|
This is one of those situations where GM / Player communication is very important. Before a new game, I make sure to find out what every one of my players is planning on playing and discussing the sort of themes that may prove more difficult during the campaign and which may prove to be highly beneficial . . .
Exactly... I have to ask though, did you add a new favored terrain (airship) :D
|
Humans are common and they like to fight. So rangers are likely to get a lot of practice fighting against them.Humans are a boring Favored Enemy though and ultimately not really a 'favored enemy' so much as the guy it's best to be good at fighting.
"Gnolls killed my family so I hunt them as often as I can"
Great roll playing stuff."Humans are common and like to fight"
Boring!!Don't get me wrong, if I'm clueless about the setting and my GM doesn't seem like he's going to work with me I'll go FE (Human). If there is a chance to make it work with your character's story and the setting you are playing in then it's a lot more fun and interesting to pick a more interesting favored enemy.
In Rise of the Runelords (Giant or Undead)
In Legacy of Fire (Gnolls)
In Carrion Crown (Undead or Magical Beast)
There is nothing in the description of FE that says anything about hatred, dislike or even mild disdain for your FE. All it says is you favor fighting this type of opponent and are good at it. Whether through study, natural talent or divine guidance you know how that opponent ticks.
I'm currently playing a Ranger and Favored enemy Human is actually the best possible choice you can make if you want to get the most out of your Favored Enemy bonus.
Adventurers tend to spend most of the first few levels either fighting them or dealing with them in Social situations and that stacking bonus to Bluff, Perception, ALL Knowledge's, Sense Motive and Survival can easily let you fill the face role of the party when in town.
Take em first and drop every increase you get into it and you can spend all your skill points on something else since you can do them untrained against em.
The rest of the time just cast Hunter's Howl for the minor opponents and Instant Enemy against whatever BBEG you meet and go to town.
The other question is which Favored Terrain you take, there really is only one choice there, URBAN. Take it love it and keep it as high as you can. You will spend most of your time fighting there and at 8th level it's better then Improved Init , Skill Focus (Perception, Geography, Stealth & Survival) and put together.
This is when you start spending the majority of your time battling intelligent enemies and they will always have urban center or at least a building there.
|
|
I've been told a couple of times at 'ranger is a solid class as long as your DM isn't tight and never lets you face your favoured enemy'. This begs the question - how often SHOULD favoured enemies rear their ugly heads for the ranger to be balanced against the other classes? I ask this from the perspective of a rookie DM, not an embittered ranger player.
I just wanted to pull the original post up because most of the folks don't seem to get what this thread is about.
|
There's nothing wrong with having a player who picks Human as a favored enemy. It's the easiest thing in the world to justify, it usually comes up often, and it's not generally hard to put humans into a campaign when you weren't planning on having them show up.
That said, if you weren't planning on having humans in your game, you should probably say something. If you plan on never letting the players fight humans, you should probably say something.
If a session goes by without a single favored enemy, don't worry about it. If two sessions go by without a favored enemy, don't worry about it. But if three or four or five sessions go by without a single favored enemy for the ranger? Throw the guy a bone, or at least have a chat about his FE choices.
|
|
However their psychology and fighting styles are very different. A dwarf with an axe and shield will show different openings and opportunities than an elf swordsman, for example, and attack in different ways.mmmm.. I don't think there would be any more psychological and fighting style differences between a Dwarf axe/shield and elf swordsman... then there would be between a Shackles pirate and a Linnorn king barbarian/viking...
Humans are SOOOOO vast and different between each other, that i have a hard time justifying bonuses against the whole race.
If you had to clarify it a bit more, like Humans: Chelaxians... or Human: Varisians... Then I could buy the psychological aspects of it.
But to get a bonus against an entire race because 'they think and move like a human' seems off...
As we clump together all the undeads in one group and demons, devils and efreeti in another (evil outsiders) with their myriad forms little differences like living in a different regions and having different training are meaningless.
There's nothing wrong with having a player who picks Human as a favored enemy. It's the easiest thing in the world to justify, it usually comes up often, and it's not generally hard to put humans into a campaign when you weren't planning on having them show up.
That said, if you weren't planning on having humans in your game, you should probably say something. If you plan on never letting the players fight humans, you should probably say something.
If a session goes by without a single favored enemy, don't worry about it. If two sessions go by without a favored enemy, don't worry about it. But if three or four or five sessions go by without a single favored enemy for the ranger? Throw the guy a bone, or at least have a chat about his FE choices.
Rangers tend to get use out off human as FE in every campaign it is one of the choices I feel no need to cater to even if the ranger has gone a while without combat involving his FE, nor is his FE only about the damage he can deal, humans are most likely involved in a number of RP encounters where a ranger will attempt to benefit from bonus on perception, sense motive, survival, bluff and knowledge checks. On the other hand I will be more inclined to bend towards a player selecting a more exotic FE choice.
Also it is a player's choice to choose a spread of enemies or focus on a single one, if a player focuses on a single enemy more than the 'other' ranger, should more enemies appear to give him a bigger advantage ? As instant enemy is suddenly the ranger spell for every ranger you are 'forced' to focus from an optimization point of view, if a ranger has access to such a spell, I would feel less inclined to accomodate the ranger. (since I will not use the spell as written that is a non-issue for me)
However their psychology and fighting styles are very different. A dwarf with an axe and shield will show different openings and opportunities than an elf swordsman, for example, and attack in different ways.mmmm.. I don't think there would be any more psychological and fighting style differences between a Dwarf axe/shield and elf swordsman... then there would be between a Shackles pirate and a Linnorn king barbarian/viking...
Humans are SOOOOO vast and different between each other, that i have a hard time justifying bonuses against the whole race.
If you had to clarify it a bit more, like Humans: Chelaxians... or Human: Varisians... Then I could buy the psychological aspects of it.
But to get a bonus against an entire race because 'they think and move like a human' seems off...
As we clump together all the undeads in one group and demons, devils and efreeti in another (evil outsiders) with their myriad forms little differences like living in a different regions and having different training are meaningless.
just saying, efreeti does not have the evil subtype so is not clumped together with devils and demons, but your point stands regardless
Picking options for the absolute best abilities, regardless of how they work for the 'character'... Call it what you want. Min/max, Optimizing, Cheesy... All means the same to me :)
Oh, I'm no great min/maxer, but in the real world people concentrate on what they know, what they are good at.
Now if you don't know what you will find in the campaign 'cos the DM does not give anything away, FE: Human is a good bet to come up. If the DM whines about cheese, just inform him that you would gladly pick another race, but as he isn't giving any clues about what will be coming up on the horizon, you're hedging you bets to get some use out of your primary class feature - you will change it if he is more forthcoming.
Bottom line- everybody needs to have fun. I'd make some general suggestions, Carrion Crown does this and I hope the trend continues.
However- if a GM chooses Not to work a little with the player there are safe options common to MOST AP'S
Human
Undead
Evil outsiders
Magical Beasts
Abberations
Giants
These are probably the broadest/most commonly encountered creatures I'VE seen in Paizo AP'S.
The same can be done with favored terrains
Urban
Forest
Underground
Mountains
Swamp
If one was to metagame his FE from an Optimisation Point his split would probably be:
1st- +4 (Human)
2nd- +2 (Undead)
3rd- +8 (When you Know this is a common/powerful enemy-eg outsider)
4th- +2 (Magical Beasts)
5th- +2 (Giant)
Tip: Heaps of Enemies are Large- Big Game Hunter is a good feat. +1 to hit and +2 Damage=Equals wpn fcs+wpn spl vs Large.
Equals +3 to hit and +4 to damage vs Large or Bigger Undead, Magical Beasts and Giants. Most Magical Beasts are Large/Bigger and ALL Giants are large or bigger. Nearly every monster over CR9 is Large or Bigger
Abberations I leave OFF My FE list because you don't see them as often (unless playing underground alot), they also tend to be powerful and sometimes unique so they are a better instant enemy target.
Hunter's Howl lets you have multiple FE'S in the same encounter and Instant Enemy lets you rock vs Powerful Foes who don't come up often.
It's been MY experience(yours may differ) but the above choices work well in 80% of AP'S.
You know... spelling Human that way makes your elf sound like a Ferengi. :)We just see the FE concept a bit differently. I still see them as the old-school 'species enemy' where they are your most hated enemy, and if there is one on the field of battle, THAT is the one that you go after...That is the old way, certainly. I don't prescribe to that theory, certainly not for my particular Ranger character.
Quick Note on Hu-mon encounters in my KM campaign.
I don't attack NPCs or PCs
We haven't run into Hu-mon encounter since, oh, half-way through the second chapter (I think.)
Dere's anudder word dose pesky elvses use for you humans...dey also say "Mon-Keigh". I tink it means "un-evolved" or somefink like dat...
It's the same as with feats and it's very good pointed out at the GMG, generally "let the players use their toys, nothing is more frustrating, then after a lot of work get whirlwind attack and then, never be able to use it"
Part of GM-Buisnes is to work towards the players strengths and concepts not against them all time (from time to time it's ok^^)
I've been told a couple of times at 'ranger is a solid class as long as your DM isn't tight and never lets you face your favoured enemy'. This begs the question - how often SHOULD favoured enemies rear their ugly heads for the ranger to be balanced against the other classes? I ask this from the perspective of a rookie DM, not an embittered ranger player.I just wanted to pull the original post up because most of the folks don't seem to get what this thread is about.
Yeah, going to the GM perspective: I would talk to the player. Ask them why they are picking a FE. If they say "I think this is the best mechanical choice", I would just go about building scenarios that I was already planning to build.
If they give an answer that involves a backstory, their character choice is telling you something. It's information about what kind of story they want to see and how they want to interact with it. In that case, I would make sure the FE features prominently in the campaign. As the campaign progresses, the player is most likely going to be reacting to the trend of encounters they see with FE.
|
|
I'm not a big fan of the whole favored enemy thing to begin with but it really should only come up when the Ranger is looking for his favored enemy or the GM is using it in the campaign. I feel the Ranger should have the ability to choose in an encounter who is his enemy and for that entire encounter (or death of said enemy)gain his bonuses.
Everyone should have a chance to shine in the spotlight, without monopolizing it. One of the times rangers get to shine is vs. their FE. If they show up all the time, the other melee types are going to feel like second class citizens. If every fight is "the ranger waves her bow at the bad guys and they explode in sprays of gore" it gets old, quick. Not every game will let every class use every one of their features, but you should try to incorporate as many as you can. You'd rather have players going "I've got just the thing for this" and being awesome, then thinking they are dead weight and wondering why they bothered to roll that class.
But the trick is to rotate the spotlight, so everyone gets a chance to shine. Tossing favored enemies at the ranger is one (but not the only) way to give them the "I'm awesome" moment.
But the trick is to rotate the spotlight, so everyone gets a chance to shine. Tossing favored enemies at the ranger is one (but not the only) way to give them the "I'm awesome" moment.
I disagree with the way you seem to be saying that the GM should somehow keep track of how often the Ranger has encountered his FE.
I don't think the DM needs to worry about FE rate of contact at all. There are so many factors within the game, too many to really list here. Over the course of a 6-chapter AP, and probably 17 character levels, a Ranger should get ample opportunity to run into his FEs. There is an ebb and flow here, I guess that's what I'm saying.
When he's not fighting his FEs, it's not like he's useless pile of stats. Ranger is a great class, with spells, skills and an animal companion too.
I'm not a big fan of the whole favored enemy thing to begin with but it really should only come up when the Ranger is looking for his favored enemy or the GM is using it in the campaign. I feel the Ranger should have the ability to choose in an encounter who is his enemy and for that entire encounter (or death of said enemy)gain his bonuses.
Then, he needs to take the Guide archetype. :)
But the trick is to rotate the spotlight, so everyone gets a chance to shine. Tossing favored enemies at the ranger is one (but not the only) way to give them the "I'm awesome" moment.I disagree with the way you seem to be saying that the GM should somehow keep track of how often the Ranger has encountered his FE.
I don't think the DM needs to worry about FE rate of contact at all. There are so many factors within the game, too many to really list here. Over the course of a 6-chapter AP, and probably 17 character levels, a Ranger should get ample opportunity to run into his FEs. There is an ebb and flow here, I guess that's what I'm saying.
When he's not fighting his FEs, it's not like he's useless pile of stats. Ranger is a great class, with spells, skills and an animal companion too.
I agree that rangers are more then just FE, but it is a large part of what they do. And if you are looking for a way to make them "shine", tossing a few into the foe mix will accomplish that. You can also do this with tracking, wilderness encounters, or other things depending on the particular ranger.
But you do need to keep an eye on it. In a 3.5 game I was in, we had a long stretch where all the bad guys were the primary thing our ranger hated. As that arc dragged on the rest of the party was getting a little discouraged; it seemed like out only role in the group was to loot the bodies that our ranger left in her wake. The spotlight was focused for -too- long on the ranger, and the game suffered for it.
I'm not saying that one in every four encounters MUST be vs. a favored enemy, but you do need to keep track, just so everyone gets time to shine. FE encounters are just one way to make the ranger the hero of the day. Just like traps let the rouge do his thing, or social events make the bard shine. The trick is to give everyone a turn.
I'm not saying that one in every four encounters MUST be vs. a favored enemy, but you do need to keep track, just so everyone gets time to shine. FE encounters are just one way to make the ranger the hero of the day. Just like traps let the rouge do his thing, or social events make the bard shine. The trick is to give everyone a turn.
I'm playing a Ranger and I can tell you that my GM isn't really concerned with the lack of FE encounters. I'm not concerned by it either. Fact is, I shine with or without it.
- Favored Terrain I have two; Forest, Mountains. In the KM AP, I spend a lot of time in my FT(s). At 13th level, I will almost never leave FT.
Skybolt: this just a small, magical, trinket really... I mean, it's just a +2 Composite Longbow (STR 18) of Thundering. Oh, yeah, and I have the Staglord's magical hat too... Point is, I have neat magical toys and I know how to use 'em.
Skills: Out in the wilderness, I spot the baddies before they spot us. I know what the weather is gonna be like days in advance. I'm an elf (with a Ring of Sustenance), so I'm always on watch and I don't get to hungry. I can climb and swim...
Spells: Hunter's Howl, Barkskin - that's just two great choices of many!
Basically, I'm not buying the notion that if I don't get to utilize FE, then I'm somehow getting gypped. That's just not true. The Ranger, in a wilderness setting anyway, is the star of the show. It's not because he's a jerk, it is because Ranger is just a great class.
|
|
But the trick is to rotate the spotlight, so everyone gets a chance to shine. Tossing favored enemies at the ranger is one (but not the only) way to give them the "I'm awesome" moment.I disagree with the way you seem to be saying that the GM should somehow keep track of how often the Ranger has encountered his FE.
I don't think the DM needs to worry about FE rate of contact at all. There are so many factors within the game, too many to really list here. Over the course of a 6-chapter AP, and probably 17 character levels, a Ranger should get ample opportunity to run into his FEs. There is an ebb and flow here, I guess that's what I'm saying.
When he's not fighting his FEs, it's not like he's useless pile of stats. Ranger is a great class, with spells, skills and an animal companion too.
It's not really about keeping track of anything. The player says "I'm going to take favored enemy Humanoid (Gnolls)!", the GM says "There really aren't a lot of gnolls in Ustalav, there are a fair number of ghouls and vampires though, you might think about favored enemy (Undead)."
Alternately in a home grown campaign the GM might put together a side plot around a character's favored enemy.
It's not that the character is useless without it, it's that for a player it's fun to be able to use class powers and do cool stuff.
Similarly if someone puts together a bard and wants to focus on social encounters I'll make sure there are some social encounters (or let him know he should probably focus his efforts elsewhere). If a player puts together an undead hunting character I'll make sure undead are at least a minor plot item so they get a chance to shine.
The class is certainly a fun class if you never use your favored enemy, but it's more fun if you do at least occasionally bump into them and get to be awesome.
I haven't read all the thread, here is just my opinion:
every 5-10 sessions, half the encounters should have the favorite ennemy, this if you have given the ranger advice on favorite ennemy.
If the ennemy is likely to be encountered only at a few levels and you will have a whole campaign, make it every 2-5 sessions, 3/4 of all encounters for those levels. This is for goblinoid or animal for example
If the ranger takes dragon becase his level 1 ranger has the awesome dragon-hunter background, well then you can't do much for him and he has to accept that.
of course I wouldn't plan exactly to these numbers, but a favorite ennemy definitly has a higher chance to occure than any other monster.
The class is certainly a fun class if you never use your favored enemy, but it's more fun if you do at least occasionally bump into them and get to be awesome.
I highlighted the words 'fun' and 'awesome' for a reason; the use of FE, whether a little, or a lot, doesn't make the Ranger any more or less awesome. If you're playing a Ranger, just to utilize the Favored Enemy class feature (meaning that's what is required for you to have awesome funness), then I think you're missing the point. The class is so much more than that. Favored Enemy is a great class feature, but it isn't the only thing the Ranger does and it isn't guaranteed that you'll always get use it.
As long as the GM is fair, trust him to have a varied world that will accommodate all of your abilities at one time or another. If he tries to force scenarios that favor all of the PCs, I think the game suffers for it. You're better off to go for variety and let things sort themselves out.
This thread with the earlier thing for humanoid human made me think of a new background for humanoid human. You were used in reconconsense in teh army but under a cruel and evil commander so you deserted and now try to fight for good. You would have expirence seeing humans and tracking them and some fighting them but it still will work and this makes sense you do not per say hate humans and is fluffy.
Or your ranger could have been a bounty hunter before and has favored enemy human.
An in game example in a pbp I am in is favored enemy human would have helped me track down a missing child. Being the one moving the adventure forward is really fun.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The class is certainly a fun class if you never use your favored enemy, but it's more fun if you do at least occasionally bump into them and get to be awesome.I highlighted the words 'fun' and 'awesome' for a reason; the use of FE, whether a little, or a lot, doesn't make the Ranger any more or less awesome. If you're playing a Ranger, just to utilize the Favored Enemy class feature (meaning that's what is required for you to have awesome funness), then I think you're missing the point. The class is so much more than that. Favored Enemy is a great class feature, but it isn't the only thing the Ranger does and it isn't guaranteed that you'll always get use it.
No you are missing the point. "As long as the GM is fair..." I highlighted GM because we are talking about GMing. Which is what the OP asked about.
As a GM your job is to make your players have as much fun as possible. There are a lot of things you balance to make the game as challenging and rewarding as possible.
Whether they *expect* it or not players like having their choices validated and enjoy being able to use the cool class powers at their disposal.
It's not JUST favored enemy, it's all of them. Player's like saying:
Whether they consciously know it or not people get a little bit of pleasure when their decisions to pick one class feature over another pays off. Your players choices are also informing you as a GM about what sort of campaign they want to play in. If a player picks favored enemy Humanoid (Giant) it's likely because he wants to fight giants!
That doesn't mean you pile on encounter after encounter of giants which are a pushover for that player, but it does mean that when he encounters them he's getting a little reward. If it's your home game this is an even better deal because your players actually feel like they are controlling the story to some extent.
Considering the most important role of a GM is to ensure everyone at the table is having fun I do absolutely think tossing your ranger player a bone every once in a while in the form of a favored enemy encounter is essential to good GMing. Or throwing in extra social encounters for bards, spellbooks for wizards, making sure there are traps and locked doors for the rogue to overcome, etc etc.
Just a few thoughts:
-- To answer the OP, I would say the GM should work with the player to give them advice about several options as FE that will likely be useful. If the player ignores the advice, that's their problem, and I wouldn't change anything to cater to their choice. By the same token I would never remove favored enemies from a campaign deliberately.
-- IMHO, players should come up with some background reason for the FE choice. Although hatred of the target creature may be one valid reason for the bonus, it doesn't necessarily have to be the only reason. There should be some reason for it, however. It shouldn't just be numbers on a sheet.
-- The choices are not all equal, and as some have pointed out, many are pretty broad, while others are pretty narrow. I think some work could be done to even them out.
-- Humans is indeed a pretty logical generic choice, as it is a rare campaign that does not involve extensive interaction with humans, the most common race in Golarion and most other campaign worlds. I'll hazard no opinion here as to whether choosing human is cheesy, but I understand why some GMs get annoyed/bored when that is what every ranger picks, and/or if the players make no or only a lame attempt to justify it with backstory.
-- In practice I frequently suggest that the ranger leave their favorite enemy undeclared until after a session or two, when they have an idea of what they might be facing. This also gives an opportuntiy to declare something that they struggled aganst or really despised when they faced it. Can be very flavorful. Had a ranger once that was nearly killed by giant spiders in my campaign. Made vermin his favorite enemy and then went nutso every time he encountered giant bugs until they were chopped into little quivering bits. Everyone loved the theater of it because they knew why his character acted that way.
My take on a related but slightly different question: How My Ranger Stopped Encountering Undead. :)
Sry, computer unplugged suddenly...
+1 This is a real problem with some 'dms'. I had a Rogue that suddenly was facing nothing but Undead and Constructs. I must admit that I felt put upon. To the OP subject, I always consult with players on FEs, based on 30 yrs of Champions hunteds.
|
|
Just regarding the main thread title question, any class that has class abilities that are tied to very specific creature types (I think Ranger is the only one, but I could be off), The player needs to get together with the DM and discuss how to tie this character to the main plot, thus getting a favored enemy that is relevant to the story. I would say with that in mind, the adventure should have a few encounters here and there have the favored enemy in the beginning, gradually having more as the story progresses.
If an enemy is chosen by the player that will not appear very much, the DM needs to let this player know. If they choose to keep it because of the background flavor they want, then that is their option and they won't see the bonus used much, if at all.
I think it is good to give players the chance to shine in certain circumstances. If the player made a bad decision during character generation that will cause problems in the particular adventure, the DM should jump in and help fix it before the adventure starts. It is no fun to play a character that seemed good on paper, but sucks terribly in action (I have had a couple myself)
Haven't read the whole thread, sorry, but my thoughts on it.
The ranger should encounter his first favored enemy as often as it makes sense in the world. If, in your world, elves were hunted nearly to extinction by orcs 500 years ago, then if your ranger has 'Favored Enemy : Elf' then he should probably never encounter an elf (although maybe drow would count).
If your world is extremely human centric, and it's a city based campaign, and the guy is an urban ranger who picks FE (Human) he should encounter them 95% of the time.
The trick is not to warp the world to fit the FE of the ranger. It's to alert the player if he's picking a FE that doesn't fit the world. For example, I had someone making a ranger at one point (he later changed to a rogue) who was going to take FE (Human). However, I knew that the campaign was going to take place on a continent that didn't have any humans on it. So I just told him that FE (Human) was a very bad idea for this campaign, and he changed it to FE (Lizardfolk). I knew there would be a decent number of lizardfolk over the course of the campaign, and confirmed that this was a better choice.
|
|
Haven't read the whole thread, sorry, but my thoughts on it.
The ranger should encounter his first favored enemy as often as it makes sense in the world. If, in your world, elves were hunted nearly to extinction by orcs 500 years ago, then if your ranger has 'Favored Enemy : Elf' then he should probably never encounter an elf (although maybe drow would count).
If your world is extremely human centric, and it's a city based campaign, and the guy is an urban ranger who picks FE (Human) he should encounter them 95% of the time.
The trick is not to warp the world to fit the FE of the ranger. It's to alert the player if he's picking a FE that doesn't fit the world. For example, I had someone making a ranger at one point (he later changed to a rogue) who was going to take FE (Human). However, I knew that the campaign was going to take place on a continent that didn't have any humans on it. So I just told him that FE (Human) was a very bad idea for this campaign, and he changed it to FE (Lizardfolk). I knew there would be a decent number of lizardfolk over the course of the campaign, and confirmed that this was a better choice.
A big +1 to these statements but with a caveat.
If you are in a home brew game and one of your players makes a character "Aellen Elfslayer" who hates elves with a passion... He is sending a pretty clear message to you as a GM that he wants to hunt elves to the very corners of the earth.
I wouldn't change the world to give him an elf filled world, but I might give him hints in game about where he might find elf enclaves and let him steer the adventure towards the destruction of the foul creatures. The big advantage of a home-brew game is you have the flexibility of letting your players help steer the course of the game which makes it all the more immersing for them.
Haven't read the whole thread, sorry, but my thoughts on it.
The ranger should encounter his first favored enemy as often as it makes sense in the world. If, in your world, elves were hunted nearly to extinction by orcs 500 years ago, then if your ranger has 'Favored Enemy : Elf' then he should probably never encounter an elf (although maybe drow would count).
If your world is extremely human centric, and it's a city based campaign, and the guy is an urban ranger who picks FE (Human) he should encounter them 95% of the time.
The trick is not to warp the world to fit the FE of the ranger. It's to alert the player if he's picking a FE that doesn't fit the world. For example, I had someone making a ranger at one point (he later changed to a rogue) who was going to take FE (Human). However, I knew that the campaign was going to take place on a continent that didn't have any humans on it. So I just told him that FE (Human) was a very bad idea for this campaign, and he changed it to FE (Lizardfolk). I knew there would be a decent number of lizardfolk over the course of the campaign, and confirmed that this was a better choice.
I agree with this as well. This also could be true of talking elf in a region the elves have abandoned. Or aquatic humanoids in the middle of a desert does not make much sense.
If you ask my ranger's player this question, his answer would be "every single encounter." I literally had someone upset because the second adventure didn't feature his favored enemy (although the first was almost nothing but).
This is an easy question. A ranger should never encounter his favored enemies nor should he ever encounter his favored terrain. This is clearly the only choice that maximizes GM pleasure.
The only drawback to this approach is that eventually you're painted into a corner about what kind of monsters/terrains you're dealing with. We all yearn for the player who selects gnomes, halflings, and good outsiders as favored enemies, but this usually isn't the case. If your players are particularly evil, they'll *all* play rangers and pick different favored enemies/terrains until all possibilities are covered. In this case, just create a new creature type. Easy as pie!
This is an easy question. A ranger should never encounter his favored enemies nor should he ever encounter his favored terrain. This is clearly the only choice that maximizes GM pleasure.
The only drawback to this approach is that eventually you're painted into a corner about what kind of monsters/terrains you're dealing with. We all yearn for the player who selects gnomes, halflings, and good outsiders as favored enemies, but this usually isn't the case. If your players are particularly evil, they'll *all* play rangers and pick different favored enemies/terrains until all possibilities are covered. In this case, just create a new creature type. Easy as pie!
The solution is obvious. Send swarms and swarms of halfling and gnome enemies at them. I've also seen a diabolist who used enslaved celestials to fight for him, it was quite effective.
The obvious answer to this thread (if it hasn't already been said) is...
... however often they can manage to track down their favored enemy with their ridiculously high Track roll.
|
Often enough that the player does not feel like he is purposely being nerfed.
If every enemy is an orc until the ranger takes FE: Orc, and then they're nothing but gnolls, something is wrong.
This is precisely why I take FE:Human for my first choice every time. It's common, and easily flavorable.
I played a dwarven ranger/wizard headed for eldritch knight, and he took FE:Human to represent his study of human culture in preparation for being the ambassador of the dwarven nation to the human world.
Favored Enemy does not require hatred.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Favored Enemy does not require hatred.
I've considered playing a ranger/chirurgeon. Someone who is a specialist in herbalism and field medicine (army doc). So his 'FE' is actually just species who's anatomies he's studied so well that he knows all their weak spots, how their bodies work, etc.
If every enemy is an orc until the ranger takes FE: Orc, and then they're nothing but gnolls, something is wrong.
If "wrong" is maximum GM pleasure, then yes, something is wrong.
Favored Enemy does not require hatred.
Much like a duck hunter usually doesn't hate ducks. A ranger with favored enemy: halfling is essentially someone with a halfling law enforcement background. They don't *always* hate them. (But usually it helps.)