PDA

View Full Version : Are Nonspellcasting Rangers and Paladins better then the ones with magic? (3.5)



Tempest Fennac
2008-11-16, 07:31 AM
Is the spellcasting which normal Rangers and Paladins get better then the class features which the Non-spellcasting versions get as compensation? I know the abilities (for the most part) aren't particularly impressive, but I tend to think the spells those classes get are too weak to really be useful, so I'm curious about what other people think about the Magicless versions. (If you're not familiar with the variants, see http://crystalkeep.com/d20/rules/DnD3.5Index-Classes-Base.pdf .)

Spiryt
2008-11-16, 07:40 AM
This variant grants you exaclty what spells do (Longstrider, Bear Endurance/Cat's Grace, Freedom of movement in case of Ranger), but less times per day, you can't choose other spells if you want, and loose generall versality. They're weak as hell to me.

And I'm not sure why poeple scorn their spells so much. In fact, they're kinda good bonus for any Full BaB class, improving their stats, simply.

And stuff like Spell Compendium gives them even more stuff.

One just shouldn't expect those spells to have any offensive or "combat control" merit. They're just buffs and utility stuff.

Tempest Fennac
2008-11-16, 07:47 AM
I didn't expect them to be that powerful. I was just wondering if they were really worth it due to how items could probably emulate a lot of those spells if you had enough money (admittedly, there is a good chance that you'd need to buy other things instead).

Spiryt
2008-11-16, 08:05 AM
Well, I'm just saying that the only thing that can be worth it is +10 to movement, as it's always active in case of Ranger. Other things from this variant are just ranger/paladin spells one level later and generally limited.

In case of paladin I don't think anything is worth, as his core spells are more useful than ranger's IMO.

But speaking of variants, there's a LOT of potentially interesting paladin variant's here.

And this moon warded ranger looks worth it....

hotel_papa
2008-11-16, 08:11 AM
Personally, I really like the ranger variant in Complete Champion, the one that gives you bonus feats instead of spellcasting. Works really well for those not interested in going full-on ranger 20.
In my case, my Ranger 6/Beastmaster 1/Beast Heart Adept 10 build enjoys his bonus feat much more than a few 1st level ranger spells. Anything to keep well poisoned arrows flying at the baddies who come at his pets.

HP

Tempest Fennac
2008-11-16, 08:11 AM
MW Ranger would be good at night. I liked the look of the Half-Orc Paladin as well. Which spells would you recommend for Rangers and Paladins? (I'd probably not bother with anything with a save due to how low the DC would normally be compared with full caster's DCs.)

Spiryt
2008-11-16, 08:28 AM
Well, longstrider and resist energy are fine, one for better speed and second in case of ecountering some energy hazard.

Barskin is nice +2 or higher to AC, Cat's grace is great for archer, and Owl's Wisdom for Will saves and other stuff, Wind Wall good against archer's.

Water Walk, Neutralise Poison are always nice. So is Darkvision, if you're just poor weak eyed 'Ummie.

Nondetection and Freedom of movement are probably best from 4th level, but Commune with Nature, also is useful.

Paladin:

Divine Favor!, Bull's Strenght and other's, Shield Other, Death Ward...

If you're thinking about spell variants I suggest Paladin and Ranger modification in Pathfinder Beta. It's simple change, just gives them new spell slots earlier, but it makes their spells more useful, without being overpowering in any sense.

Tempest Fennac
2008-11-16, 08:42 AM
Thanks (I'll check my Pathfinder guide later). How good would you say the Moonwarded Ranger is compared with the other combat styles?

Spiryt
2008-11-16, 08:55 AM
Thanks (I'll check my Pathfinder guide later). How good would you say the Moonwarded Ranger is compared with the other combat styles?

Dunno, I see it first time. But complete immunity to mind affecting attacks is just times better than Improved Precise Shot or something, I think.

Tempest Fennac
2008-11-16, 09:14 AM
That is a good point (unless I wanted the other 2 stages desparately, I'd probably just take the 11th level substitution to get that ability). I was just thinking about making a CN TWF Lupin Ranger who hated magic, but I think taking that 11th level ability in place of the 3rd TWF skill would get work better then just using the Nonmagic Ranger (I'd ideally be able to take Armour of the Senses as a level 6 ability due to only really wanting the first TWF feat).

Starbuck_II
2008-11-16, 09:26 AM
MW Ranger would be good at night. I liked the look of the Half-Orc Paladin as well. Which spells would you recommend for Rangers and Paladins? (I'd probably not bother with anything with a save due to how low the DC would normally be compared with full caster's DCs.)

Are we tasling core?

Because Non-core we have Find the Gap which is a fantastic Ranger spell ignoring Natural armor: kinda like a more balanced versiuon of Wraithstrike.

Tempest Fennac
2008-11-16, 09:36 AM
I didn't think Find the Gap had a save (I'm not familiar with the spell, apart from the fact that, it I remember correctly, it ignores armour and NA with melee attacks). I'll check that spell in a minute.


EDIT: According to http://www.devinweb.com/assassinspells.htm , it ignores non-natural armour as well.

Quietus
2008-11-16, 10:04 AM
Paladin spellcasting gets a big bost from that one feat (I'm running on zero sleep in two days, with three work shifts in between, so I can't remember which book or any specifics) that lets you cast Paladin spells as a swift action. Paladins rarely have anything to do with their Swifts, so throwing in the ability to pop a buff as you charge into combat is really, really handy.

Hal
2008-11-16, 10:26 AM
Paladin spellcasting gets a big bost from that one feat (I'm running on zero sleep in two days, with three work shifts in between, so I can't remember which book or any specifics) that lets you cast Paladin spells as a swift action. Paladins rarely have anything to do with their Swifts, so throwing in the ability to pop a buff as you charge into combat is really, really handy.

Battle Blessing.

If you're making a charge-adin, this is crucial, as it lets you cast your charge buffing spell(s), then make your charge, allowing for the mega-damage people go to this build for.

It's still helpful otherwise, particularly if you can get expanded source books to your options (Spell Compendium, I'm looking at you). Technically, RAW, you can only cast Paladin spells with Battle Blessing, but I think most DMs will give you the benefit of the doubt on this one and let you cast other spells if you find a way to add them to your Paladin casting (Sword of the Arcane Order, for example).

As to the OPs question, it's generally not a good idea to give up spellcasting, especially with how limited it is for these classes already. I know Paladins have the option to replace it with bonus feats (Complete Champion), but the number of feats you get in exchange doesn't add up to much. It basically makes you a fighter with turn undead (etc.).

Salvonus
2008-11-16, 10:42 AM
In addition to what everyone else mentioned, the variants can also be useful (especially the feat one) if you plan on prestige-classing or multiclassing out of Ranger/Paladin at a fairly early point. Well, if the PrC you're using doesn't advance casting, that is. The further you get into the class, the more you begin to lose out, in my opinion.

Saph
2008-11-16, 11:20 AM
Remember that having Ranger or Paladin spellcasting means you can use a wand of cure light wounds. This is a huge deal in my experience. Being able to self-heal up to full whenever you have a few rounds spare is not something you want to give up.

- Saph

Captain Six
2008-11-16, 11:39 AM
They are definitely not worth it in the long shot. Epic level spellcasting man.

Suzuro
2008-11-16, 01:54 PM
While I agree that they are weaker in general, remember that they are usually spell-like abilities which means that you can still use them if your hands are full (I'm looking at you, dual-wielding ranger).

-Suzuro

Recaiden
2008-11-16, 02:01 PM
I find that the spells that they get are just as good as most class features, although either will be better for some builds.

AmberVael
2008-11-16, 02:18 PM
They are definitely not worth it in the long shot. Epic level spellcasting man.

Paladins and Rangers do not get level 9 spells, and thus, without another source of casting, cannot take the Epic Spellcasting feat.
Plus you need 24 spellcraft ranks, and that would be really annoying to try and get.

hamishspence
2008-11-16, 02:20 PM
I'm told that they can take the bonus spell slot feats (normally for metamagic) keep taking them all the way to 9th level (5 epic feats) then take epic spellcasting.

Though it was Sage Advice that said that, for bards.

AmberVael
2008-11-16, 02:26 PM
...well I guess you could do it that way.
But that would be an annoyingly high investment, and would take you quite a while to actually achieve.
Plus it does seem to be a perversion of the feat's intention, if not its wording.

So yes, I guess you could, with the expenditure of no less than 6 feats, and getting Spellcraft to 24 (which would require you to be level 42 if you went for pure Paladin or Ranger), gain Epic Spellcasting.
But by that point I'd wonder why you didn't just play a cleric or druid.

hamishspence
2008-11-16, 02:31 PM
1 level in another class (or the right feats) might fix it.

The idea of a Paladin using high end epic divine powers is kinda fun. Sure, not optimised, but makes an interesting change of pace.

AmberVael
2008-11-16, 02:43 PM
^: Even then, due to the feats they'd have to choose, they'd need to wait at least until level 30.

hamishspence
2008-11-16, 02:45 PM
question is- would a 30th level paladin with epic magic, despite not playing to strengths, be much more dangerous than a 30th level one focusing on the things paladins do best? Is epic spellcasting a "get at any cost" thing?

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-16, 03:12 PM
^: Even then, due to the feats they'd have to choose, they'd need to wait at least until level 30.

Technically no, it's doable at level 21.

Take the feat Flexible Mind (Dragon #326) to make Spellcraft a class skill for you. Then at level 21 make use of Embrace the Dark Chaos and Shun the Dark Chaos to change 5 of your feats into Improved Spell Capacity and a 6th into Epic Spellcasting.

Work's for rangers as well.


question is- would a 30th level paladin with epic magic, despite not playing to strengths, be much more dangerous than a 30th level one focusing on the things paladins do best? Is epic spellcasting a "get at any cost" thing?
Yes. If you want to stand a chance in epic you need epic spellcasting (or manifesting).

hamishspence
2008-11-16, 03:14 PM
isn't there a rule somewhere that epic feats must occupy epic feat slots? if not, maybe there should be- those two spells are good enough already.

AmberVael
2008-11-16, 03:22 PM
Technically no, it's doable at level 21.

Take the feat Flexible Mind (Dragon #326) to make Spellcraft a class skill for you. Then at level 21 make use of Embrace the Dark Chaos and Shun the Dark Chaos to change 5 of your feats into Improved Spell Capacity and a 6th into Epic Spellcasting.

Work's for rangers as well.

:smallsigh:
Okay, barring ridiculous cheese which no good DM would allow, 30 is approximately the level you could qualify. There are probably ways to lower that, but my point stands- you have to put a fair amount of effort into making this happen.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-16, 03:24 PM
:smallsigh:
Okay, barring ridiculous cheese which no good DM would allow, 30 is approximately the level you could qualify. There are probably ways to lower that, but my point stands- you have to put a fair amount of effort into making this happen.

What ridiculous cheese? This is all predicated on epic spellcasting existing in the game in the first place. Short of playing as Pun-Pun or the like you really can't come up with anything cheesier.

AmberVael
2008-11-16, 03:27 PM
Under a DM who actually attempts to regulate things, epic spellcasting isn't actually so bad.
It's still amazing, but hell, you're already a spellcaster who can cast level 9 spells.
On the other hand, using Chaos Shuffle to suddenly make all of your feats Epic feats is pretty blatantly cheesy.

hamishspence
2008-11-16, 03:29 PM
I figure, feats are supposed to be feats you could legally take at that level- if you swap a 6th level feat out, alternate feat should be one you were legally allowed to take at that level. Thats the usual rule for chracter rebuilds.

The_Snark
2008-11-16, 03:34 PM
What ridiculous cheese? This is all predicated on epic spellcasting existing in the game in the first place. Short of playing as Pun-Pun or the like you really can't come up with anything cheesier.

Unless your DM uses the Epic Spellcasting system with the caveat "don't break it", and actually works with you to develop epic spells. As long as we're talking about an actual game situation here, and not hypothetical rules-tweaking, that's probably a good assumption to make.

Back on topic, the Complete Warrior alternatives are pretty terrible; as others have pointed out, you're giving up your spells to get, essentially, 4 spells that your spellcasting ability would have given you anyway. I suppose if you don't have a Wisdom score high enough to cast the spells, it might be worth it, or if you plan on multiclassing after level 6. Otherwise, stay with the spells; they're surprisingly useful, and the Spell Compendium holds some good ones (I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Rhino's Rush for Paladins, or Hunter's Mercy for rangers).

The Complete Champion variant is better, especially for those paladins and rangers who'll be prestige classing after level 5. I'd still probably prefer the spellcasting if I were staying in the class for 20 levels, but if not, one bonus feat is probably better than 1 1st-level spell per day.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-16, 03:40 PM
I figure, feats are supposed to be feats you could legally take at that level- if you swap a 6th level feat out, alternate feat should be one you were legally allowed to take at that level. Thats the usual rule for chracter rebuilds.

Yeah but this isn't a rebuild. And Shun the Dark Chaos specifically says that the feat is replaced by "any other feat for which the character qualifies".

hamishspence
2008-11-16, 03:45 PM
yes- but cheesing it out- at all, will likely cause many DMs to ban the spell entirely. Or maybe even the rest of the crunch the players can use in that book.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-16, 03:54 PM
yes- but cheesing it out- at all, will likely cause many DMs to ban the spell entirely. Or maybe even the rest of the crunch the players can use in that book.

What cheese? It's paying 4,750 GP to upgrade 1 of your feats. And in epic the non casters need all the help that they can get (even if you don't let them get epic casting) and the casters don't benefit all that much (most of the feats that they would want are skill point dependent). The only semi cheesy part is switching racial bonus feats for usable bonus feats.

hamishspence
2008-11-16, 03:58 PM
switching non-epic feats for epic ones? 6 non epic feats for 6 epic ones? At 21st level?

Maybe not on a par with Charop stuff, but might raise eyebrows.

Emperor Tippy
2008-11-16, 04:04 PM
So long as you aren't qualifying pre epic it's not that bad. I mean melee is already significantly behind the power curve. And none of the feats do a whole lot for a wizard at level 21.

newbDM
2008-11-16, 04:39 PM
Is the spellcasting which normal Rangers and Paladins get better then the class features which the Non-spellcasting versions get as compensation? I know the abilities (for the most part) aren't particularly impressive, but I tend to think the spells those classes get are too weak to really be useful, so I'm curious about what other people think about the Magicless versions. (If you're not familiar with the variants, see http://crystalkeep.com/d20/rules/DnD3.5Index-Classes-Base.pdf .)

So which is the non-spellcasting Paladin? I could really use it for my low-magic homebrewed setting.

I know the ranger one is in one of the complete books, which is the one I allow in my games.

Quietus
2008-11-16, 06:24 PM
So which is the non-spellcasting Paladin? I could really use it for my low-magic homebrewed setting.

I know the ranger one is in one of the complete books, which is the one I allow in my games.

Both are in Complete Warrior, near the beginning.

newbDM
2008-11-16, 06:33 PM
Both are in Complete Warrior, near the beginning.

Thank you!

woodenbandman
2008-11-17, 10:57 PM
Epic feats on the whole, with the exception of the epic spellcasting feats, are not that good. Sure there's the one that gives you invisibility all the time and makes your criticals into coup de graces, but an 11th level wizard can still kill you with your tasty tasty will saves. So I would let anyone have all the epic feats they wanted. I'll take Shock Trooper over Overwhelming Critical any day.

Tempest Fennac
2008-11-18, 03:19 AM
How about Epic Toughness? 30 extra HPs looks useful to me (admittedly, they won't make a difference against a lot of save-or-die spells).

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-18, 05:14 AM
How about Epic Toughness? 30 extra HPs looks useful to me (admittedly, they won't make a difference against a lot of save-or-die spells).At that level? Seriously? Standard Druid has 19d8+8+(6*20), or 200+ HP. How will 30 additional matter?

Tempest Fennac
2008-11-18, 05:32 AM
I was thinking more for Arcane spellcasters (Epic Mager Armour would probably be better, though).

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-11-18, 05:39 AM
I was thinking more for Arcane spellcasters (Epic Mager Armour would probably be better, though).At that point, HP damage is, on the low end, in the hundreds. D4s and a starting Con of 14 mean they probably will die in one hit anyways. AC rarely matters, either, unless you're devoted to it. AB and Damage scale too easily for a Wizard to beat.