Ranger Toughness?

[Cannon]

In my mind, I always pictured rangers as the hardy, tough, outdoor type that can wander the far reaches of the map.

Could rangers also get the toughness line? Seems odd that those sissy little pallies get it but the tough rangers do not

(In the interest of self-disclosure, i have 1 fighter,2 pallies, 2 rangers, 1 sorc, and 1 cleric)


If this is a game-play issue in that you do not want to inflate the ranger hps, that is fine. Just wanted to point out that it seemed odd that they did not get the line.

Cannon

[Bromm]

Rangers are supposed to have a Free Endurance Feat at level 3 but since the game dosnt have endurance maybe toughness should be it's replacement? Or at least the toughness enhancement line.

Rangers get very little in useful enhancements this would be a nice bonus.

Cheers

[bobbryan2]

I definately would concur that Rangers should get the toughness enhancements to make up for the loss of the Endurance feat.

[aurus33]

Agree!!!!

Show us sum ranger luuuuuv!!!

[Twerpp]

In my mind, I always pictured rangers as the hardy, tough, outdoor type that can wander the far reaches of the map.

Could rangers also get the toughness line? Seems odd that those sissy little pallies get it but the tough rangers do not

(In the interest of self-disclosure, i have 1 fighter,2 pallies, 2 rangers, 1 sorc, and 1 cleric)


If this is a game-play issue in that you do not want to inflate the ranger hps, that is fine. Just wanted to point out that it seemed odd that they did not get the line.

Cannon

I always pictured them as the superhuman speed and cat-like agility types, not the tough meat-shields though. Unfortunately the AC is lower than the other types too in many cases due to light armor. I definitely agree, rangers are a 1/1 BAB class and should stay balanced with the other 1/1 BAB classes for the most part.

[Huebacca]

I definately would concur that Rangers should get the toughness enhancements to make up for the loss of the Endurance feat.

I think having both combat styles more than makes up for not having the endurance feat that is mostly useless in this game.

But I do think of rangers as a class that is as capable at melee as a paladin and think they should have toughness enhancements.

[QuantumFX]

I'd rather see a generic enhancement. None of the current classes that get toughness enhancements have any innate attachment to the feat. (No freebies, Not a fighter bonus feat, etc.) Rogues, Battle Clerics and Bards need HP too. In fact you could make a good argument that low HP classes are more likely to take a toughness feat in tabletop D&D than a high HP class.

Also Rangers do get a tradeoff for the missing Track/Fast Tracking/Endurance/Camoflage feats. They get access to both fighting style chains and are the only class that gets Bow Strength.

[Bizbag]

I'd rather see a generic enhancement. None of the current classes that get toughness enhancements have any innate attachment to the feat. (No freebies, Not a fighter bonus feat, etc.) Rogues, Battle Clerics and Bards need HP too. In fact you could make a good argument that low HP classes are more likely to take a toughness feat in tabletop D&D than a high HP class.

Also Rangers do get a tradeoff for the missing Track/Fast Tracking/Endurance/Camoflage feats. They get access to both fighting style chains and are the only class that gets Bow Strength.

I'm pretty sure nobody ever took Tougness in PnP unless they were using it to qualify for a PrC. It granted all of 3 HP.

[Okita]

I'd rather see a generic enhancement. None of the current classes that get toughness enhancements have any innate attachment to the feat. (No freebies, Not a fighter bonus feat, etc.) Rogues, Battle Clerics and Bards need HP too. In fact you could make a good argument that low HP classes are more likely to take a toughness feat in tabletop D&D than a high HP class.

Also Rangers do get a tradeoff for the missing Track/Fast Tracking/Endurance/Camoflage feats. They get access to both fighting style chains and are the only class that gets Bow Strength.

to which everyone knows that ranged fighting is gimped.

[Maldini]

Rangers are secondary melee like rogues. They're hybrids of sorts. As such they don't have toughness enhancements. If they did, then rogue's should get them too.

Fighter's, Paladin's and Barbs are the primary melee classes so that's why they were given that enhancement line.

[lostinjapan]

I always pictured them as the superhuman speed and cat-like agility types, not the tough meat-shields though. Unfortunately the AC is lower than the other types too in many cases due to light armor. I definitely agree, rangers are a 1/1 BAB class and should stay balanced with the other 1/1 BAB classes for the most part.

Someone certainly never read/watched LotR. I would definitely place Aragorn in the 'tough meat-shield' class instead of the 'superhuman speed and cat-like agility' class. Perhaps you are confusing "elf" for "ranger"?

Rangers are secondary melee like rogues. They're hybrids of sorts. As such they don't have toughness enhancements. If they did, then rogue's should get them too.

Fighter's, Paladin's and Barbs are the primary melee classes so that's why they were given that enhancement line.

And someone else has definitely never run with my rogue (or any of the other many rogues and rangers out there who can out-damage and stay alive longer than the majority of those so-called "melee classes").

[Dingo123]

Aragorn wasn't a meatshield. Boromir was.

Rangers should not get the toughness enhancement line.

[Lifespawn]

ya dingo thx for chiming in your opinion means alot hows the free cleric spell points thing comming?

Rangers should get the toughness line they are a full bab class but get less hp per lvl than all the other 1 bab classes.

[Dingo123]

ya dingo thx for chiming in your opinion means alot hows the free cleric spell points thing comming?

Rangers should get the toughness line they are a full bab class but get less hp per lvl than all the other 1 bab classes.

Look at that statement.

Go on.

Look at it.

They get FEWER HITPOINTS for a reason, They also wear lighter armor.

The logic of your statement is apparently that because Rangers have fewer hitpoints... they should get MORE hitpoints.

Why bother giving them d8 hp to begin with? Why not give them d10? why not give fighters d12?


Rangers aren't meant to be frontline tanks. They would come with DR, better HP, and better armor if they were. They don't.

Base attack bonus has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not you should get the toughness enhancement.

[VonBek]

I think having both combat styles more than makes up for not having the endurance feat that is mostly useless in this game.

But I do think of rangers as a class that is as capable at melee as a paladin and think they should have toughness enhancements.

(First part: How many focus on Str or Dex rather than play balanced Rangers? NOT taunting, btw - just curious.)

Second part: I feel sympathy, yet my view resembles Maldini's. My perspective: A Ranger resembles a Fighter/Rogue (avg d10 & d6) with a splash of Divine Caster (d8). That's quite a combo. Something has to give - it seems like it was HP relative to the other melees. Since toughness centers on boosting HP it seems inconsistent with the rest of the Hybrid.

[Turial]

If they were to give rangers a toughness enhancement I think it would follow the item defense line coming in mod 5. It would be one enhancement short of the "Traditional tank or meat shield" toughness. I wouldn't mind having a toughness line available to me but personally I would be less likely to take it. Giving an untyped and non-feat requiring enhancement line to rangers and other classes would be a bit unbalancing and unfair to the meat shields.

So in the end I'm in favor of a toughness line for rangers if it is tied into having the feat and is 1 level below what the meat shields can pick up.

[bobbryan2]

(First part: How many focus on Str or Dex rather than play balanced Rangers? NOT taunting, btw - just curious.)

Second part: I feel sympathy, yet my view resembles Maldini's. My perspective: A Ranger resembles a Fighter/Rogue (avg d10 & d6) with a splash of Divine Caster (d8). That's quite a combo. Something has to give - it seems like it was HP relative to the other melees. Since toughness centers on boosting HP it seems inconsistent with the rest of the Hybrid.

But, at the same time. The endurance feat centers around swimming, running and climbing for longer periods of time, Sleeping in heavy and medium armors without penalty, and it opens the way for the Die Hard feat.

Without any kind of real fatigue bars, the only measure of endurance we have IG is HP. No one was asking for Rangers to get an automatic toughness feat... just to have access to the toughness line of enhancements. Well, I was just asking for the enhancements if nothing else.

[Cannon]

(First part: How many focus on Str or Dex rather than play balanced Rangers? NOT taunting, btw - just curious.)

.

My first ranger is a dex/finesse ranger. The second ranger I made was a str based front-line ranger. Both are effective at what they do within the limitations of the class.

This request was not to start an argument about what is a ranger but to see if rangers could get toughness. I understand Maldini's point and if that is the reasoning behind the decision, no problem However, I view the toughness line of enhancements as a break from AD&D in order to accommodate the changes that were put in place to make this a dynamic computer game. In my feeling that break should also apply to the rangers.

As a compromise to the higher hp classes, what about giving rangers ONLY the first 3 lvls of toughness. That would mean they get the 5/10/15 but not the 20. That would continue to place the higher hps front-line (fighters,barbs, pallies) individuals ahead of rangers but it would give the rangers a bit of a boost.

Cannon

[Gornin]

I think rangers could have access to the toughness feat, then access to the toughness line enhancements. It depends on how you want to build your ranger. If you take these feats/enhancements, you are giving up other choices. It is the players choice. I think rangers can be like both descriptions in previous posts.

[Ringlord]

If they can't do something like that then come up with an enhancement to replace the missing endurance feat or give Rangers a better fire rate with bows than others get or something. I know most people would like to see ROF for bows increased all around