What do you think of a houserule which gives rangers spells from 1st level, as per bard (6th-level spell progression)? The cost: Full BAB.
Would this be too much of a change for you? Would this still be a ranger, or something else entirely?
For me, it sort of fits nicely with the "jack of all trades" aspect of the class. Yea, some combat ability is lost, but with combat style feats and favored enemy, the ranger wouldn't be hurting *that* badly.
(Also considering converting the warden class from 4th edition, which would be a full BAB, 4th-level spellcaster, as per the ranger/paladin. So, that might be influencing my thought process quite a bit.)
What do you think of a houserule which gives rangers spells from 1st level, as per bard (6th-level spell progression)? The cost: Full BAB.
Would this be too much of a change for you? Would this still be a ranger, or something else entirely?
For me, it sort of fits nicely with the "jack of all trades" aspect of the class. Yea, some combat ability is lost, but with combat style feats and favored enemy, the ranger wouldn't be hurting *that* badly.
(Also considering converting the warden class from 4th edition, which would be a full BAB, 4th-level spellcaster, as per the ranger/paladin. So, that might be influencing my thought process quite a bit.)
This would more than likely be a serious nerf to the ranger, unless he was getting paid bigtime in the magic department. Rangers have enough magic to be useful while still being primarily martials. Unlike Bards, the lack stuff like Bardic music and Arcane Strike to make up for the loss of accuracy. Loss of accuracy leads to loss of damage, both due to hit % and due to severe loss of Power Attack viability.
You'd just be a defanged druid.
The lowered BAB would hurt power attack and deadly aim. Perhaps this would be too great a cost for divine spells... always so inferior to their arcane brethren... why is that? ~_~
Seems a good idea, but it would need work. A similarly designed class (as the proposed change) is the Inquisitor, though they receive Judgments to even the odds a bit. Perhaps re-tooling Quarry into a sort of "Smite-lite" would do the trick (1/day at 1st, plus an additional time per day every three levels thereafter).
So why play a ranger when you could just play a druid that is better in nearly every aspect?
Magically inclined, divine "jack-of-all-trades" sounds like what I'm aiming for. Definitely not a woodsy Aragorn-type.
|
So your going to give him spells up to level 6? What spells are you going to give them to replace the full attack bonus, druid spells? What I dont understand really is it sounds like you want to remake the warden from 4th edition into basically what the ranger already is. Why not just make the warden into the nature-bard instead of changing the Ranger all up?
I have to agree with Ashiel that it doesnt really sound like a good trade off to me and probably wouldn't play one myself, but thats just my two-cents worth.
I agree, it will take a lot of work to accomplish (if I choose to pursue it). Part of the reason I posted was to gather what most people perceive a "ranger" is (or ought to be).
I like the idea of a more magically-oriented ranger. Doesn't alter my perception of the class all that much. If anything, it makes them feel more flavorful. The Warden can be to the druid what the paladin is to the cleric, and the ranger something else entirely!
Maybe check out the inquisitor. Don't let the name fool you. They can be great divine jack of all trades, and their various boosts let them hit or tank pretty well. And they are proficient in bows, so you can do the whole ranged thing as well.
Also, you can use--AND SWAP OUT--teamwork feats (even if your allies don't have them!), which leads to some fun tactical combats.