|
The 4th installment is finally up here.
So far nothing jumps out at me as "whoa why did they do that?" or "whoa how did they do that?", although one question did arise.
On the summon nature's ally list, there are ants (drone and soldier) but it doesn't say "giant". I certainly hope the ranger isn't wasting his time to summon an ordinary ant.
|
Yeah, looks like they kept pretty much with the Beta version of the ranger, which is good. It'd be nice to see the info for the alternate combat styles (if any), but that's just a minor nitpick.
I like the new SNA list -no lame ducks (unless there is a dire lame duck later on the SNA V list). Good to see bugs on the list too. The kobold sting wardens will be pleased! :)
|
|
I know this is already off my original topic, but it's a thought I had to state:
SUMMON ANT
casting
Level sorcerer/wizard/druid/ranger/cleric/bard 0
casting time: full round action
components: S,M
effect
range: close
duration: varies
description
This spell is cast when the caster drops a cupcake (the material component) and waits for the ant to show up. The caster has no control over the summoned creature once it arrives. This spell does have the possibility of summoning multiple creatures, at the DM's discretion. The duration of the spell depends on how long it takes the ant(s) to eat/remove the material component.
I know this is already off my original topic, but it's a thought I had to state:
SUMMON ANT
casting
Level sorcerer/wizard/druid/ranger/cleric/bard 0
casting time: full round action
components: S,M
effect
range: close
duration: varies
description
This spell is cast when the caster drops a cupcake (the material component) and waits for the ant to show up. The caster has no control over the summoned creature once it arrives. This spell does have the possibility of summoning multiple creatures, at the DM's discretion. The duration of the spell depends on how long it takes the ant(s) to eat/remove the material component.
Hmm, I think my daughter is a spellcaster.
Depends on how many ants. I mean the army ants can kill and attack in swarms. Yeah it makes more since for them to be giant ants but just saying the normal little buggers can be dangerous too.I certainly hope the ranger isn't wasting his time to summon an ordinary ant.
Most painful thing I ever felt was climbing up a tree and putting my hand into a red-ant nest that was in the trunk. I couldn't get away fast (being up 30 feet in the tree), so all I could do was scream and try to climb down as fast as I could with one hand (the other was covered with red ants). I had about a hundred swollen red bites on my hand within 60 seconds, and they hurt for days.
Who knew red-ants could make their nests in the trunks of pecan trees?
(Following the off topic discussion)
I have a co-worker who leaves nuts and other food items on the patio outside our office for the squirrels. I have noticed in the last couple of days that there has been a small (ant sized) two lane highway built across the patio, and the ants are taking their fair share of the loot, I mean food.
(Back to original topic)
I really liked the preview for the Pathfinder ranger. I've never played a ranger before, but I'd like to try playing a ranger now. Of course, I think that I'm probably going to say that about all the classes in Pathfinder RPG. I haven't seen much at this point that I don't like.
"For now, remember that if Harsk were to take an animal companion, his effective druid level would be 8th (not 5th, as it was in 3.5).
In addition, Harsk has a few spells to aid him in his struggles. He now casts spells with a caster level equal to his ranger level –3 (instead of half his ranger level). His progression has also been improved a bit, giving him a few extra spells.
THANK YOU PAIZO!!! Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I hope the Paladin gets the same treatment.
CHA: 6 Ouch, no wonder he hangs out in caves all the time!
Because everyone knows bows are for pansy-ass elves.
An' if ye can't tells a hand cross-bow froms a light cross-bow,
maybes ye's best keep ta countin' yer daisy petals an' leave the huntin' to's de real hunters...
Yes, it is interesting that the iconic ranger neither dual wields, nor wields a classic ranged weapon. A character with martial proficiencies wielding a simple weapon that requires a feat to even use competently (rapid reload) at high levels.
Still, one of the main things I'm seeing here is the elimination of Giant as a type. It's a subtype of humanoid, now, so ogres are humanoids, as are trolls, frost giants, etc. I remember some Paizo-ite making a comment about that before - that there was little real difference between humanoids and giants, both thematically and mechanically. Glad to see that they've gone and changed that, because it really probably wasn't necessary to keep it around.
"Still, one of the main things I'm seeing here is the elimination of Giant as a type. "
Hmmm, I don't really mind that, as long as they keep all "giants" within the new sub-type. I pity the ranger who has to choose - humanoids {trolls}.
I have found the most troubling thing about favored enemy is that it tends not to evolve well unless the setting has a specific race of villain, or the player chooses undead. Humanoids is a great example, while the lower levels of play are packed with kobolds, goblins, and orcs, they become VERY rare after 4th or 5th level. The player ends up having one of his most powerful class features get forgotten, unless the DM goes far out of his way to keep the creatures appearing.
"Still, one of the main things I'm seeing here is the elimination of Giant as a type. "
Hmmm, I don't really mind that, as long as they keep all "giants" within the new sub-type. I pity the ranger who has to choose - humanoids {trolls}.
I have found the most troubling thing about favored enemy is that it tends not to evolve well unless the setting has a specific race of villain, or the player chooses undead. Humanoids is a great example, while the lower levels of play are packed with kobolds, goblins, and orcs, they become VERY rare after 4th or 5th level. The player ends up having one of his most powerful class features get forgotten, unless the DM goes far out of his way to keep the creatures appearing.
Quite true.
The smart ranger always chooses Undead for his first favored enemy. He can encounter them at level 1, so it may be useful right away, and he can encounter them all the way up to epic, when he'll be very glad of those big bonuses he gets against his favored enemies by then.
No level 20 ranger needs +5 to hit and damage an orc...
The smart ranger then chooses things like Aberrations as his second favored enemy, even though he won't see many of them right away, but he'll see enough of them over his career to make it pay off.
After that, it's really more of a campaign thing.
Of course, that's metagamey and/or munchkiney.
The smart DM, of course, simply reverses the bonuses on the favored enemies.
So whatever the ranger picks at level 1, he will always be +1 against that enemy.
Whatever the ranger picks next, he will always be +2 against that enemy.
So when a ranger gets his last favored enemy choice, he can choose something like Dragons and get +5 against them right away (and he's still only +1 against Humanoids, if that is what he originally took).
Sure, that destroys the "I have hunted these enemies for so long that I have become a master hunter of this creature type" mentality.
But it does make the Favored Emeny ability useful at every level.
The smarter DM then allows a ranger, each time he improves his favored enemy, the option of improving one he already knows (which means he then picks something new to replace the enemy he just improved).
Example:
Level 1: Ranger picks undead and is now +1 vs. undead.
Level 5: Ranger picks vermin because he's currently in a campaign fighting lots of vermin. He is now +1 vs. undead and +2 vs. vermin.
Level 10: Ranger is now fighting lots of undead, so he picks undead again, improving that to +3, and decides on aberrations for his +1 enemy. He is now +1 vs. aberrations, +2 vs. vermin, and +3 vs. undead.
Never again will a ranger lament only being +1 against Evil Outsiders, and fighting them every day, while he is +5 against orcs that he never fights (and if he did, he wouldn't need the +5).
|
|
Quite true.The smart ranger always chooses Undead for his first favored enemy. He can encounter them at level 1, so it may be useful right away, and he can encounter them all the way up to epic, when he'll be very glad of those big bonuses he gets against his favored enemies by then.
The smarter Ranger (or rather his player) asks for the DM's advice at character's creation ;)
In my games, there's almost no reason not to take Humanoid (Human) as a favored enemy. But I tend to use classed NPCs as major opponents throughout my campaigns. Heck, there are certainly opportunities for battle against high level orcs throughout my world.
The smart DM, of course, simply reverses the bonuses on the favored enemies.
So whatever the ranger picks at level 1, he will always be +1 against that enemy.
Whatever the ranger picks next, he will always be +2 against that enemy.
So when a ranger gets his last favored enemy choice, he can choose something like Dragons and get +5 against them right away (and he's still only +1 against Humanoids, if that is what he originally took).
Umm.. Blake.. have you read the Pathfinder.. or 3.5.. entry for Favored Enemy?
It's +2 at first level, with +2 to whichever new one is picked, and an extra assignable +2 to one of the ones you have. So you can increase the first, or the second. And at 10th you can increase your previous +4 to +6, or get another +4 one.
It's not so much the hand crossbow so much that it's something used more often by Rogues. Every 3.5. game I have been in that has had a Ranger the player always used a bow. I guess I rather see a build you would see in most games rather one that you see once in a blue moon imo.
To some of us grognards this is a welcome throwback. Quite a few NPC Rangers in 1e & 2e weilded heavy or light crossbows.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
It's largely a function of the art. We are building the stats to match the art that Wayne Reynolds did for us, and we mixed up the weapons years ago in order to keep things diverse and interesting. Admittedly, there are going to be more bow-using rangers than crossbow-using rangers, but the previews are more about "here's how we'd build Harsk" than "here's a fully optimized ranger" or even "here's a ranger other than Harsk."
I completely understand why someone might want to see a more standard ranger, but that will have to wait a bit until we've gone through the iconics. I promise our products (and perhaps even our blogs) will have other ranger builds on them in the future.
Also its a light crossbow in the preveiw, not hand, and he actually uses a heavy crossbow in game. Which with crossbow mastery he's pretty good with it.
I promise our products (and perhaps even our blogs) will have other ranger builds on them in the future.
Erik,
You could call the blog spots the Pathfinder Rogue's Gallery in honor of the 1e supplement of the same name.
Also its a light crossbow in the preveiw, not hand, and he actually uses a heavy crossbow in game. Which with crossbow mastery he's pretty good with it.
Right, I'm not quite sure where people are hallucinating this hand crossbow from...
To start, the cross-bow in the picture definitely looks like it requires two hands to wield (this is the picture which was described as a HEAVY cross-bow in previous write-ups of Harsk, after all). And the stat-block clearly lists the weapon as a Light Cross-Bow. No Hand Cross-Bow in sight.(I suppose it was switched from Heavy to Light because the Heavy Cross-Bow would have required the non-Core "Crossbow Mastery" Feat in order to Full Attack unimpeded, and they wanted to show off what a Ranger Full-Attack would look like)
In any case, these previews are using Pathfinder's Iconic characters, i.e. more specific than "the most vanilla D&D class generalizations". I mean, I'd guess DWARVES like-wise probably aren't the most "common" race for Rangers (but crossbows are clearly associated with Dwarves).
Excessive body hair, excellent sense of direction, uses a crossbow that shoots energized bolts? Harsk is clearly a Wookiee.
Excessive body hair, excellent sense of direction, uses a crossbow that shoots energized bolts? Harsk is clearly a Wookiee.
Ugh, shaved wookie....this brings back memory's of a VERY wrong star wars game
Oh it wasn't just a shaved wookiee. He was a shaved wookiee porn star.
Wookies are not to be shaved (or have a moon fall on them in a book by a sub par author) ever
I can forgive that.It's a source of pride for wookies that he was so badass they had to drop a moon on him to kill him.
|
I can forgive that.It's a source of pride for wookies that he was so badass they had to drop a moon on him to kill him.
Wookies are not to be shaved (or have a moon fall on them in a book by a sub par author) ever
Quite true, I'd just rather a better author, but that's a can of worms to not open when we're looking at the Ranger preview.
Are we going to have enough time to preview all the iconics and other potential class builds before we've already gotten the rules in our greedy, eager hands? Probably not. I don't hate the iconics (though I, again, was hoping that there might be newer art for them in the launch book), but I do like previews to show me neat little bits and bobs. Recreating the stats of the iconics with Pathfinder is rather neat, but I'm concerned that I'm not going to really get a ton out of it. Harsk is killer against his primary favored enemy. That's cool, and I'm glad for it. Just wouldn't mind seeing more of the revolutionary changes the PFRPG is bringing to my table come August.
|
Excessive body hair, excellent sense of direction, uses a crossbow that shoots energized bolts? Harsk is clearly a Wookiee.Ugh, shaved wookie....this brings back memory's of a VERY wrong star wars game
Shaved wookie? That happened in your game too? What is the gamer fascination with doing this? I've been in two separate Star Wars campaigns with different players where this happened.
___
And back on target of the post - I like how the previews are now covering more than just the stat block. Covering related subjects - like the Summon Nature Ally animal list, gives a great incite into what has changed - and what hasn't.
On another thought - I do hope the restriction on stacking the hunter's bond bonuses has been maintained. A party of rangers with compatible favored enemies could be broken deadly. Or really appropriate. Hmm, have to think about that one...
Excessive body hair, excellent sense of direction, uses a crossbow that shoots energized bolts? Harsk is clearly a Wookiee.Ugh, shaved wookie....this brings back memory's of a VERY wrong star wars gameShaved wookie? That happened in your game too? What is the gamer fascination with doing this? I've been in two separate Star Wars campaigns with different players where this happened.
I can honestly say I have never shaved a wookie character in one of my games.
I did, however, have a wookie character wielding an E-WEB get blasted at point blank range (less than 30 feet) by a tie fighter and survive, barely (used every force point he had accumulated in the game to that point, all 12 of them). He was hairless as he slid down the wall of the landing bay, but I can honestly say he wasn't shaved.
This was the same player who ended up playing a force-sensitive albino JAWA in the next star wars game. Said Jawa then got converted by a sith agent. He'll forever be known as Darth Kenny.
___And back on target of the post - I like how the previews are now covering more than just the stat block. Covering related subjects - like the Summon Nature Ally animal list, gives a great incite into what has changed - and what hasn't.
On another thought - I do hope the restriction on stacking the hunter's bond bonuses has been maintained. A party of rangers with compatible favored enemies could be broken deadly. Or really appropriate. Hmm, have to think about that one...
I agree, the iconics are nice, but I like the game rules discussion better. And yes, I would, as GM, absolutely disallow stacking of favored enemy bonus's, that would get too sick too quickly.
It grants half-bonus favored, and specifically says that you only use the highest in beta rules.
Stacking is not a worry.
Excessive body hair, excellent sense of direction, uses a crossbow that shoots energized bolts? Harsk is clearly a Wookiee.
Not tall enough.
Right, I'm not quite sure where people are hallucinating this hand crossbow from...
"For a real man, everything smaller than a heavy crossbow is a hand crossbow."
Reminds me of something else:
[Ahmad Ibn Fahdlan shows off his new scimitar, whittled down from a Viking sword]
Weath the Musician: Give an Arab a sword, he makes a knife.
[Ahmad cuts through a thick wooden pole in one chop]
Ahmed Ibn Fahdlan: It works.
[He tosses it into the air, twirls it around, then holds the blade to Weath's neck]
Weath the Musician: When you die, can I give that to my daughter?
[laughter]
"For a real man, everything smaller than a heavy crossbow is a hand crossbow."
True 'nuff... :-)
Reminds me of something else:[Ahmad Ibn Fahdlan shows off his new scimitar, whittled down from a Viking sword]
Weath the Musician: Give an Arab a sword, he makes a knife.
[Ahmad cuts through a thick wooden pole in one chop]
Ahmed Ibn Fahdlan: It works.
[He tosses it into the air, twirls it around, then holds the blade to Weath's neck]
Weath the Musician: When you die, can I give that to my daughter?
[laughter]
Good movie that was.
Who can't dig Vikings!?
|
|
Miniature giant space wookie?Excessive body hair, excellent sense of direction, uses a crossbow that shoots energized bolts? Harsk is clearly a Wookiee.Not tall enough.
You mean, I hate to say it, an ewok?
Random Star Wars trivia: Ewoks were created to replace wookies in Return of the Jedi. Originally, the moon of Endor was to be inhabited by a tribe of primitive wookies, but the idea was dropped because of the development of Chewbacca's character. He was portrayed as very technically oriented, and as he was the only wookie on screen at the time, there was a fear that this would confuse the audience.
Of course, movies have human characters which are technically sophisticated and others that are more primitive on screen together in other movies, and that isn't a problem. Of course, I don't understand movie logic.
So in closing, I think we can come to the illogical conclusion that Harsk is not a dwarf, nor is he a shaved wookie. At best, he would be considered a well-groomed, heavyset ewok.
And this is why I should be allowed near a message board between 9PM and 9PM...
I'm soo gonna use that.
"Dwarves are partially shaved ewoks"
As soon as the next racial war breaks out, I'll use that as my doomsday device!
"Elves are gay and hump trees"
"So? dwarves are ewoks!"
"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" *cuts wrists, wraps lips around a gun and blows his head off, disembowels himself and runs into a chainsaw, all at the same time*
Since we're on the subject of funny situations with wookies, I had an old Star Wars game where my friend Alleyn and I played a special-ops duo of a Wookie and a Noghri...the comic image of a nearly-seven-foot tall, hair-covered critter walking alongside a 4'8", completely hairless commando. They were a deadly duo, though. Anyway...the Wookie's name was Rrarrworr, and he wasn't shaved. He did, however, bleach his fur blonde and frequently streaked his fur with the blood of their enemies. His favorite thing to say to the bad guys was, "Put your head between your legs and kiss your butt goodbye." Not that many of them could understand, but Khabarakh got a kick out of it.
Hi! I was lurking for 3 months now and decided to finally make a post.
I just wanted to say, I really liked this preview and it made me wanna play a ranger. I also learned a lot of info on how the ranger fairs in combat that I had missed when reading the beta pdf.
Hi! I was lurking for 3 months now and decided to finally make a post.
I just wanted to say, I really liked this preview and it made me wanna play a ranger. I also learned a lot of info on how the ranger fairs in combat that I had missed when reading the beta pdf.
Welcome to the boards John John! Lilith will probably be by with cookies soon - fresh baked for PaizoCon.
Rangers are pretty neat - I've rarely played one either, but they get more and more tempting!
|
|
I'm soo gonna use that.
"Dwarves are partially shaved ewoks"
As soon as the next racial war breaks out, I'll use that as my doomsday device!
"Elves are gay and hump trees"
"So? dwarves are ewoks!"
"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" *cuts wrists, wraps lips around a gun and blows his head off, disembowels himself and runs into a chainsaw, all at the same time*
Well, if you're going to use the "partially shaved ewok" insult, please give me credit if you don't mind. When you invent such a destructive weapon, you might as well get credit...kind of like that guy who invented dynamite. Nobel wasn't it? Not like he came up with anything else significant to human history. :-)
You know, I totally clicked on this threads last pages to see if anything new had been said about the ranger class... but man, partially shaved ewoks... I never saw THAT coming. In fact, I don't know if I even wanted to see that coming. In fact, I wouldn't wanna see one at all!
I did notice something about Harsk - he has more hit points than he should. 11 more, to be exact. Methinks he's getting a favored class bonus to them, even though ranger isn't classically a dwarf's favored class. Looks like the people who were speculating that you'd get to pick your favored class no matter what race were right.
I'm not sure how I feel about that.
I did notice something about Harsk - he has more hit points than he should. 11 more, to be exact. Methinks he's getting a favored class bonus to them, even though ranger isn't classically a dwarf's favored class. Looks like the people who were speculating that you'd get to pick your favored class no matter what race were right.
I'm not sure how I feel about that.
I am.
Well, I'm sure how *I* feel about it. Don't know about your feelings.
My opinion: Just get rid of the rule altogether. This is not a "favoured class" rule, it's a "get more advantages for not multiclassing rule".
Well, if you're going to use the "partially shaved ewok" insult, please give me credit if you don't mind.
Why? He won't hear you over his own sobbing.
When you invent such a destructive weapon, you might as well get credit...kind of like that guy who invented dynamite. Nobel wasn't it? Not like he came up with anything else significant to human history. :-)
You still have to set up a fund, paying money to everyone who can play a dwarf that is not stereotyped. Say a million dollars per incident.
I don't think you'll have to shell out any money.
Hey there John John! Welcome to the boards! *passes out virtual cookies*
Thanx :)
I just noticed sth in the preview. Harsk gets a -3 penalty to hit and a +6 bonus to damage. My pdf's version says you get an equal amount of penalty and damage. Yet in the preview it seems to function like power attack for a two handed weapon fighter.
Thanx :)
I just noticed sth in the preview. Harsk gets a -3 penalty to hit and a +6 bonus to damage. My pdf's version says you get an equal amount of penalty and damage. Yet in the preview it seems to function like power attack for a two handed weapon fighter.
Ergo: those feats have changed.
|
|
When you invent such a destructive weapon, you might as well get credit...kind of like that guy who invented dynamite. Nobel wasn't it? Not like he came up with anything else significant to human history. :-)You still have to set up a fund, paying money to everyone who can play a dwarf that is not stereotyped. Say a million dollars per incident.
I don't think you'll have to shell out any money.
Wait, I played a dwarven bard back in 2E. Trust me when I say he was anything but stereotypical - he was the world's first, if not only, metrosexual dwarf. Does this mean I have to pay myself a million dollars?