When is a Ranger not a Ranger?
-
This is more for open discussion than anything else. I'm not complaining about anything by any means it was just something that piqued my interest recently. Since the ranger changes, I feel like Rangers have blurred their identity a bit. Most rangers I have seen are essentially fighers in full plate with an animal companion. Though I do still see some woodland/nature themed rangers, they seem to have become the minority. Thoughts?
-
Easy enough fix. Change the feats so that wearing full plate nullifies various duel-wield ranger powers, as it should. Rangers are hilariously OP right now.
-
About that.
My problem is that they're basically better than fighters in every way, though.
-
To be fair, Aragorn or "Strider", when he was a ranger, forgoed that path to become pretty much a fighter/king dude and live within civilization, not outside it. And, I had thought wearing higher than medium armor DID remove ranger special abilities, or did I mis-read that in the character menu? I was unaware there were changes.
-
He was wearing leather and/or chain mail throughout the movies. He never put on plate. Chain mail+greatsword/bastard sword is legit ranger.
-
Don't know which rangers are you going out with but mine was wearing clothes/leathers and in case of battle a chainmail shortsword and large shield.
Doing ranger stuff - without the animal companion - unless necessary for "planned" hunting/fighting session.I've known at least 2/3 more ranger lately wearing leathers and I've seen none wearing plate…
-
I'm just wondering how much of a "Ranger" they are with full plate and a tower shield. "Ranger" seems to be more of a mechanical choice now instead of an RP/Character choice now adays. I mean, why the hell would you want to be just a regular fighter when you can be a fighter with a powerful companion? (This is a logical question, not my actual feeling. I'm known to use weaker builds for the RP)
-
Don't know which rangers are you going out with but mine was wearing clothes/leathers and in case of battle a chainmail shortsword and large shield.
Doing ranger stuff - without the animal companion - unless necessary for "planned" hunting/fighting session.I've known at least 2/3 more ranger lately wearing leathers and I've seen none wearing plate…
Since the ranger changes I've seen at least 5/6 rangers in full plate (2 2h rangers and 3-4 beastmaster) and only about 3 or so in leathers. I'm not saying there aren't players playing a Ranger in full spirit, I'm just saying there are some playing fighters with a pet so to speak. Nothing wrong with that and I'm not bashing anyone's choices, it just seems like the Ranger loses its original identity at that point.
-
I agree rangers lose their natural flavor in FP fighter mode, but its a roleplay choice for some, much like taking rogue levels with fighter. If it can be done, it will be done.
-
@Khamal:
I agree rangers lose their natural flavor in FP fighter mode, but its a roleplay choice for some, much like taking rogue levels with fighter. If it can be done, it will be done.
This.
Just let people play their characters how THEY want to.
-
As I said, I don't have a problem with this and people can play whatever they want. This was just general discussion and not a suggestion for change (hence it not being in the suggestion forum) Just wanted to talk about it is all Moloch :)
-
Just let people play their characters how THEY want to.
I agree with this.
Only problem I see is that alot of people treat their animal companions like pets, and don't take any time to RP with them. You can call your bear fluffy but he's not a little animal puppet!
You aren't a hunter from World of Warcraft guys, your companions should mean something to you, they're not just pets for tanking to be replaced without a care when they die. -
your companions should mean something to you, they're not just pets for tanking to be replaced without a care when they die.
This part would depend entirely on the ranger in question ;)
-
Only problem I see is that alot of people treat their animal companions like pets, and don't take any time to RP with them. You can call your bear fluffy but he's not a little animal puppet!
You aren't a hunter from World of Warcraft guys, your companions should mean something to you, they're not just pets for tanking to be replaced without a care when they die.I RP with my Bear often, and do not treat it like a pet, but as my companion, the one creature who is always with me, who is always their to aid me, and keeps me alive when i am out on patrol. The one time he lost a companion hit him really hard (And the time his Boar Sow was dismissed upset him quite a bit). Just because he is named Fluffy does not mean he is a pet, it just means my char has a sense of humour. Same as why his Boar Sow was called Oinkers. :D
-
Every character is different, not every ranger or druid were raised by wolves ;) We got rural and urban nature folks, all are welcome.
-
your companions should mean something to you, they're not just pets for tanking to be replaced without a care when they die.
How the ranger PCs treat their companions is often a matter of IC RP than it is mechanics. Not every ranger prays to a nature deity; even nature deities have different takes on how an animal companion would/should be treated. All that takes RPing with a few rangers to learn. ;)
-
Some rangers may ABUSE their companions, even. I'm pretty sure the DM team had a running joke going with the update about it being a city of FP rangers before they implemented the update. I would even make the argument that a competent high level leathers ranger is scarier than one in full plate. To me, classes like ranger are open to a wide array of interpretation. A guy who hunts undead for a living could just as easily be ranger as paladin and I don't see why it wouldn't be IC for him to wear FP.
-
I'd also point out that a pure fighter can still be just as powerful as a ranger and depends entirely on the build and person playing it. That said, there are some absurd multiclasses!
-
There's been an influx of rangers of the server, that can't be argued. And it's pretty clearly due to the vast superiority rangers have over many other classes. I have no problem with people playing rangers, I think they're a cool class with many different avenues, but I'd prefer the first thing to come to mind to be "Am I doing this for my PC, the PERSON, or am I doing this for mechanical superiority?" I would never have any objection with anyone playing a ranger with full plate and a tower shield, because in the end it's that person's choice, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it or appreciate the concept.
-
What Unfie said