Oh my god. I just had this idea (right here):
Why not make the FE bonus changable from the beginning?Let the bonus improve per level, but let the ranger choose a favored enemy when gaining the next level!
He may keep the old one or take another.AND: in increasing level, he can have more than one FE at one time!
OH MY GOD THIS IS JUST BRILLIANT!
Ok, naturally when changing enemies it should be one you often encountered in the last level.
Why not allow them to change with a day (8hours) of training? This allows them to correct for faulty input (Yeah, orcs are a major enemy of the RotRL plotline.) and to adjust to changes of enemy in mid-game. I'm going to playtest this with my online group, but initial reactions are positive. It allows flexibility without adding new abilities or mechanics (unless you count the swap-out as an ability/mechanic).
For that matter, why limit them to favored enemy? Maybe instead of guessing what's in the Swamp of Nasty Things I should just swap FE out for Favored Terrain: Swamp?
Anyway, my point is that Rangers move about a lot, and thus pass through areas with many different enemies. The static FE bonus rarely if ever does them any good, which may be why a lot of rangers take a level of ranger (or two, for the style feat), and put the rest of their levels into rogue or fighter.
|
I say nay to this one. You get to choose new favored enemies, one every fifth level, and get to change your focus as you go along. It takes time to learn to fight, track, and understand a species, and I don't think being able to change the subject of your studies every level is realistic from a story point of view. But that's me.
|
On another thread, which I cannot find, I proposed that the Ranger should gain Favoured enemy bonuses in smaller bites, more often.
Rather than gaining a new enemy (+2), and increasing an existing bonus by (+2), every 5 levels, they could be granted one (+2) more often, at levels 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, and 20.
Same total bonuses, but half those bonuses would be gained 2 levels earlier. To balance this, I proposed that these bonuses should be used to gain a broader range of enemies, with no total being larger than (+4). If he wants, he can have 9 different favoured enemies at (+2).
This eliminates some dead levels, encourages staying single-classed, reduces the chance of the ranger not meeting a relevant favoured enemy. It also reduces the ability of a min-max player to make a high-level replacement character who benefits from 20-20 hindsight, out-of-character knowledge ("Is this the way to the aeons-lost, magically-concealed city of the secretive, isolationist snake-people? The one that was only rediscovered yesterday by your now-deceased scout (played by moi), who was killed without reporting this fact back to his comrades? Why, yes, I DO happen to have +8 vs Humanoids (reptillian), why do you ask?")...
|
|
Here's my proposal for replacing Favored Enemy with something a bit more useful. It's inspired by the Archivist's Dark Knowledge ability. Details are not set in stone. I posted this in the other Ranger thread, which appears to have drifted off.
Tactical Knowledge (Ex): Once per encounter, you may make a D20 Survival check to, as a free action, notice or recall a feature of a humanoid, monstrous humanoid, vermin, animal, or magical beast, which you use to your advantage. For the duration of the encounter, you gain +2 to hit and +1d6 damage for against that creature. This bonus increases by +2 to hit and +1d6 to damage at 4th level and every 4 levels thereafter.
Exotic Tactical Knowledge (Ex): Choose one of the following types: undead, construct, aberration, giant, dragon, plant, or ooze, or select the swarm or incorporeal subtypes If you chose a base type, you may use Tactical Knowledge against creatures of this type. If you chose a subtype, you may use Tactical Knowledge against creatures of that subtype regardless of their base type.
Extraplanar Tactical Knowledge (Ex): Choose one of the following types: outside or elemental. In addition, choose one subtype of the chosen type. For elemental, these are: Air, Fire, Water, or Earth. For outside, these are: Lawful, Chaotic, Good, or Evil. You may use your Tactical Knowledge against creatures of this type and subtype.
I agree with the OP or Owen -- changeable enemies are a good thing.
Name the ability something like "Hunter's Mark" and the flavor takes care of itself.
I thought of something like that:
1) Every X levels an increase in the bonus
2) FE changable once per level (or so)
3) Every Y levels +1 FE at the same time (2 FE with the same general bonus at 5th, 3 FE at 10th, etc.)
Quick and simple.
What about this:
Hunter's mark (Ex): Through careful observation rangers are able to quickly develop combat techniques that are especially effective against specific opponents. As a move action a ranger may study their opponent and make a survival check with a DC = 10 + the opponent's CR. If they are successful, they gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage against that specific opponent. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 ranger levels they possess. There is no limit to the number of times the ranger may change their mark, but they may only have one mark at a time.
Going right after the mechanic this would surely be one of abilities the FIGHTER just needs right now.
|
What about this:
Hunter's mark (Ex): Through careful observation rangers are able to quickly develop combat techniques that are especially effective against specific opponents. As a move action a ranger may study their opponent and make a survival check with a DC = 10 + the opponent's CR. If they are successful, they gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage against that specific opponent. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 ranger levels they possess. There is no limit to the number of times the ranger may change their mark, but they may only have one mark at a time.
i like this... this goes well with the Ranger skills of marksman and hunter...
let the ranger choose a favored enemy when gaining the next level!
You mean retraining? I'd rather just have retraining in PRPG than specific case(s) retraining.
|
|
I agree with the OP or Owen -- changeable enemies are a good thing.
Name the ability something like "Hunter's Mark" and the flavor takes care of itself.
too much like a videogame, really...
favored eenmyt akes time to train, elarn and master, why would a ranger change each night WHO he HATES more?
Too much like a videogame!?
I was actually specifically thinking of Bard vs. Smaug in The Hobbit when I wrote it. I'd love it if my ranger could notice a bare patch in the dragon's scales and use it to his advantage.
I agree with the OP or Owen -- changeable enemies are a good thing.
Name the ability something like "Hunter's Mark" and the flavor takes care of itself.
too much like a videogame, really...
favored eenmyt akes time to train, elarn and master, why would a ranger change each night WHO he HATES more?
Like I said, you have to reflavor it from a favored enemy to a mark, bounty, or whatever.
Instead "I really hate/fear this type of monster, so I've devoted my life to killing them." It's "Oh, we're hunting mind flayers this time? Let me review my hunter's handbook."
And I am still thinking this is just the thing the fighter needs.
Scan the enemy for weaknesses = fighter's job.
(Besides, only because bard used a bow, who said he was a ranger? He was neither a dunedain from the north nor the south, if I remember correctly. And those (and some friggin elves) where the only "real rangers" in Middle Earth.)
|
Like I said, you have to reflavor it from a favored enemy to a mark, bounty, or whatever.
That would turn the Ranger into the Bounty Hunter.
Instead "I really hate/fear this type of monster, so I've devoted my life to killing them." It's "Oh, we're hunting mind flayers this time? Let me review my hunter's handbook."This changes it entirely from combating a foe you stumble across blind and unprepared to preparing to hunt a Known Prey.
|
|
That would turn the Ranger into the Bounty Hunter.This changes it entirely from combating a foe you stumble across blind and unprepared to preparing to hunt a Known Prey.
I completely disagree.
My vision of the ranger is as a hunter who has hunted many different kinds of prey. He probably hasn't had the formal instruction/training that a fighter has. He fights from practical experience rather than rigorous training in fighting techniques.
I envision the Tactical Knowledge ability as being something like:
"Ah ha! I'm fought dragons before. They always have a blind spot behind their ears, so you should attack them from there."
or
"I've noticed that duelists trained in Riddleport always drop their guard for a moment after their offhand flourish."
That's what the Survival check models: does the ranger have a piece of combat trivia in his repertoire that's useful in this fight?
|
Instead "I really hate/fear this type of monster, so I've devoted my life to killing them." It's "Oh, we're hunting mind flayers this time? Let me review my hunter's handbook."
This sounds more like it. Spontanously changing the favored enemy sounds silly.
Then again just reading from books how some monsters behave sounds very silly. It'd probably need the ranger to study them in all aspects; in combat, observing, culture etc. After all, the ranger gets +2 to damage, Bluff, Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, and Survival checks (Bluff, Perception, Sense Motive, Survival in PRPG).
After thinking this a little I object the change. Instead I'd make it a favored terrain, or broaden the favored enemy groups. Possibly not by creature type and subtype, but to "Mindless" (most undead and most constructs), "Feral" (mostly all with INT 1 or 2), etc.
|
|
That would turn the Ranger into the Bounty Hunter.This changes it entirely from combating a foe you stumble across blind and unprepared to preparing to hunt a Known Prey.
I completely disagree.
My vision of the ranger is as a hunter who has hunted many different kinds of prey. He probably hasn't had the formal instruction/training that a fighter has. He fights from practical experience rather than rigorous training in fighting techniques.
I envision the Tactical Knowledge ability as being something like:
"Ah ha! I'm fought dragons before. They always have a blind spot behind their ears, so you should attack them from there."
or
"I've noticed that duelists trained in Riddleport always drop their guard for a moment after their offhand flourish."
That's what the Survival check models: does the ranger have a piece of combat trivia in his repertoire that's useful in this fight?
Then you shouldnt be able to pick up a foe you have no experience with.
"Dragon's ey? They have wings and acid breath or sumptin..." Goes off an meditates so he is ready to kill the creature he has never met.
I wanted to write something else, but I just realized that we only talk about fighting against Favored Enemies.
But I think the main aspect shouldn't be fighting the enemy BUT FINDING the enemy!
I think we should put further thoughts into this direction.
|
|
Then you shouldnt be able to pick up a foe you have no experience with.
"Dragon's ey? They have wings and acid breath or sumptin..." Goes off an meditates so he is ready to kill the creature he has never met.
1) You're already allowed to choose creatures you've never encountered before for Favored Enemy. I don't see how my suggestion changes that situation at all.
2) The same thing could be said about wizards: how do they cast spells they've never seen before? The core rules say that they gain two spells per level w/o having to copy them from somebody else.
3) Of course the obvious explanation for the wizard is that he does research behind the scenes. So, who says that the ranger does the same? Maybe he's listening to stories about famous dragonslayers of legend in bars, or reading scrolls about them that he borrowed from the wizard. Then when he actually fights a dragon for the first time, he remembers how Bartholomew the Dragonslayer used to kill dragons by attacking the underside of their joints.
Just like HP, tactical knowledge is an abstraction.
I was actually specifically thinking of Bard vs. Smaug in The Hobbit when I wrote it. I'd love it if my ranger could notice a bare patch in the dragon's scales and use it to his advantage.
How about Bard was using Deadly Aim and rolled a critical to boot: not really a use of favored enemy.
But really, Smaug is in an age bracket that no DND ranger is going to kill him without magic in one shot even with a critcal hit. And, besides, your assuming BArd is a Ranger based solely on his use of a bow. I always thought he was a fighter.
Now maybe Bard had a secret hobbyy at night: assassin . He studied Smaug for the 3 rnds, got off his Death Attack and Smaug rolled a 1 on his save :-). Just kidding.
Interesting ideas, I particularly like the broken apart "pick new" and "add bonus" idea, that works well.
One Major Point: Favored Enemy will NOT be removed/replaced/renamed. That would kill backwards compatibility.
Minor Point: Along with Bards, in 3.5 Rangers got a major overhaul to bring them up to par. They already get abilities at every level through 11th, just missing 12, 14, 16, 18, and 19. Also Pathfinder already bumps them back to a d10 hit die.
As for changing Favored Enemies, it's an ugly practice in my opinion. However I could see something along the lines of:
New Favored Enemy: Select an additional favored enemy from those given on the table. You may also choose to shift +2 bonus from any one favored enemy to another (including the one just selected, if so desired). This shift may not reduce a favored enemy bonus below +2.
Improved Favored Enemy: Choose one favored enemy you have, the bonus against that enemy increases by +2. You may also choose to replace one favored enemy that has a total bonus of +2 with a new selection.
Hunter's Mark is a WoW Hunter's Talent (Feat) - One of the biggest complaints I see over at the WotC boards is that they are turning D&D into WoW with 4e - I would hate for the same thing to be said of Pathfinder.
Changing Favored enemy at-will (even with 8 hours of study) goes against the flavor of the class - you might as well just give them random to-hit bonus. There is huge difference between having a passionate hatred for something, and being able to spot a weakness on a single creature.
The Assassin ability becoming available to both fighters and Rangers is an interesting idea (maybe even Monks) - ANY well-trained fighter should be able to study his opponents for weaknesses.
On another thread, which I cannot find, I proposed that the Ranger should gain Favoured enemy bonuses in smaller bites, more often.
Rather than gaining a new enemy (+2), and increasing an existing bonus by (+2), every 5 levels, they could be granted one (+2) more often, at levels 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, and 20.
I REALLY like this - adds a lot of versatility without changing the flavor.
I REALLY like this - adds a lot of versatility without changing the flavor.On another thread, which I cannot find, I proposed that the Ranger should gain Favoured enemy bonuses in smaller bites, more often.
Rather than gaining a new enemy (+2), and increasing an existing bonus by (+2), every 5 levels, they could be granted one (+2) more often, at levels 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, and 20.
Agreed - I was sort of surprised it wasn't included in the Alpha 3 Ranger.
That's a good one (I would suggest every other level).
I would make them something like Ranger Talents (I know the concept is getting over-used), and let the player choose between:
- Favored Enemy (+2 to ONE enemy, stackable, no automatic increase to other enemies)
- Favored Terrain (same as FE, but on Terrains... SUPRISE!)
- Combat Syles (TWF, Archery)
- Stuff like Camouflage, HIPS or what ever
- some other stuff... ;)
on the grounds that simple is always better, i'd go for spreading the bonuses out so that you can gain new / update old favoured enemies more often.
The total bonuses can be kept the same (preserves backward compatibility) but if you get them every level / every other level then you can customise your favoured enemies to what you've actually faced/ will face.
looking at the PHB Ranger and the total bonuses
level PHB Ranger total bonus Max vs an individual FE
1 +2 +2
5 +6 +4
10 +10 +6
15 +14 +8
20 +18 +10
its just a thought but if you gave bonuses as +1 / level then you'd end up with a similar progression. (I personally wouldn't give a +2 to start as you already gain at levels 3-4, 7-9 and 11+ but it wouldn't be too much)
Downside is that you'd probably have a greater mix of bonuses which might be confusing - but if that bothers you then just put them all into one or two FE's only
you might need a rule that caps the FE at Ranger level/2 or you could end up with a ranger having a +20 bonus which he couldn't do in RAW. That doesn't worry me but might affect backwards compatibility too much
|
Can Rangers now apply Favored Enemy bonuses to undead? I know that Wizard's official ruling was no but since PfRG rogues can get sneak attack I was wondering if Rangers can now work this also. This is the big change I would like to see in favored enemy. Of course maybe that makes favored enemy "Undead" too powerful since there are so many different undead creatures.... nah
In general the big problem with FE is that it is a wildcard. If you know what you are going to encounter a lot then you are set. On the other hand if you goof up and pick the wrong thing then you have a worthless class ability. This is one of those places where DM-Player cooperation is necessary. Without a bit of a clue in or DM intervention the player is totally hosed regardless of whether he can change it or not.
I think a good rule of thumb is the DM should set up about 10-25% of encounters to be one of the player FEs, either by dropping in-game hints to the player or by designing the game around the players enemies. A ranger is passionate about killing off his FE and would actively seek out chances to eradicate them.
-Dennis
OK, I just took a look at the old AD&D Player's Handbook. Back then Rangers started out having +1 damage/level to eleven monsters from the get go - bugbear, ettin, giant, gnoll, goblin, hobgoblin, kobold, ogre, ogre magi, orc, and troll. So they had them all and it only got better. But, if you remember from playing back then it was hard to get past 10 or 12 levels, so this wasn't a huge huge factor.
Taking this as a historic precedent, what if rangers could pick all 5 or 6 (or however many) favored enemies that they want from the beginning and at certain level increments they would get a bonus to all of them, or if they chose to specialize, they could drop one off the list and add its bonus to another one? This way, they could take animals or vermin early on but when they get to be 20 level it would have been dropped in favor of outsider or dragons or something else as powerful.
|
|
On another thread, which I cannot find, I proposed that the Ranger should gain Favoured enemy bonuses in smaller bites, more often.
Rather than gaining a new enemy (+2), and increasing an existing bonus by (+2), every 5 levels, they could be granted one (+2) more often, at levels 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, and 20.
I REALLY like this - adds a lot of versatility without changing the flavor.
complimentary comments, too.
Glad people like it. I've got a player looking into it for later levels (multi-classing Scout/Ranger).
I like to create versatile characters, and so prefer my PCs to have small-to-medium bonuses across the board. I accept that I may be in a minority, though. :)When I see a player stacking up egregious bonuses in one over-specialised area, my radar goes off, that they may be abusing OOC knowledge, whether that be from reading the adventure, or by bringing in a new PC half-way through a campaign. Especially when their PC choices would have sucked, right until juuuust about...now.
I proposed that the Ranger should gain Favoured enemy bonuses in smaller bites, more often.
Rather than gaining a new enemy (+2), and increasing an existing bonus by (+2), every 5 levels, they could be granted one (+2) more often, at levels 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, and 20.
I've got a player looking into it for later levels (multi-classing Scout/Ranger).
I like to create versatile characters, and so prefer my PCs to have small-to-medium bonuses across the board. I accept that I may be in a minority, though. :)
When I see a player stacking up egregious bonuses in one over-specialised area, my radar goes off, that they may be abusing OOC knowledge, whether that be from reading the adventure, or by bringing in a new PC half-way through a campaign. Especially when their PC choices would have sucked, right until juuuust about...now.
Wotcha Bob! Welcome back - hope you had a good break! I've had the past two weeks off and I must say I've missed our Thursday nights! Why are we not playing this week?
Anyway, to keep this on-topic, I did know that our campaign is very undead heavy, but even so, it can't be even 50% of the total monsters in the AP, so to spend 50% of your ranger bonuses on them is too much - you'd hit like a girl against other creatures. Plus, I'd only get 3 choices, so I'd be forced to specialise to be honest. Now I get 5 choices, and mix and match over 20 levels - that's a lot more useful.
And I'm playing from 1st level, so if any part of my build sucks, I'll feel it! Or die, presumably...
Anyway, my journal is up to date, and I've even got a character portrait, so I hope this doesn't happen!