It has always been my opinion that rangers are just not as good as other classes. They get a lot of cool out-of-combat stuff, but I feel like rogues can get most of it as well, and still outperform rangers in combat. So with that in mind, I have come up with a few tweaks to Combat Style that I think might help, and I would greatly appreciate input:
At levels 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18, rangers may choose a feat from any Combat Style tree. They must be the appropriate level, but otherwise do not need to meet the prerequisites.
At second level, a ranger must choose a combat style. Whenever a ranger gains a feat, they may choose a feat from their combat style without meeting the prerequisites. They must still be the appropriate level.
At level 3, characters with levels in Ranger count as fighters two levels lower for the purposes of meeting prerequisites. This stacks with levels in fighter for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.
So what do you think? I think this puts them about equal to barbarians when it comes down to it, maybe a smidge better because of their skills.
|
Well, it won't sound nice but you asked.
I think you are wrong. Rangers have it QUITE nice in pathfinder with a D10 HD, Full BAB, specialty combat feats, a special bond at a pretty low level, favored enemy & terrain, and divine spells.
Rangers simply put, don't need all those bonus feats because they are already able to specialize in the area that they focus on is their specialty, they don't need a million feats to achieve that.
In addition counting as a fighter for those specialty fighter feats is overkill, those things are supposed to be unique to them. Otherwise the fighter will end up being a boring sack of everyday nothing special compared to everyone else if you take away those unique benefits.
In addition to your comparison with the barbarian... I think I have to part ways here too, barbarians as they are, are actually in (IMO) the worst position of any of the melee focused classes, so saying it brings ranger to their level would require nerfing the ranger, not buffing them.
In short, a ranger is not supposed to be a Fighter, they are supposed to be rangers.
Edit: If you want to buff them in any way my suggestion would be to let them start their spell progression from level 1 instead of level 4, capping the spellcasting progression at level 16 which shouldn't matter at that point because VERY few games get past that level. In fact Pathfinder AP's cap out at level 17 at the highest and you usually HIT that level upon defeating the last BBEG.
Haven't had a chance to try it out, my group is AWOL for the next two weeks. Just looking for thoughts on how this would shift power balance.
Well, it won't sound nice but you asked.
I think you are wrong. Rangers have it QUITE nice in pathfinder with a D10 HD, Full BAB, specialty combat feats, a special bond at a pretty low level, favored enemy & terrain, and divine spells.
Rangers simply put, don't need all those bonus feats because they are already able to specialize in the area that they focus on is their specialty, they don't need a million feats to achieve that.
In addition counting as a fighter for those specialty fighter feats is overkill, those things are supposed to be unique to them. Otherwise the fighter will end up being a boring sack of everyday nothing special compared to everyone else if you take away those unique benefits.
In addition to your comparison with the barbarian... I think I have to part ways here too, barbarians as they are, are actually in (IMO) the worst position of any of the melee focused classes, so saying it brings ranger to their level would require nerfing the ranger, not buffing them.
In short, a ranger is not supposed to be a Fighter, they are supposed to be rangers.
Edit: If you want to buff them in any way my suggestion would be to let them start their spell progression from level 1 instead of level 4, capping the spellcasting progression at level 16 which shouldn't matter at that point because VERY few games get past that level. In fact Pathfinder AP's cap out at level 17 at the highest and you usually HIT that level upon defeating the last BBEG.
+1
I quite agree Rangers really don't need to be messed with because they are not front linesmen to begin with. You can't judge a class purely by is combat potential but you also have to conciser all the other aspects of a class that makes a class effective.
Although I would have to say that a Barbarian if played correctly can be very effective.
I think Rangers are just fine the way they are.
With the right feats and spells, my archery ranger (level 7) can easily achieve 100 damage per round. I have all sorts of utility spells I can choose from to tailor to the problem at hand, and I have plenty of skills to get me through tricky non-combat obstacles.
Hell, during the last fight, my ranger (Level 7, remember) managed to do 170 damage to one of the enemies. More than enough.
As a ranger, I can choose to be different things; a damage beast, a tactical caster, a buffer, or a scout/investigator. The key to being a good ranger is adapting your tactics to the situation at hand. I probably won't be quite as good in the damage department as the fighter will be, but frankly I'm OK with that, because I will be very nearly as good, while still having the versatility to be useful almost all of the time.
Rangers ftw.
Before you do all the work, i would suggest to check out the APG and the new Ranger spells and class options. Give a ranger some pearls of power at you have a lot of power at your hands.
Before you do all the work, i would suggest to check out the APG and the new Ranger spells and class options. Give a ranger some pearls of power at you have a lot of power at your hands.
Gravity Bow and Aspect of the Falcon are a great combo.
Although I would have to say that a Barbarian if played correctly can be very effective.Oh for sure, but comparably speaking their toolkit is much smaller compared to rogues, fighters, and rangers, even monks.
Very True, they mostly just hurt people but that is what they do best. One of my newer players is an old timer GM and he said that he might be willing to give me a break from my GMing duties every other week so I can just play. So I been playing around with the idea of playing an idiot savant Barbarian who is basically like Lennie Small from "Of Mice and Men" but every once in a while I can use my actually intelligence as a player and come up with good ideas for the group on how to proceed in a adventure. Sorta like an epiphany of brilliance in which for a few seconds the veil of his retardation lifts and his true intelligence is revealed. Mechanically, when I want my character to do something smart I would have to roll a 1d12 (those never get used enough) and on a roll of 1 his Int is doubled so that he can do smart things but on a roll of a 12 his roll is halved which he does major stupid things. I think it would create some interesting things in the game. Plus I want to called everyone George. :)
Hell, during the last fight, my ranger (Level 7, remember) managed to do 170 damage to one of the enemies. More than enough.
Rangers ftw.
From someone currently playing a level 7 ranger, I would LOVE to know how you pulled that off.
I'd just like to preface this by saying that every campaign I've ever played in has been 99.9% straight-up fighting, so that is the yardstick that I'd have to measure them by. I can see the utility being nice, but it's never been an issue for me. And I'm not trying to argue, I want to like rangers, I've just never had the opportunity. Please show me how much ass they can kick.
Favored Terrain and Favored Enemy have never really impressed me, just because they're so situational. Maybe I'm just grumpy about it because every time I pick "favored terrain: forest," my DM decides we should have an urban campaign all of a sudden, and if I pick "favored terrain: urban," we are nigh-instantly teleported to the Abyss, etc.
I've statted out archery rogues and fighters that can both crank out more damage than the archery rangers can, and I feel like you could just make a better ranger with smart rogue talent choices. Though that was Pre-APG, and Gravity Bow could definitely shift the balance. The only real combat edge I can see rangers having is the ability to two-weapon fight while dumping dex.
Hunter's Bond is also kind of eh. You can have an okay pet, or an okay buff. The Paladin's Divine Bond is twenty times better - a self-buff at minutes per level, or a pet at full druid levels. And even if the Paladin picks the pet, later on they can pop Aura of Justice, and buff the horse. Hell, even Barbarians with the Spirit Steed rage powers do pets better than Rangers do.
I've looked at the APG, and all the ranger variants are just so crappy compared to what everything else got. The only thing that impressed me was the Scout variant, and some of the new spells. Beastmaster's alright, and the Shapeshifter's pretty cool, too. But the Urban Ranger is just so terrible I feel like the developers sat around and said "What's the single s#&~tiest thing we can do to Rangers?" I can see it working, if that's the kind of campaign you're in, but I never see anyone choosing that instead of just being a ranger with Favored Terrain: Urban.
In 3.5, I would've agreed that fighter-specific feats are the only thing that set them apart from other classes. But now they have Weapon Training, which is, IMHO, a contender for "best upgrade from 3.5". Armor Training is pretty awesome, too. And the variant fighters in the APG have some awesome abilities.
And while we're talking about barbarians, it seems to me that the whole concept is that they're hyper-specialized in breaking faces. Some of the rage powers (the Beast Totem tree, Guarded Life, Elemental Rage) are pretty dang good. I totally dig the idea of the Savant barbarian. I once played a barbarian who would use extremely circular logic, a la Pinky from Pinky & The Brain, to suggest the things that I thought of as a player.
Hell, during the last fight, my ranger (Level 7, remember) managed to do 170 damage to one of the enemies. More than enough.
Rangers ftw.From someone currently playing a level 7 ranger, I would LOVE to know how you pulled that off.
+2 Comp. Longbow (+4 STR), Frost. Boon Companion Lion with Pounce and Rake. Favored Enemy: Undead. Rapid Shot, Manyshot and Deadly Aim. Cast Gravity Bow and Aspect of the Falcon, got two crits and a third solid hit (my last attack didn't hit, so I could have done even more), high damage on the rolls.
That probably won't happen again anytime soon, but it was pretty epic.
I'd just like to preface this by saying that every campaign I've ever played in has been 99.9% straight-up fighting, so that is the yardstick that I'd have to measure them by. I can see the utility being nice, but it's never been an issue for me. And I'm not trying to argue, I want to like rangers, I've just never had the opportunity. Please show me how much ass they can kick.
See my earlier post about doing 170 damage.
Favored Terrain and Favored Enemy have never really impressed me, just because they're so situational. Maybe I'm just grumpy about it because every time I pick "favored terrain: forest," my DM decides we should have an urban campaign all of a sudden, and if I pick "favored terrain: urban," we are nigh-instantly teleported to the Abyss, etc.
This sounds more like an issue with your DM than an issue with the class. DMs need to give some good suggestions to Rangers about these things. I've been doing great with FE and FT.
I've statted out archery rogues and fighters that can both crank out more damage than the archery rangers can, and I feel like you could just make a better ranger with smart rogue talent choices. Though that was Pre-APG, and Gravity Bow could definitely shift the balance. The only real combat edge I can see rangers having is the ability to two-weapon fight while dumping dex.
Fighters can probably do a bit more damage, but not by much, and don't have nearly the kind of versatility the ranger has. If you want to be a one trick pony, ranger is not for you I'm afraid. (Not saying you do.)
Hunter's Bond is also kind of eh. You can have an okay pet, or an okay buff. The Paladin's Divine Bond is twenty times better - a self-buff at minutes per level, or a pet at full druid levels. And even if the Paladin picks the pet, later on they can pop Aura of Justice, and buff the horse. Hell, even Barbarians with the Spirit Steed rage powers do pets better than Rangers do.
The buff is garbage, but the Animal Companion is really nice once you take Boon Companion. There are plenty of different types of animals depending on what you want to do. For damage, go for a Lion/Tiger or a Deinonychus.
+2 Comp. Longbow (+4 STR), Frost. Boon Companion Lion with Pounce and Rake. Favored Enemy: Undead. Rapid Shot, Manyshot and Deadly Aim. Cast Gravity Bow and Aspect of the Falcon, got two crits and a third solid hit (my last attack didn't hit, so I could have done even more), high damage on the rolls.That probably won't happen again anytime soon, but it was pretty epic.
Ah, that's including pet attacks too. So it looks like 11d6+84 plus pet attacks. Not bad.
I've statted out archery rogues and fighters that can both crank out more damage than the archery rangers can, and I feel like you could just make a better ranger with smart rogue talent choices. Though that was Pre-APG, and Gravity Bow could definitely shift the balance. The only real combat edge I can see rangers having is the ability to two-weapon fight while dumping dex.
All of what you say is true, but if all you want to do is crank out damage then maybe the ranger class isn't the right choice for you. Indeed a LOT of their damage is situational and maybe in your standard dungeon crawl the ranger is a lousy choice for outright DPR. Our group is just nearing the end of book 2 in the Kingmaker AP and I'm getting much more out of my ranger than the ability to crank out damage. Believe me, I haven't had the chance to use my favored enemy bonus against ANYTHING yet (which ticks me off), but if I can do 70ish points with no animal companion, a couple lucky rolls, no deadly aim, and a non-magic bow with a +1 STR bonus against an enemy that isn't favored to me I think I'm holding my own (it's the level of wizard I took to qualify for AA, the 15 point buy, and the fact I didn't gimp my stats). Especially since critters around my CR top out around 90 HPs.
Also I would try asking your GM what kind of campaign he intends to run so you can plan your ranger around that and if he won't tell you then that is an issue between you and the GM and has nothing to do with the Ranger class.
Instant Enemy takes the guesswork out of slaying stuff:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells---final/i/instant-enemy
Just use all that monster killing skill and apply it the the task at hand ^^.
Given the existance of this wonderfull spell, it´s usually suggested to chose one good favored enemy like Undead or evil outsiders and allocate the following to something rare (or something you do in fact not fear) like Humanoid (gnome) or plant.
Favored Terrain may sucks if you are not in it, so chose a Terrain your character actually likes to be in, so you can enjoy your bonus when you retire.
I can suggest the Beastmaster ranger, you give up some stuff, but you get a better pet. And I really would not suggest to discount the pet, especially if you go the archery route.
And to state some advantages of the Ranger over other casters:
Spellcasting
Pearls of Power are just awesome for Rängers, and in the worst case use a wand. Ok it doesn´t have a ranger feeling, but it´s something the Barbarian and Figher just cant do.
Evasion. Having evasion ist a good thing.^^
Oh and just to mention other wonderfull spells:
Arrow Eruption: Remember that scene from Lord of the Rings.... Arrow Eroption is the rangers fireball... a fireball that uses your favourite enemy bonus and your +1 flaming frost holy bow of doooooom .
Aspect of the Falcon has been mentioned already, if you do not have this spell active on you go back to ranger school and retake "How to ambush" and "How to counter ambush". As Kryptik mentioned already.
Bow Spirit: Having played World of Warcraft for quite sometime.. and most of the time hunters, I learned something very powerfull and important.
"The more arrows you shoot towards the enemy the better", never let me down and helps if you want to be number one in recount.....
But I digress. Hunters..... I mean Rangers, do not need help, IMO it´s just that its a different approach when you are used to figherts.
(to be blunt pre APG I would have agreed with you.)