Rangers need love

[CarpeNoctu]

In every game that I have ever played that had a Ranger or Ranger type class, that has always been my first choice, as I absolutely love the class... But our Rangers in DDO really do get much less respect than they should, and much less love imo...

There are some great suggestions in this thread (Tempest capstone, improved evasion, Favored Enemy bane damage and a toughness line to name a few) but I guess I just tend to think of the Ranger a bit differently... As many of you have pointed out, the Ranger should not be a better fighter than a Fighter, or have greater HP or DR than a Barbarian... But they should be able to be a Ranger without having to multiclass. Rangers are hunters. They are light armor combatants with high dexterity and made for dual wielding and bow use, this much is obvious. But they are also supposed to be adept at trapping, tracking, healing and light spell work.

That said, I'm thinking that the best change immediate change, that shouldn't require any massive effort, would be to grant us more skills and more skill points per level. We don't have to be on par with Rogues on the amount of skill points we're given, but seriously... Tumble and Balance are not class skills for a class that is always in the middle of the action and/or drawing heavy aggro? A class that should be all about skill doesn't have real access to UMD? What's that about?

Second, I think some trap skills should be given to Rangers... I'm not saying that we should make Rogues obsolete, by any means, but how about granting Rangers the ability to make and set their own traps, as they would living off of the land, and perhaps even the ability to disable some types of traps... Again, not on par with Rogue skills, but even Wizards, Sorcerers and Bards get Knock for opening doors and chests...

The thing is, Rangers are a utility class. A Jack of all Trades class, if you will. I'm not asking that you make us Fighters... I'm not asking that you make us Barbarians... I'm not even asking that you make us Rogues... But how about letting us be Rangers for a change? That's all I really want... Just to be able to do what a Ranger is supposed to be able to do. A few more skills, a few more skill points, a feat or two and a few more (actually useful) spells and I'd be happy for now...

But I'd still want that capstone at some point in time

[pharky]

i totally agree tempest III should be made stronger in same way or another, i dont really see the point of getting more than 12 levels of ranger as it is right now.

[NaturalHazard]

That said, I'm thinking that the best change immediate change, that shouldn't require any massive effort, would be to grant us more skills and more skill points per level. We don't have to be on par with Rogues on the amount of skill points we're given, but seriously...

rangers already get 6 skill points per level rogues get 8 so what do you suggest? 7?

[NaturalHazard]

, but seriously... Tumble and Balance are not class skills for a class that is always in the middle of the action and/or drawing heavy aggro? A class that should be all about skill doesn't have real access to UMD? What's that about?


But I'd still want that capstone at some point in time

i dont know about tumble, but I do think yes rangers should get balance, even though they dont get it in pnp? but no not umd, they dont get umd in pnp and I think it would be op in ddo, umd should be exclusive to rogues and bards,

[Brennie]

i dont know about tumble(...)

Every Tempest ranger has Mobility. Mobility increases AC while tumbling. Tumble is NOT a Ranger class skill. Does no one see the problem here?

Is this oversight, or Turbines way of pointing out that melee Rangers need to multiclass?

(Yes, i know Mobility is useless even *with* tumble, but the mere fact that it is based off a cross-class skill for Rangers would indicate, to me atleast, that Tempests are practcally written with multiclassing in mind.)

On a related note, can Tumbling with the Mobility feat give stacking concealment bonus or something? Y'know, an ACTUAL form of defense for the 99% of the playerbase for whom AC is entirely useless?

[78mackson]

. . . and hit slightly harder than a battle-cleric against non-FEs

rangers might do more dps(?), but they do not hit harder. Even a ranger with paladin past life will have lower base dmg vs non-FE.

[sephiroth1084]

Every Tempest ranger has Mobility. Mobility increases AC while tumbling. Tumble is NOT a Ranger class skill. Does no one see the problem here?

Is this oversight, or Turbines way of pointing out that melee Rangers need to multiclass?

(Yes, i know Mobility is useless even *with* tumble, but the mere fact that it is based off a cross-class skill for Rangers would indicate, to me atleast, that Tempests are practcally written with multiclassing in mind.)

On a related note, can Tumbling with the Mobility feat give stacking concealment bonus or something? Y'know, an ACTUAL form of defense for the 99% of the playerbase for whom AC is entirely useless?

Mobility, and probably Spring Attack, needs to be reevaluated. It was a rather poor translation from PnP and Tempest rangers are just suffering from that poor translation.

[Brennie]

Mobility, and probably Spring Attack, needs to be reevaluated. It was a rather poor translation from PnP and Tempest rangers are just suffering from that poor translation.

A-yup. I Agree entirely.

[Faent]

Is this oversight, or Turbines way of pointing out that melee Rangers need to multiclass?

A melee ranger that doesn't multi-classs sucks. Turbine has screwed the pooch here.

[grodon9999]

A melee ranger that doesn't multi-classs sucks. Turbine has screwed the pooch here.

1. Tempest III is a very weak PRE. The 15/3/2 split is better on all levels except if you want to main-tank raids.

2. No Capstone worth a **** for melee, but honestly how ridiculously over-powered would a melee capstone have to be to go pure.

3. Everything a ranger can do, somebody else can do significantly better. I'm as big of a ranger-fanboy as they come and I tank raids all the time on my rangers, but I'll admit my fighter blows him out of the water in regards to this capability. Primary-fighter multiclasses are better archers, rogues are better flankers, bards better buffers, etc . . .

[ShaitainFerenczy]

For me, rangers have always been the best fighter type class. In Tabletop or rpg games.

[Ystradmynach]

3. Everything a ranger can do, somebody else can do significantly better. I'm as big of a ranger-fanboy as they come and I tank raids all the time on my rangers, but I'll admit my fighter blows him out of the water in regards to this capability. Primary-fighter multiclasses are better archers, rogues are better flankers, bards better buffers, etc . . .

I'm actually alright with most of that. I mean I would expect fighters to be better at fighting, because that is pretty much all they do well and if they didn't exceed a ranger in combat, why play them? Likewise rogues aren't very good when they aren't flanking, bards struggle to find roles other than buffing, and so on.

While a new melee capstone would be good and I have no doubt it will be added at some point, I would actually be interested in seeing rangers be able to pull more stuff out of their utility belt so to speak. Rangers need more spells, and some of the spells (especially offensive ones) they do have should be modified so they are actually useful in battle. I'd like to see wild empathy enhancements looked at again so people have a reason to take them, and favored enemies either adjusted in category or have some bonus associated with each favored enemy that will make your FE choices a little more varied. Maybe people might take FE plant for example if it grants them immunity to knockdown effects.

[NaturalHazard]

Mobility, and probably Spring Attack, needs to be reevaluated. It was a rather poor translation from PnP and Tempest rangers are just suffering from that poor translation.

yep

[grodon9999]

yep

What was different about Mobility and Spring attack in PnP? I'm an old AD&D 2.0 guy.

[Ystradmynach]

What was different about Mobility and Spring attack in PnP? I'm an old AD&D 2.0 guy.

Mobility gave a +4 armor bonus to attacks of opportunity and spring attack allowed you to move both before and after an attack and avoid attacks of opportunity. With no attacks of opportunity in DDO though that would be meaningless. Also, for some reason DDO doesn't have the attack progressions that would make AC useful for almost all characters instead of just for a few that optimize it.

I would like to see the feats adjusted to give damage bonuses when attacking on the move, especially as there was an optional ranger like class called a scout in 3.5 that was based around that very idea.

Edit: And before you ask, attacks of opportunities were free attacks that players and monster had when moving through their opponents zone of control. So you could move up to a monster with no problem, but if you moved past him, he'd get a free attack on you.

[grodon9999]

Mobility gave a +4 armor bonus to attacks of opportunity and spring attack allowed you to move both before and after an attack and avoid attacks of opportunity. With no attacks of opportunity in DDO though that would be meaningless. Also, for some reason DDO doesn't have the attack progressions that would make AC useful for almost all characters instead of just for a few that optimize it.

I would like to see the feats adjusted to give damage bonuses when attacking on the move, especially as there was an optional ranger like class called a scout in 3.5 that was based around that very idea.

So this "tumbling" thing was something DDO made up? A better translation would be +4 AC while moving. Spring attack's no penalty to-hit while moving is pretty good so can't complain about that.

[Mercureal]

I'd love to see something to improve Ranger's combat effectiveness a bit by giving them greater potential against their favoured enemies - given that other melee classes can often do more damage against them than a ranger can.

While it's unlikely we'd get it, I'm thinking of something like the following, which to me seems worthwhile but not unreasonable or overpowered.


Ranger Favoured Strike


Favoured Strike I - ML 4, 1 AP
Your study of your favoured enemies has given you knowledge of how to pierce their defences. Your attacks now bypass 10% fortification on favoured enemies.

Favoured Strike II - ML 8, 2 AP

Your continued study of your favoured enemies has given you improved knowledge of how to pierce their defences. Your attacks now bypass 20% fortification on favoured enemies.

Favoured Strike III - ML 12, 3 AP

Your intensive study of your favoured enemies has given you great knowledge of their anatomy. Your critical threat range when attacking favoured enemies is increased by 1.

Favoured Strike IV - ML 16, 4 AP

Your near-obsessive focus on your favoured enemies has given you the ability to deal devastating damage to your foes. You add 1 to the critical multiplier of all confirmed critical hits.

[grodon9999]

I'd love to see something to improve Ranger's combat effectiveness a bit by giving them greater potential against their favoured enemies - given that other melee classes can often do more damage against them than a ranger can.

While it's unlikely we'd get it, I'm thinking of something like the following, which to me seems worthwhile but not unreasonable or overpowered.


Ranger Favoured Strike


Favoured Strike I - ML 4, 1 AP
Your study of your favoured enemies has given you knowledge of how to pierce their defences. Your attacks now bypass 10% fortification on favoured enemies.

Favoured Strike II - ML 8, 2 AP

Your continued study of your favoured enemies has given you improved knowledge of how to pierce their defences. Your attacks now bypass 20% fortification on favoured enemies.

Favoured Strike III - ML 12, 3 AP

Your intensive study of your favoured enemies has given you great knowledge of their anatomy. Your critical threat range when attacking favoured enemies is increased by 1.

Favoured Strike IV - ML 16, 4 AP

Your near-obsessive focus on your favoured enemies has given you the ability to deal devastating damage to your foes. You add 1 to the critical multiplier of all confirmed critical hits.

This would make rangers OTT against favored enemies and do nothing to help them where they are weak, against non-FEs. Against FEs ranger damage output is fine.

[Glenalth]

...and favored enemies either adjusted in category or have some bonus associated with each favored enemy that will make your FE choices a little more varied. Maybe people might take FE plant for example if it grants them immunity to knockdown effects.

I like this sort of idea more than the increasing FE damage that many others have brought up. More resiliency & tricks over more damage.

[Kvetha]

More resiliency & tricks over more damage.

This is an excelent idea, and would surely inspire many more verietys of FE's.