels before you meet a dragon, and hopefully you member the the lessons old Hrofi Scorcheye taught you about waiting to fire until after the beast has turned and you can send an arrow under the scale, instead of shooting too soon and seeing the arrow bounce off harmlessly...
My ranger's backstory was that he was a hunter for hire for poor farmers, killing wolves and other predators. So he took favored enemy animal.
Every time I see this thread in the listing, I can't help hearing the following...
OH, my ranger has a first enemy, it's O.S.C.A.R.
My ranger has a second enemy, it's M.A.Y.E.R.
;)
But does that mean your favored enemy is the employees or the company, some guy named oscar, or low quality cold cuts?
Fair enough. I'm just a bit tired of players taking FE human for the sole reason that it is likely the best choice mechanically. I actually wish that it were not an option, to force people to be a little more unique and creative. However, I suppose tha same player who is always looking for the most mechanical advantage is just going to pick the next best FE mechanically then.
The issue with favored enemy is it is already situational, and if you dont have any hints from your dm it means both the mechanical side and the backstory side may not come up. It sucks both ways. If you create a backstory where your character is an orc hunter, seeking to track down and eliminate the abominations because of a divine mandate by deity X. It is a double edged sword if your campaign has nothing to do with orcs. Your back story doesnt come into play, and you never or almost never get the benfit of a class feature.
I that more then trying to force players not to choose human, dms should try to theme their campaigns where it makes sense both mechanically and thematically to take something different. You just have to make sure to give your players hints about what to take and make sure they come up.
Fair enough. I'm just a bit tired of players taking FE human for the sole reason that it is likely the best choice mechanically.Make it not the best choice. Mix up your palette of low-level encounters. There's plenty of room for animals, goblinoids, reptilian humanoids (kobolds, lizardfolk, etc.), gnolls, a few monstrous humanoids, vermin (an Aliens-esque 'bug hunt' in a giant ant warren, to rescue some kidnapped people, can be fun at 1st level) and / or undead at the lower levels. Just include some humans, too. No reason to punish the player for playing the game.
I wasn't really referring to my campaign (which is about to be Kingmaker) or looking for advice (although what you offer is solid). I was merely expressing frustration with the extreme emphasis many players put on mechanical advantage over story and roleplaying that leads to a huge percentage of rangers being created with FE Human at first level. Combine that with the favorite power builds using a point buy system, and it seems like rangers should come with a serial number and a warranty, just like they came out of some factory in East Asia.
Human certainly is not the best FE for all campaigns, but it is certainly the safest choice if you are looking for mechanical advantage and don't have much advance knowledge of what you will be facing. Very few campaigns don't include a large number of human opponents.
Fair enough. I'm just a bit tired of players taking FE human for the sole reason that it is likely the best choice mechanically. I actually wish that it were not an option, to force people to be a little more unique and creative. However, I suppose tha same player who is always looking for the most mechanical advantage is just going to pick the next best FE mechanically then.
The issue with favored enemy is it is already situational, and if you dont have any hints from your dm it means both the mechanical side and the backstory side may not come up. It sucks both ways. If you create a backstory where your character is an orc hunter, seeking to track down and eliminate the abominations because of a divine mandate by deity X. It is a double edged sword if your campaign has nothing to do with orcs. Your back story doesnt come into play, and you never or almost never get the benfit of a class feature.
I that more then trying to force players not to choose human, dms should try to theme their campaigns where it makes sense both mechanically and thematically to take something different. You just have to make sure to give your players hints about what to take and make sure they come up.
Fully agree. No one wants to have a FE that you never meet. Best option in my opinion is to work with the DM to create your character. A good DM should be able to steer you in the right direction without revealing too much about the plot. In my case, I'm usually going to steer you away from humans unless there is a great roleplaying or story reason not to, and perhaps even then if your last five ranger characters have also had FE Human.
|
|
Looks like we have some good concepts when it comes to a Ranger's FE.
1: The cliche hatred(Elves/Orcs, Dwarves/Giants, Gnomes/Kobolds)
2: Necissity(spelling? Hunter/Animals)
3: Fascination
4: Diplomacy(see the Dwarf/Human example above)
Did I miss any? I just skimmed a bit to get a general understanding of the cool new Ranger thread.
Fully agree. No one wants to have a FE that you never meet. Best option in my opinion is to work with the DM to create your character. A good DM should be able to steer you in the right direction without revealing too much about the plot. In my case, I'm usually going to steer you away from humans unless there is a great roleplaying or story reason not to, and perhaps even then if your last five ranger characters have also had FE Human.
I try to actively engage a player on this, as you are right, if you dont talk to your ranger players you will almost always get favored enemy human, because its the only one you are almost positive will come up often in most campaigns. I think for future campaigns i will do some writeup like the players guide that paizo does for their APs and I think its great idea and great way to get players started on the campaign.
|
|
I was merely expressing frustration with the extreme emphasis many players put on mechanical advantage over story and roleplaying that leads to a huge percentage of rangers being created with FE Human at first level.
[joke] I really don't have this problem much, as my players would rarely choose something as sub-optimal as the Ranger in the first place. [/joke]
Seriously, though, it's all about having a good time.
Our entertainment media is full of characters like Conan, or Dread Pirate Wesley, or James Bond, who are just arbitrarily better at everything than anyone else around them, while the 'average schmoes caught up in danger' like the average H.P. Lovecraft protagonist, or the token quippy black dude who dies halfway through a Jason movie, is not exactly the stuff of which legends are made.
We are fed a constant diet of optimized movie characters and novel 'heroes,' like Jack Bauer or Richard Cypher or Repairman Jack or the Bride who are better, tougher, faster, smarter, more magical, bluer-blooded, etc. than others. It's hardly a shock that when we sit down to play our fantasy games, we choose to make characters like these, and not people like Xander or Jimmy Olsen or Lt. Ellen Ripley, normal folks who got dragged into adventure.
We all want to be Luke (or at least Han), not the guy who was saying 'stay on target, stay on target.'