Giving Auras to the Ranger

[djreynolds]

IMO, the defining characteristic of a martial class is how they deal damage and..... also support party members

Rogue's sneak attack, fighter's fighter, barbarian's rage, and paladin's smite. Each one of these has its own feel

So the ranger needs something that feels unique. The ranger has multiple histories. We have Aragorn from Lord of the Rings, we have the Revolutionary War, and even modern day rangers. These rangers are leaders, leaders of ambushes, leaders of hunts

So we can't just steal from the rogue and give out extra d6s to favored enemies, or expanded crit ranges to favored enemies, or rage damage or smites to favored enemies... simply because its not unique

So what if the ranger's damage came from those around him, just being around the ranger makes everyone else more dangerous

What if the ranger had auras like a paladin? Both classes are half casters, the paladin is a melee combatant and the ranger is dex based warrior. But the paladin get these aura's that enhance his party, shouldn't the ranger?

Some examples, just spit balling here

At 6th level all allies with 10ft add the ranger's wisdom modifier (or half) to the armor class while in the ranger's favored terrain

At 10th level all allies within 10ft add the ranger's wisdom modifier (or half) to their attacks rolls vs the ranger's favored enemy.

At 6th level, all allies with 30ft add the ranger's wisdom modifier to their damage rolls for a creature the ranger has marked with his hunter's mark.

At 6th level, when a ranger uses ensnaring strike versus a foe in his favored terrain all allies within 10ft also make their next melee attacks with the same property

At 13th level, when a ranger hits a target with lightning arrow, any ally within 30ft of target adds 2d8 lightning damage to their next melee attack

These auras could just be placed over the existing ranger class and archetypes.

[Vogie]

Giving the other half-caster one of the main features of the OTHER half caster isn't particularly "unique" either.

Sure, the 3 favored terrains you get from Natural Explorer (RAW) or just while travelling (UA) are aura-esque, but it's less of an "get close to me" and more of a "follow my lead"

If you wanted to make something unique to Rangers, amplify the uniquely Ranger aspects. Something like:

Buffs toward other party members attacking your sole quarry, marked by a ranger feature or via hunter's mark, since all rangers (except Horde Breaker Hunters) have something similar to that
Bonuses toward other party members acting in a ranger-esque style, such as bonuses on stealth, half-cover, or attacking while hidden.
Add things that are thematic towards Rangers that other classes don't have. This could be the ability to set traps that give bonuses. Snare is fine for what it does, but I'd expect something more like Create Bonfire, except that instead of dealing fire damage, a monster that is caught in the trap is distracted and anyone attacking it gains a bonus until the trap is removed.
Buff Ranger-only spells when cast by rangers (suck it, bards) so they have something more interesting. Things like a Cordon of Arrows that scales with your weapons, or follows you around as a sort of turret; or a the ability to scale down learned spells, so grabbing Flame Arrows at level 9 allows you to cast it at 1st level (4 arrows), 2nd level (8 arrows) or 3rd level (12 arrows) and a 1st level pass without trace only giving +5 to stealth, et cetera.
Distance Rangers from Paladins by giving Rangers Ritual Casting. Sure, it's only going to be things like Alarm, Water Breathing & Locate Animal/Plants, but at least it'd be different. Since the Ranger class is essentially an anthropomorphized version of the Survival skill, it doesn't even seem that out of place.

[Nidgit]

I agree with Vogie. There's possibly something there to granting openings or proficiencies to your allies but auras definitely aren't the way to do it. Ranger and Paladin should kind of mirror each other and sharing more abilities between the two works against that.

[Mud Puppy]

I think you guys (djreynolds & Vogie) are saying something similar, but you're sticking on the use of the word "aura." I think the focus should be on this line...




So what if the ranger's damage came from those around him, just being around the ranger makes everyone else more dangerous



The crux of the matter is that dj is correct in his assessment that Rangers are leaders and the idea of buffing the party in certain circumstances, either through expanding effects of Ranger only spells or "influencing their combat actions" through re-writes of the established feats (Favored Enemy, Terrain, etc.) would be a good way to solve the well established shortcomings of the class while staying centered in the Ranger Class's "lane" rather than swerving left into Bard or right into Paladin.

That said, I would like to take what both of you have said and send it to WotC for consideration because I have played a Ranger for the last 2 years and these two posts are the absolute best thing I've seen on the road to "fixing" a class that I absolutely love.

[Vogie]

I think you guys (djreynolds & Vogie) are saying something similar, but you're sticking on the use of the word "aura." I think the focus should be on this line...

So what if the ranger's damage came from those around him, just being around the ranger makes everyone else more dangerous

The crux of the matter is that dj is correct in his assessment that Rangers are leaders and the idea of buffing the party in certain circumstances, either through expanding effects of Ranger only spells or "influencing their combat actions" through re-writes of the established feats (Favored Enemy, Terrain, etc.) would be a good way to solve the well established shortcomings of the class while staying centered in the Ranger Class's "lane" rather than swerving left into Bard or right into Paladin.

That said, I would like to take what both of you have said and send it to WotC for consideration because I have played a Ranger for the last 2 years and these two posts are the absolute best thing I've seen on the road to "fixing" a class that I absolutely love.

While that's true, he's not only using the word "aura", he's specifically calling out the "aura mechanic" that paladins have, and how it can be duplicated. It doesn't work great because Paladins are almost exclusively melee, and tend to be in close quarters with both their targets and the Swords Bards, Rogues, barbarians, et cetera that are also attacking that target... while Rangers tend to be ranged, and thus are actively moving away from other ranged PCs, due to things like Fireball.

I mean, if all you want is the party to do more damage, then replace the "Extra Attack" feature with:

Coordinated Attack
Beginning at 5th level, When you use the Attack action on your turn, if an ally of your choice can see you, it can use its reaction to make a weapon attack or cast a cantrip targeting that same creature. Spells cast this way must have a casting time of only 1 action and must target only that creature.

Basically, it's the Beastmaster's "extra attack", but using someone in the party as the "companion."

Is it stronger than Extra attack? By a ton! And doubly so if you have a EB blasting Warlock or a Rogue.
Is it flavorful? Sure - Like I said, it's already used in the Beastmaster subclass of the Revised Ranger.
Would people like it? Not necessarily, because it "takes away" an attack from the actual ranger player themselves - Even Revised Beastmaster Rangers wish that they could do 2 attacks independent of their animal companion.

[Mud Puppy]

Ok, granted he called out the Paly's aura mechanic, and I will admit that most people probably go for the Legolas/archer/ranger more than the Drizzt/melee/ranger, but I think the solution is covered in dj's "within 30ft" effects, and I still think that you are both on the right track to solving some of the biggest shortcomings of the class.

Also....this...



Is it flavorful? Sure - Like I said, it's already used in the Beastmaster subclass of the Revised Ranger.
Would people like it? Not necessarily, because it "takes away" an attack from the actual ranger player themselves - Even Revised Beastmaster Rangers wish that they could do 2 attacks independent of their animal companion.
[/LIST]

….having played as a beastmaster, I can say that while I would LOVE to have a "third attack" each round by giving the Ranger his 2 shots and the companion 1 too, I completely understand why it was developed the way it was for action economy and for supplementing play styles. For example: my ranger was a classic dex based archer with a longbow and a wolf companion (super original, I know). The wolf's pack tactics allowed for some superb melee attacks while it was acting as a meat shield that I could fire over and heal from behind. Combined with my party's Paladin and Rogue, my wolf acted as a frontline flanker (read as left or right side, not actually flanking) and helped them to bottle up enemies in the battle space and give the ranger time to get to an optimal position where he could cover the whole party with fire support, on every turn.

As you and dj have said though, the ability to further buff the party with expanded effects to Ranger only spells or through "Influencing Combat Actions" would go a long way toward making a better Ranger.

[Bigmouth]

I'm going to have to go with a hard no from me.

I know some people are in love with the Drizzt thing, but the only time I've seen the melee ranger being a 'thing' was in 2E. Ranger means ranged weapon. It exists outside of DnD. People who have never played DnD will instantly identify Ranger as a bow character. So running into the middle of fights and providing buffs just isn't going to be what the majority of players are going to want from a ranger. IMO, YMMV.
Even boosting the 'aura' radius so Rangers can be at distance doesn't fix the part I think is the true crux of the issue, players playing under-performing classes generally aren't going to be made happy by buffing all the people around them. It is a hard thing to see/appreciate. If you were wanting to give them something unique, how about instead of boosting other people, they boost themselves...when they coordinate with others? Completely spitballing/off-the-cuff, but something where they could put potshots out at enemies when other party members hit them, or when they run from other party members. Bob the Fighters gets an Opportunity Attack...so does Rick the Ranger. Willy the Warlock shoots the big nasty spider, Ranger Rick zings in an arrow right behind that eldritch blast. Maybe you pick the person you are coordinating with on your turn, maybe you can spend a reaction to switch when outside your turn. Maybe you can provide "Cover Fire" Anyone who wants to Opportunity Atack a party member in LoS gets an arrow in their gut for their efforts. These things having the Ranger assisting, but they are rolling, they are doing damage. They get to feel bad-ass.

Edit: The intro line sounds harder than intended. Especially if you don't imagine the guy from American Idol saying it like I did for whatever reason.

[Kane0]

I mean, if all you want is the party to do more damage, then replace the "Extra Attack" feature with:

Coordinated Attack
Beginning at 5th level, When you use the Attack action on your turn, if an ally of your choice can see you, it can use its reaction to make a weapon attack or cast a cantrip targeting that same creature. Spells cast this way must have a casting time of only 1 action and must target only that creature.


This would be absolutely amazing... if I hadn't used exactly the same mechanic for a fighter warlord subclass :smallsigh:

[Zetakya]

Ranger means ranged weapon.

Except it doesn't. To Range is an archaic term for wandering or roaming. A Ranger is someone who wanders or roams, usually within a defined territory. That's where we get the term "Home Range" from.

[djreynolds]

Thank you everyone

I'm trying to make the ranger work without just stealing from other classes.

I'm only using the aura because that's all I could think of, but actually "coordinated attack" sounds even better

Its not inspiration or an aura but it should be similar in giving out party bonuses

I'm looking for some unique mechanic, related to a ranger's terrain/favored enemy.

A fighter's great with weapons and tactics, a rogue is great at stealth and ambush, a paladin smites, and a barbarian rages.

I'm not sure what the current ranger does, aside from spamming hunter's mark and sharpshooter

I cannot blame someone from cherry picking this class.

So anyhow I was on Mr Grod's thread and I was talking about guides from Africa or Alaska and favored enemies, etc blah, blah

And it hit me, rangers are guides. They are competent warriors, but they are guides first. They get the party there and "coordinate" the assault or ambush.

So what is the ranger's specialty, its being a guide, a leader. I'm sure in a village of barbarians, there are shamans and hunters and scouts and "a" ranger.

Maybe this makes the ranger could be "warlord-esque", but really, IMO, the ranger class has never really been defined before.

Ranger's have favored enemies, but it cannot derive its abilities from hatred or vengeance or loss. A ranger has much more cerebral and trained manner when it comes to dispatching his foes. A ranger gathers up a group of specialists like a rogue and paladin to help kill the dragon, and should be able to coordinate the attacks of the wizard and the fighter for optimal damage and survivability versus a favored foe in a favored terrain.

So call it a coordinated attack, I think this could make the ranger very interesting

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Keeping it coming.

Cover fire... that's an awesome idea.

[Kane0]

Thank you everyone
I'm trying to make the ranger work without just stealing from other classes.
I'm only using the aura because that's all I could think of, but actually "coordinated attack" sounds even better
I'm looking for some unique mechanic, related to a ranger's terrain/favored enemy.

Bonus action search
Ignore difficult terrain
No travel speed/perception penalty for foraging/tracking
Uncover creature resistances/immunities/vulnerabilities
Bonus damage from moving
Animal companion (at least until the Artificer steals it)
Extra damage on opportunity attacks
Ignoring exhaustion

Enough to work with?




I'm not sure what the current ranger does, aside from spamming hunter's mark and sharpshooter
And it hit me, rangers are guides. They are competent warriors, but they are guides first. They get the party there and "coordinate" the assault or ambush.
So what is the ranger's specialty, its being a guide, a leader. I'm sure in a village of barbarians, there are shamans and hunters and scouts and "a" ranger.
Maybe this makes the ranger could be "warlord-esque", but really, IMO, the ranger class has never really been defined before.

A warlord-esque subclass would be a great idea. Hell if the fighter can take Arcane Archer away from rangers (yes i'm still salty about that) then we can make a Ranger-warlord.

[djreynolds]

Bonus action search
Ignore difficult terrain
No travel speed/perception penalty for foraging/tracking
Uncover creature resistances/immunities/vulnerabilities
Bonus damage from moving
Animal companion (at least until the Artificer steals it)
Extra damage on opportunity attacks
Ignoring exhaustion

Enough to work with?



A warlord-esque subclass would be a great idea. Hell if the fighter can take Arcane Archer away from rangers (yes i'm still salty about that) then we can make a Ranger-warlord.

Yes this good stuff.

So for a martial class, how you fight in combat is your signature. Rangers do respectable damage with TWF and hunter's mark and colossus slayer/horde breaker but it nothing unique that another class cannot do.

Everything a ranger does can be copied, and trust me I have defended the class because I love the idea of it and it can be flavorful in the exploration aspect of the game, but you still feel like a guide... right. You get your party from town to town safely and then plunk arrows and hand out goodberries

The idea of a coordinated attack is very unique and not power-gaming really.

So what if the bonuses granted from favored enemy and terrain affected your party.

So here is an idea, and I'm using the paladin's 6th,7th, and 10th level auras really for leveling and positioning of class features

Say at 6th level, when a ranger uses a spell in his/her favored terrain, he/she can avoid harming or hampering allies like sculpt spell does. This could apply hail of arrows, spike growth, conjure barrage, etc

At 7th level, cover fire, when you strike a favored foe any adjacent ally has either advantage on their next attack or can use their reaction to disengage or dodge.

Or 10th level, when you score a critical hit on a favored enemy, all allies have an expanded crit range on their next attacks. This stacks with other class features or weapon features

Maybe at 15th level, you can share spell something like tree stride with your party, but it only uses your action, your party members can still act.

I'm just spit balling here

[Vogie]

Bonus action search
Ignore difficult terrain
No travel speed/perception penalty for foraging/tracking
Uncover creature resistances/immunities/vulnerabilities (Monster Slayer)
Bonus damage from moving
Animal companion (at least until the Artificer steals it) (Beast Bond)
Extra damage on opportunity attacks
Ignoring exhaustion

Scratched out what they already have.

I'm not sure if a BA search is useful - most investigating is done before or after the fight.
I like the idea of bonus effects when moving - perhaps a charge or pounce attack. I'd love some sort of attack that places a tiny silence zone on a creature as you attack them.
While I like the idea of being able to do additional damage or have additional effects on AoOs, it's a melee-only mechanic. I'd rather see rangers have something like zones where they can make ranged attacks as a reaction if an enemy moves through them. Maybe tie that to the previously-mentioned Create Trap
Ignoring Exhaustion is too much of a save or suck. It'll be completely unused for the most part... unless you're a Ranger with 3 levels with Berserker Barbarian.



So what if the bonuses granted from favored enemy and terrain affected your party.
So here is an idea, and I'm using the paladin's 6th,7th, and 10th level auras really for leveling and positioning of class features
Say at 6th level, when a ranger uses a spell in his/her favored terrain, he/she can avoid harming or hampering allies like sculpt spell does. This could apply hail of arrows, spike growth, conjure barrage, etc
At 7th level, cover fire, when you strike a favored foe any adjacent ally has either advantage on their next attack or can use their reaction to disengage or dodge.
Or 10th level, when you score a critical hit on a favored enemy, all allies have an expanded crit range on their next attacks. This stacks with other class features or weapon features
Maybe at 15th level, you can share spell something like tree stride with your party, but it only uses your action, your party members can still act.
I'm just spit balling here


The problem with the aura style is there's no pre-defined location where the ranger is guaranteed to be. Rangers are equally comfortable alone in the clocktower sniping, standing next to the wizard, and fighting shoulder to shoulder with the Barbarian.
Features based on Favored Terrain and Favored Enemy are similarly save or suck - There are either Giants in the encounter, or not; your party is either in a desert, or they're not. If a crit from you against a dragon gives EVERYONE expanded crit range on dragons... you're probably not going to see many dragons.
Tree stride is basically a ranger-y version of Far Step, and while it'd be cool to be able to blink around the forest, especially when fighting an army, it's not really Feature material... because there aren't a ton of trees in dungeons.


Again, the best way to make rangers more ranger-y is making them more ranger-y. For example, when I re-did the ranger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?582686-The-Ranger-Further-Revised-(PEACH)), I gave the player the option to EITHER be a Spell caster, OR use Battlemaster Maneuvers, OR have a Wild Shape option - so you could have Ranger Magic (hail of thorns, beast bond, et cetera) or be able to create cover fire via Distracting attack or be a greenseer and warg out. I replaced Favored Enemy with making Hunter's Mark a class feature, and replaced Favored Terrain with Excursion & Lair Delve, giving the Ranger a collection things to do in every environment.

Last night I was thinking of the WoW Hunter and what aspects could be transformed into ranger stuff. While I haven't played since Cataclysm, I remember they had trio of options - A Melee version, a Ranged version, and one focused on the animal companion.

They could launch traps at range to try to catch their targets
They had various shots that debuff the target, like reducing healing, limiting movement, setting ablaze, et cetera.
They had "Aspects" that they could buff themselves with one at a time, and later share with the party, such as boosting ranged damage, boosting melee damage, giving resistance to nature damage, giving dodge chance or increases speed at risk of being stunned if hit.

[stoutstien]

I've always been in the camp that rangers should have reverse auras. Paladin buff the party while rangers interfere with the enemy.
Maybe disadvantage AOO for all rangers and give each subclass a bonus debuff. Would be a good way to give the lacking concaves a bumb

[saucerhead]

Lots of interesting ideas in this thread.

A couple things that could be used in a similar method instead of an aura. As has been said earlier, things are borrowed from the Ranger for other classes, so I like the idea of doing the reverse.

Favored Enemy allows inspiration (similar to a bard) given to companions so they can use a d6 to add to hit or damage a target with a hunter's mark.

Favored Terrain allows inspiration to companions for hiding or stealth. Again getting a d6 to add to the roll, potentially saving the ranger's limited spell slots.

Instead of it being bardic inspiration it would be ...warder's influence?

[Nidgit]

You know, I don't buy the idea that rangers are leaders. That's overlap with protagonist stuff. The idea of the ranger as a loner is just as popular and forcing any one class into a leadership role seems ill-advised.

That said, I think a leader/support-based subclass would work quite well for the Ranger. Call it the Guide, borrow ideas from Battlemaster and Masteind, and give it some abilities that are focused on boosting and utilizing the others in the party. It could be something of a counterpart to the Redemption Paladin in playstyle.

[Kyutaru]

So basically giving the Rangers:

Trueshot Aura
Aspect of the Pack

[Bigmouth]

Except it doesn't. To Range is an archaic term for wandering or roaming. A Ranger is someone who wanders or roams, usually within a defined territory. That's where we get the term "Home Range" from.
I wasn't being literal. I am aware of the origins of the word itself. What I was saying was that Ranger has developed into its own concept over the years thanks to the many paper and pencil games as well as video games that have had it as a class. The main constant is bow. I am not arguing for a class that is helpless without a bow, I am simply saying that any rework of the class needs to work with bow first, melee second. A complete melee ranger is great, but it should be a subclass, just like the ranger with an animal companion. I'm inclined to think the support ranger falls into that same category. Could be an amazingly fun subclass, but doesn't sound like a core that all rangers share.

Also, I'll just throw it out there that Favored Enemy is broken in almost any iteration. Basing any advanced ideas off that is setting yourself up for failure.

[MrStabby]

I think you guys (djreynolds & Vogie) are saying something similar, but you're sticking on the use of the word "aura." I think the focus should be on this line...



The crux of the matter is that dj is correct in his assessment that Rangers are leaders and the idea of buffing the party in certain circumstances, either through expanding effects of Ranger only spells or "influencing their combat actions" through re-writes of the established feats (Favored Enemy, Terrain, etc.) would be a good way to solve the well established shortcomings of the class while staying centered in the Ranger Class's "lane" rather than swerving left into Bard or right into Paladin.

That said, I would like to take what both of you have said and send it to WotC for consideration because I have played a Ranger for the last 2 years and these two posts are the absolute best thing I've seen on the road to "fixing" a class that I absolutely love.

I have to strongly disagree here.

I think the ranger is a loner.

A gregarious leader would pretty much look like the paladin: charisma class, lots of buff spells, aura to help friends. We already have one of those. If you want to play a leader type with a nature theme there is the ancients paladin that covers this pretty well.

A ranger has proficiency in stealth - an ability compromised by those who are loud nearby. A ranger has extra skills - because you don't have someone else to cover your weaknesses.

[stoutstien]

I have to strongly disagree here.

I think the ranger is a loner.

A gregarious leader would pretty much look like the paladin: charisma class, lots of buff spells, aura to help friends. We already have one of those. If you want to play a leader type with a nature theme there is the ancients paladin that covers this pretty well.

A ranger has proficiency in stealth - an ability compromised by those who are loud nearby. A ranger has extra skills - because you don't have someone else to cover your weaknesses.

Leave some of that edge for the rest of us.😀
I don't think any class can be considered a loner past just whatever back story you drum up

[MrStabby]

Leave some of that edge for the rest of us.😀
I don't think any class can be considered a loner past just whatever back story you drum up

But you would consider a class a leader beyond their backstory?

[JNAProductions]

But you would consider a class a leader beyond their backstory?

If they, say, take party-friendly spells (such as Longstrider) and do their best to give tactical guidance and support in-character, yeah.

I do agree that, mechanically and with the default fluff, a Paladin makes for a more natural leader, but who cares? Aragorn was a leader.

[Makorel]

I wasn't being literal. I am aware of the origins of the word itself. What I was saying was that Ranger has developed into its own concept over the years thanks to the many paper and pencil games as well as video games that have had it as a class. The main constant is bow. I am not arguing for a class that is helpless without a bow, I am simply saying that any rework of the class needs to work with bow first, melee second. A complete melee ranger is great, but it should be a subclass, just like the ranger with an animal companion. I'm inclined to think the support ranger falls into that same category. Could be an amazingly fun subclass, but doesn't sound like a core that all rangers share.

Also, I'll just throw it out there that Favored Enemy is broken in almost any iteration. Basing any advanced ideas off that is setting yourself up for failure.

I really have to disagree with this notion, especially if we're using video games as a point of reference. If we're talking Skyrim the infamous Stealth Archer is more of a Rogue than anything.

Monster Hunter is a game that's all about doing Ranger things like tracking monsters and mixing ingredients to make strange concoctions that help in the fight. Getting all your gear in order and learning monster habits are two very important aspects of taking down your quarry. Monster Hunter has 12 weapons and only 3 of them are ranged, the rest are huge melee anime weapons that a Barbarian would think twice about trying to wield. This is what I think of more than anything when I think Ranger; a warrior who is experienced and skilled enough to weave in and out of a Dinosaur's attacks and then finding just the right moment to smack the head with their hammer, then the monster running and the hunter pursuing to finish it off.

I also think of guys like Geralt of Rivia and the Belmont Clan, both primarily melee combatants who use various niche tools magics and knowledge to get the upper hand on strange and inhuman foes.

And then there's Link, perhaps the most iconic of knock-off LotR elves. He goes through the brush, gets his boots muddy, fights monsters, doesn't afraid of anything etc. Breath of the Wild Link especially does the living of the land shtick. The weapon degradation, consumable nature of items and the different perks of armor means he's not marrying himself to any sort of weapon types or survival methods except the most effective in the current situation he finds himself in. Link's no slouch with a bow don't get me wrong but there's a reason his signature weapon is the Master Sword.

[stoutstien]

But you would consider a class a leader beyond their backstory?
No. Any class can be a leader just fine. Usually falls on the player who likes to talk the most.

[MrStabby]

If they, say, take party-friendly spells (such as Longstrider) and do their best to give tactical guidance and support in-character, yeah.

I do agree that, mechanically and with the default fluff, a Paladin makes for a more natural leader, but who cares? Aragorn was a leader.

Aragorn spent most of his life wandering alone in and around Angmar. I think the point where he became a leader was the point at which he was no longer called a ranger.

[JNAProductions]

Aragorn spent most of his life wandering alone in and around Angmar. I think the point where he became a leader was the point at which he was no longer called a ranger.

Then we can disagree. But...


No. Any class can be a leader just fine. Usually falls on the player who likes to talk the most.

Stout has an excellent point.

Again-I'm perfectly willing to agree that Paladins make a more natural fit for leadership, both in terms of mechanics and the standard fluff. But any class can be a leader.

[djreynolds]

IMO the ranger has changed extensively from its 1E origin, then 2E, 3E, 4E, etc

I know that we have Aragorn from LotR as the inspiration for the ranger class... but it has morphed since.

For me, when I hear ranger or see it on a page I am heavily influenced image wise with "The Last of the Mohicans" films, TWF isn't Drizzt with 2 scimitars but someone with a hand axe and a dagger

I see ranger leading a guerilla war and being really good at creating ambushes, for imagery take a look at "The Patriot" with Mel Gibson that has some good scenes as well, going from a ranged assault and finishing off in-close with melee

The ranger is a tough class to define in its current form as the light dexterous warrior... kinda opposite of the paladins strength based melee.

They are both half casters and are sometimes seen as warrior elements of the cleric or druid

But the paladin can affect his allies in combat where the ranger cannot do so equally

And we see the paladin as leader because of their higher charisma lending itself to better skills, and their auras, so the paladin excels in social and combat encounters

The ranger on the other hand only excels in his favored terrain, which is basically movement from point A to B, and some successful skills checks

I really like this idea of coordinated attacks in favored terrain and versus favored enemies, it mirrors the paladin's auras in terms of class features and power

[Kane0]

And we see the paladin as leader because of their higher charisma lending itself to better skills, and their auras, so the paladin excels in social and combat encounters
However they do tend to have better wisdom which lends itself to other aspects of the social pillar.



The ranger on the other hand only excels in his favored terrain, which is basically movement from point A to B, and some successful skills checks

I really like this idea of coordinated attacks in favored terrain and versus favored enemies, it mirrors the paladin's auras in terms of class features and power
So are you okay with them being centered around certain terrains/enemies or not? These two statements appear contradictory.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

For the life of me, I have no clue why Rangers don't get mechanical and magical traps.

[djreynolds]

So the idea is while you are in your terrain or facing your favored foes your party members benefit from it.

Initially it was going to be auras like the paladin but Yogie brought up coordinated attack. It think Yogie's idea is great.

And it think it could work out that 6th, 7th, and 10th level you would get the ability to either have an "advantage" for your friends vs your favored enemies, or some extra spell effects while your favored terrain..... anything different or extra

This is why I bring my dumb ideas here: you folks beat them up and re-shape them

I think this would give IMO a better feel for what a ranger does in combat without taking directly from other classes, I mean an ambush is basically a sneak attack on a large scale.

I just have an image or scene of where when a ranger is facing his favored enemy or in his favored terrain his allies let him "take point"

I like the idea of a shared or sculpted spell perhaps, I liked the idea of "cover fire" so allies can get into position or disengage. And with the base ranger its not many terrains... though forest or underdark might see extensive use.

I know this make the ranger more warlord-esque, but at least it is defining how maybe a ranger fights.

I see many members consider the ranger a loner, but at higher levels the lack that big bang of a sneak attack or smite, volley is great and it gives the feel of an opening barrage of an ambush

I'm just spit balling, trying to give the ranger a unique identity. It may creep into the paladin/bard/cleric stuff, but that isn't all that those classes do. Where as big single damage is the rogue's identity with their sneak attack, and the paladin's smite.

It could be cool.