All,
I love the Ranger Class for the most part, but I don't really like the spell-casting or the animal companion in terms of flavor. However, all the various Ranger Archetypes which trade those out for stuff trade them for stuff I hate or don't care for, or which are tedious, and those Archetypes usually change other things I consider critical or essential as well.
I was wondering, if one were to drop Ranger spellcasting and Spell List/Trigger access and Animal Companion access and replace them with a number of Ranger Combat Style Feats or just general feats spread evenly across the Ranger's 20 levels, how many feats do you think would be a fair trade to keep the overall power level of the Ranger where it is?
My instinct is to say 4 feats, but I wanted to hear your opinions.
Thanks!
you would have to give them an entire 2nd combat style with a 2 level delay
4, 8, 12, 16 and 20
and even then, you haven't even compensated the ability to use wands and scrolls, the ability to craft, the 2nd set of actions, or the mini ranger who shares your favored enemies.
that merely compensates 1st and 2nd level spells, barely.
if you wanted a non-spellcasting class with equivalent power to the ranger and no pet, you would require, a class so much better than the fighter, that the fighter feels useless.
and even then, you could never completely compensate the loss
Trapper doesn't tickle your fancy?
3.5 had a lot of good things to create variant rangers with. The Cityscape Web enhancement allowed for 2 things that may really appeal to you, 1 you could swap out your Ride class skill for Tumble (would be acrobatics now) and 2, you could swap out your animal companion for a familiar.
A familiar can be very useful to a ranger if you don't want an animal companion, the mechanics for familiars means that as long as you have it near you, you gain the benefits of the Alertness feat for free, and if you pick something like a hawk, then you gain another +3 on Perception checks during the day. That's a flat +5 to your perception checks, and +7 at later levels. It also means you can leave your familiar sitting on your shoulder or have it fly above you away from combat and not have to think about how to incorporate it into combat.
Personally, I hate the trapper archetype because I can't imagine running a ranger without spells. Gravity Bow, Lead Blades, Entangle, Wind Wall, Instant Enemy, Treestride, they are all amazing assets to you.
I obviously think spells are good and amazing and effective. But from a flavor perspective, I would prefer no spells and no animal companion. I simply wonder how many feats that is worth, losing those two.
No worries tho. Just wondered what people thought in terms of feat economy.
Thanks!
Super Genius Games has a couple of products that may interest you:
Genius Guide to Martial Archetypes
Genius Guide to Archer AchetypesKobold Quarterly also has a spell-less ranger variant that looks interesting.
Seconded.
You could give up the Woodland Spellcaster "package" and pick up the Physical Exemplar, or Youxia (or something else if you prefer). The PE gets some bonus feats, a small boost to your good saves, more HP, and additional stat points, while the Youxia gets Ki and a variety of abilities using that. If you go with a decent Wis score, the Youxia could be nice, if for no other reason than for being able to acquire Lay On Hands as a paladin (including Mercies), but using Wis.
Personally, I think the Woodland Spellcaster package could do without eating up 2 skillpoints.
I strongly dislike tricks and traps. I also found the hunters bond for helping the party to be uninteresting, and something I dont enjoy dealing with.
As for re-writing the Ranger, picking the trapper or tricks stuff is already re-writing the ranger just as much, so why not re-write it in a way that I enjoy?
I love every ranger ability except hunters bond and the spells.
Anyway, I will go with four feats, and limit them to the ranger combat style feat list so as to minimize any encroachment into fighter territory.
Thanks for the responses. I will look closer at the third party stuff, but I dont like losing or changing any of the other abilities.
FWIW, the Faiths and Philosophies book that just came out has a feat that gives an animal companion at your level -3. It requires one other feat to take though, and it's just one of those +2 / +4 feats that aren't too good. I don't think you can reverse this to get an accurate estimate of the number of feats though, given the quality of the feat necessary to get this.
Design Manager
|
FWIW, the Faiths and Philosophies book that just came out has a feat that gives an animal companion at your level -3. It requires one other feat to take though, and it's just one of those +2 / +4 feats that aren't too good. I don't think you can reverse this to get an accurate estimate of the number of feats though, given the quality of the feat necessary to get this.
Sorry to derail, but is this a feat anyone can take Cheapy? I haven't received my copy yet and this intrigues me greatly.
Anyway, I will go with four feats, and limit them to the ranger combat style feat list so as to minimize any encroachment into fighter territory.
Honestly, I would add general feats that don't work the same way as the combat style ranger feats, otherwise you WILL be overshadowing the fighter, since combat style feats are available without meeting prerequisites. Add regular feat selections at, say, 5, 10, 15, 20. They're bonus feats that you can use to pick up whatever you like, but must meet the prerequisites normally.
Honestly, though, if you're going to go this route, I'd check out Super Genius first, since it does basically this and more, which you kind of should have if you're giving up spellcasting AND other things.
|
Thanks for the responses. I will look closer at the third party stuff, but I dont like losing or changing any of the other abilities.
FYI, the Spell-less Ranger is essentially a variant ranger class. You don't lose anything (except spells of course). You *do* gain some cool abilities though (Nature's Healing, Ranger Tricks etc). Plus, there are a number of new ranger feats and two ranger archetypes (companion bound and dual-style)
FWIW, the Faiths and Philosophies book that just came out has a feat that gives an animal companion at your level -3. It requires one other feat to take though, and it's just one of those +2 / +4 feats that aren't too good. I don't think you can reverse this to get an accurate estimate of the number of feats though, given the quality of the feat necessary to get this.Sorry to derail, but is this a feat anyone can take Cheapy? I haven't received my copy yet and this intrigues me greatly.
Anyone without an animal companion!
I'd be tempted to give a bonus feat every 4 levels for spell casting loss (comprable to 3.5 rules for half-casters) and for animal companion, I'm not so sure. I try to work with my players, but don't cater to their every whim. I'd probably tell them to choose the bond or the companion. I don't really know what to suggest for it, but hope that helps.
|
Design Manager
|
Anyone without an animal companion!FWIW, the Faiths and Philosophies book that just came out has a feat that gives an animal companion at your level -3. It requires one other feat to take though, and it's just one of those +2 / +4 feats that aren't too good. I don't think you can reverse this to get an accurate estimate of the number of feats though, given the quality of the feat necessary to get this.Sorry to derail, but is this a feat anyone can take Cheapy? I haven't received my copy yet and this intrigues me greatly.
This is wonderful news! That opens up so many builds and increased possibilities for archetypes like the Dragoon and Sohei.
I found, quite by accident, a 3.5 reference to a replacement for the animal companion.
Check here and scroll down to Nature Guide.
Not sure where it comes from originally, buy I kinda liked it.
Oh! Another thing to check out would be SmiloDan's conversion of the 3.5 Scout class. It's pretty good, and fits most of the flavor of a spell-less, companionless ranger. http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2m8ll?Scout-Class-from-CA-35#7
I was super excited to play one of these in a game a friend started up, but sadly she abandoned it after only a couple of sessions. It's been a while, but I know that when I picked it up to try some months back, Smilo was hoping for some feedback on the experience playing it. Don't recall if it was for the sake of playtesting for changes, or just for a pat on the back, but if you try it and like it, send him a message!