New paths Spell-less ranger

[ProudGrognard]

I have been looking for a good spell-less ranger for some time now. There have been many such variants in PF and in d20, and there have been archetypes that want to fill the gap.

So it is strange that I only recently found out about this (http://tinyurl.com/poefbbo). In my opinion, it is the best of the crop, I was thus wandering if anyone had any experience with it.

Any thoughts?

[Xerlith]

The absolutely cheesy description doesn't really make me eager to try this out. :smallsigh:

[ProudGrognard]

I am not sure I follow you, Xerlith.

[Xerlith]

"Aragorn Didn't Cast Spells!" and such. Seems like a cheap trick to make a person buy it so they can play a character from their favourite book. "Be a real ranger"? Come on.

As for the quality of the product itself, it turns out a friend played this class. In his words - "It's basically the ranger without all the cool stuff".

[PsyBomb]

In PF, there are a couple of archetypes that do not use magic. Skirmisher is half-decent, though not great (awesome for trippers and for moving around the battlefield or while stealthed), Trapper is fun if you like that kind of thing. Skirmisher can be combined with other archetypes easily, since it only affects the Spellcasting, so pick freely from the rest.

[Coidzor]

"Aragorn Didn't Cast Spells!" and such. Seems like a cheap trick to make a person buy it so they can play a character from their favourite book. "Be a real ranger"? Come on.

As for the quality of the product itself, it turns out a friend played this class. In his words - "It's basically the ranger without all the cool stuff".

Yeah, that kind of statement has been made absolutely toxic by unpleasant reprobates online. Or paints the writer as one of those reprobates.

[ProudGrognard]

Well, the thing is that the phrase does have a point. Almost none of the iconic rangers in fantasy and myth were spellcasters. I have tried many times to create a grizzled woodsman and I always have to deal with the problem of spells. And the argument 'then just cut the spells out' is not really an option, in the general framework that is d20 and if you like the class to be able to do something. DnD classes are supposed to be inspired after iconics, after all. Nothing wrong with that. Rangers should be able to be Aragornish.

As for the archetypes, yes some are quite nice. But I think that in some ways, this product is a bit better. I am not sure what
cool stuff' is this ranger leaving, since he has all the abilities of the standard ranger minus the spells. Which is sort of the point.

[Kantolin]

I have tried many times to create a grizzled woodsman and I always have to deal with the problem of spells.

To take a quick skim through the 3.5 core First Level Ranger Spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spellLists/rangerSpells.htm#firstLevelRangerSpells) for a moment... (And look, these spells also apply to pathfinder!)

Alarm, Animal Messenger, Calm Animals, Charm Animal, Delay POison, Detect Animals or Plants, Detect Poison, Detect Snares and Pits, Endure Elements, Hide from Animals, Jump, Longstrider, Magic Fang, Pass without Trace, and Speak with Animals all make absolute and total sense for a ranger to be able to do.

I mean, sure it's listed as 'spells', but animal messenger has the material component of 'a morsel of food the animal likes', and has the result of you being able to tie a note to the end of a bird and have it go to where it's going? And I mean.. calming animals? Pass without trace? Alarm even can require a thin wire and a bell. Jump and longstrider are 'I jump slightly more easily and move slightly faster', both of which are totally rangery things.

Even the less /objectively/ nonmagical ones like Magic Fang are extremely subtle. I mean, once again if someone is sitting there with a detect magic staring at you they will say 'A~ha! You casted a spell!', but generally it's more "I pet my dog and say 'sic'm, Fido!'. Speak with Animals helps enable the wounded wolf running into camp, "She's really scared... orcs! Gather your weapons!" (Or I guess it could be Lassie if you wanted to go that route, but that's not the default).

Heck, the only /objectively magical/ things on this level 4 ranger are resist energy, read magic, entangle, and summon nature's ally 1. And of those, resist energy is particularly subtle of an overall effect, and nobody uses read magic. So, summon natures ally 1 and entangle?

Even second and third level ranger spells at level 8 mostly hold to this dynamic. Snare 'creates a magic booby trap', you can make crops grow really well, you can make your way through the middle of the darkest forest at night, insects stay away from you? Meh? Fourth level ranger spells have some actual magic-magictherein in teleportation and animal growth, I suppose.

Even out of core, the spells you most often hear people talk about are things like lay of the land (The ranger... knows the terrain around him? Sounds kosher to me) and things like Hunter's Mercy (I shoot my bow as normal, but it does more damage).

All, or at the very least the vast majority of these things certainly seem like something a nonmagical ranger should be okay with doing. You can refluff things to be more or less magical if you want, but by default most of the ranger spell list are 'subtle tricks', not 'look ma I'm a spellcaster!'. The remaining few are druidic, so they can fit if you're going for a more druidic bent or something.

I mean, if rangers were shooting fireballs or something, sure, but is it really so bad that a grizzled nature guy can stare down a wolf sometimes, or run very slightly faster through the woods... sometimes?

[ProudGrognard]

I know what you mean Kantolin. I have indeed played many rangers which did have spells mechanically, but did not in RPing context. Or if they did, they were druidic, herbalistic, totemic and so on. They were enjoyable and nice, but the spell mechanics did in the end make them spells (why only once per day? Why rest if you can heal via poultices? and so on.)

But that discussion isn't the point here. We are talking about spell-less rangers here. If someone wants his spells, fine and dandy. But if he or she doesn't, then we are talking.

[Psyren]

OP - have you looked at Paizo's Trapper Ranger (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/ranger/archetypes/paizo---ranger-archetypes/trapper) as a magic replacement? Most of the traps are jank but there are some useful ones, like Freezing Trap (no-save entangle), Quicksand Trap (scaling Swim DC), Tripwire (save vs. prone, chargers take a huge penalty), Sleet Trap (block line of sight, make the ground slippery), Pit Trap, Snare Trap and Swarm Trap. The save DCs also scale with your level. There is also Spell-Storing Trap for some custom tricks.

Alternatively, you can take a look at Super Genius Games' Archetype Packages. This allows you to mix and match aspects of different base classes to make something of your own. There is a package for instance that lets you swap out the Ranger's spellcasting for a set of abilities from another class, e.g. Barbarian rage and rage powers, druid's wild shape, monk ki pool and ki abilities or rogue sneak attack. Check out the sidebar here (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/3rd-party-classes/super-genius-games/adept-godling/archetypes/super-genius-games---adept-godling-archetypes/weapon-champion#TOC-Ranger) to learn more.

[ProudGrognard]

Thanks for that Psyern

I do indeed know of the ranger archetypes. And it is true that the trapper comes closer than most. But I find the Spell-less ranger better.