When is a Ranger not a Ranger?
-
Glad I'm not alone. I really do have no problem with it because people can play how they want. I just know /I/ wouldn't feel right doing it because that's not how I see a ranger in my mind. Same with an elf, I have it in my mind what an elf is and that is how I'm going to play it. Other people aren't wrong for playing their elves differently, it's just not how I would do it.
-
Who gives a crap rangers are the new buffed up class next month they may improve mages by removing some of the sucky spells nerfs and making them powerful again,or maybe fighters will get vorpal swords at level 6.
In truth it's a pointless discussion players will take the new thing on offer and use it to it's full mechanical advantage they always have.
The only thing i detest about the ranger's ATM is the unsummoning of animal companions mid battle so they can be summoned back safer,then healed and sent back in to the same combat.
But that is just me being picky.
Peace out. -
I kind of agree with Amy about unsummoning/summoning.
-
"Am I doing this for my PC, the PERSON, or am I doing this for mechanical superiority?"
This is what I mean anytime I raise a stink about people doing stuff for a mechanical superiority. I don't care if you're mechanically strong, as long as it makes sense to the PC AND you RP it correctly.
As for the "Let players play their characters how they want." I want to rebuttal this. No. We don't do that here. If we did, people would be running around with Min Max Half orcs who speak perfect English. I say we change this mind set to "Let players role-play their characters how they want." If you can make a convincing ranger in FP with a tower shield, I don't say anything. But if I see you trying to pull a fast one on me, I'll call your bluff.
-
I don't necessarily see the armor choice of a ranger as a very big deal. A ranger's strength lies in their diversity of talents. For a ranger to be able to have all that heavy armor means they have to emphasize strength which inevitably limits the usefulness of their other skills and class abilities. I remember one pc explaining IC why he started wearing full plate. It was because he kept going out and getting beat up by big scary monsters when he tried to fight them in armor. So he gave up using stealth to wear full plate. It made IC sense due to the way he played. As it is, most of the rangers I have been interacting with lately aren't wearing heavy armor. But in my time zone most of these rangers tend to use their skills as scouts and explorers to lend value to a group. Rangers being good solo characters might make them more popular in less populated time zones where a different set of skills and abilities get emphasized in their builds.
-
Ranger of Nobanion, dam right he's got on plate. And he's multi-paladin as well.
-
I dont think the Plate is the cause, but rather the unfeeling of what a ranger is. And I concur that such can be discussed without pointing fingers, or telling people how to play their characters.
That said, I personally would like to see more enforcement of rules and what makes sense. I hope dms would discuss with an CE Wood Elf Malarite, regarding whether the concept makes sense. Or will remove divine spellcasting from clerics, rangers or paladins, who associates with and supports Heretics for instance.
Or make sure paladins who arent acting as paladins, or clerics not upholding their deities' dogma can fall from grace.Any dm should be willing to discuss with a player why they are doing what they are doing, if what they are doing does not make sense in the Game World Arabel is situated in. I know it is done with applications, where Canon Lore is taking into account regarding concepts. And while I have shit idea if dms still do so, I imagine they do, and as such leave the discussion of what makes sense and does not make sense to them and them alone.
-
I can assure you DMs will remove spell casting from missbehaving pets, having been the "victim" of such. It was when animal companions were first introduced and was "IG testing" their power with a druid in V4. DM intervenes, with spell failure, rightly so, as I was aware I was walking on a thin line about how a druid of that particular concept should behave.
Rangers are a different kind of thing though and they are not restricted by oaths, or something a DM can use to cause "divine intervention" and discussion with players, it would be hard to justify IG. They are indeed more free on how to play than a druid. I enjoy the well played, traditional ranger though, and I have a harder time appreciating the stealthless heavy plate ranger but that is personal taste.
In general, it used to be that people would occasionaly play something unusual and less optimized, like a half orc paladin, or wizard, and they RPed well. I might be wrong but I do not see those characters around anymore. I do not exclude myself from the trend at all so I m not really pointing fingers, I know mechanical power is important and if you cannot do awesome RP it is even more important as it comes as a form of enjoyment, having fun. Not the kind of fun DMs might want to see but fun anyway.
I am playing occasionally, not having time to dedicate myself to a character, a plot that might or might not drag. I am aware there are others in that situation, Moloch already made a thread about helping those players (thanks btw). Having a powerful character is part of the fun even if it is only mechanical. In the end though it sums up to nothing, but the fun time in scripted quests. Rangers were a chance to taste something new (always loved the class, my V4 character vault can attest…) and it was indeed the class of the month. Now the pets wete toned down considerably, still being great. It is how it works. Same happened with sorc kits, fighter kits (Spellscarred used to be ebast I hear?).
At some point it ll balance and we can all make the full diversity of all classes without worrying about under-over-powered classes.
I just miss the time when a few players would give up the best mechanical feats for something more tastefull and different. (In case it still happens I am not aware)
-
Rangers have to multiclass or take a feat to use heavy armour, so that's not an issue.
You can have urban rangers too, beastmasters can tame magical beasts, so you could have an urban ranger of mystra who has a magical beast pet and wears full plate to hold a line when protecting his responsible wizards.
The idea is most of the time to allow for more concepts, so that's worked. Pets are only as powerful as the amount of ranger levels allows too, so multiclassing has sacrifices as it should. Divine spells still come from their deity, so spell failure can and will still be applied if it's deserved for instance. Things can also be done to their pets too when it makes sense.
-
Thanks for the tips Olouth.
Yes we do all of those things.