Give rangers our pets back!

[Talon_Moonshadow]

I say sure! Let Rangers have their animal companions.
Just make sure that all Rangers - past, present, and future - have to decide between duel-wielding or ranged-focus (and eventual many-shot) like they are supposed to and were granted both to make up for the lack of animal companions...



I'm sure once Rangers see just how "useful" something like Artificer Dogs really are, they'd clamor for it to be changed back in a hurry.


On a side note, the Arti Dog is also why I'm kinda dreading Druid. I have a feeling it's going to fall well short of good.

With ranged combat as gimped as it is.....
...and yet soooo popular with new players....

do you actually "want" Rangers to have to choose between TWF and ranged?!

[Talon_Moonshadow]

and if they are so useless.

Why not give them to us?

what part of the game does a useless buff change? for better or worse?




I want them for flavor.
(but just because they are weak does not make them useless IMO)

[Havok.cry]

I always thought the improved wild empathy was there in place of ranger pets. I just wish they would give the summon nature's ally spells the same love as the summon monster ones. Though, I dont think that will happen till druids come out. As far as PnP goes, ranger pets were not that great. Aerial scouts, trackers, and sometimes mounts (mine was a mounted archer).

Also, anyone that thinks turbine has proven they can program pets obviously haven't played an artificer for very long. The higher level they get the more their AI degrades.

[Expalphalog]

I'm a big fan of "don't bother with this fluff-nonsense and give rangers a real buff"

Personally I'm the exact opposite. The fluff is the only reason that I'm here. I could have played WoW or AoC but I love me some D&D, so I chose this game over those. I'm not contradicting the "give rangers a real buff" portion of your post, I'm just saying that if they can do it in the form of utility pets then that would be awesome.

But then I'm also the kind of guy who can't stand it when people name their Fantasy Football teams something like "Over the Dwayne Bowe" or "Blood Bath and Beyond" - sure it's cute and clever, but it ruins my illusion that it is a real football team. And our Blood Bowl league (tabletop, not video game) has a rule that all players must be named and those names must be realistic and unique. So yeah, I may go overboard a bit with my fluff-obsession.

[Memnir]

you actually "want" Rangers to have to choose between TWF and ranged?!

Yep.

[Missing_Minds]

Yep.

If they make ranged combat actually worth while and viable at the high levels, I'd be fine with having to choose a 'school'.

They are the only PnP class that is supper pumped up, but that is because of how gimped archery is in a video game. If it followed the "same rules" as melee, wouldn't be near the issue that it is now.

[Kielbasa]

I say sure! Let Rangers have their animal companions.
Just make sure that all Rangers - past, present, and future - have to decide between duel-wielding or ranged-focus (and eventual many-shot) like they are supposed to and were granted both to make up for the lack of animal companions...



I'm sure once Rangers see just how "useful" something like Artificer Dogs really are, they'd clamor for it to be changed back in a hurry.


On a side note, the Arti Dog is also why I'm kinda dreading Druid. I have a feeling it's going to fall well short of good.

Considering being able to switch between reliable melee and ranged damage is about the only thing that makes the class interesting in the first place forcing players to choose one or the other would be a catastrophe. There are no ranged combat feats unless you count manyshot and improved precise shot. Ranged combat needs a massive overhaul before turbine should even consider such an idea. Also a melee ranger cannot get a good dc for their combat feats let alone the feats improved sunder, improved trip, or stunning blow. You would completely gut the class beyond the auto attack snore fest that it is in its current form.

Loved the class when I first started playing ddo but it just doesn't compare to most of the others after you've played casters or monks. Its primarily just an easy cheap way for new players to make a two weapon fighting class because of the free feats. I'd love an overhaul. If the devs want to give rangers a worthwhile animal companion I say great. Then I'll ask what are you going to do to make the class fun to play? They really need some good active abilities or feats.

[Memnir]

I absolutly agree that ranged combat needs a massive overhaul - it has for the past six years (including beta).


However, the justification for giving Rangers both ranged and melee specialties - a rather large step away from the core rules - was that it was to make up for the loss of Animal Companions as a feature in DDO. The Devs couldn't figure out how to put em in in time for launch... so they gave Rangers a boon by not having to pick a specialty by granting both. All I'm saying is that if they are now given Companions, the boon should be reevaluated.


That does not exclude the need for ranged combat to be overhauled. Nor does it exclude the need for Rangers themselves to receive some attention in terms of class-balance. I'm not saying that those things should not happen. If it takes the Devs actually getting around to fixing ranged combat to go hand-in-hand with Animal Companions... then that's what it takes.


Besides the other, and the far more important one, point I tried to make that seems to have been overlooked is that the Artificer Dogs are good for about the first five levels, then their use fades. And, since Animal Companions would not have the upgradeable weapons or armor that minimally extend the usefulness of Arti-Dogs... Animal Companions would be measurably worse in the long run.

That's also why I am not looking forward to Turbine's interpretation of Druidic companions or animal-form. After seeing, playing with, and evaluating the metal mutts... I think that they will do nothing but disappoint when we finally get Druids.


In any event... Rangers would be improved very little by giving them flesh equivalents of Arti Dogs. Out of all the things needed to improve Rangers, I'd rank Animal Companions dead last.

Your mileage may, of course, vary.

[Aesop]

I absolutly agree that ranged combat needs a massive overhaul - it has for the past six years (including beta).


However, the justification for giving Rangers both ranged and melee specialties - a rather large step away from the core rules - was that it was to make up for the loss of Animal Companions as a feature in DDO. The Devs couldn't figure out how to put em in in time for launch... so they gave Rangers a boon by not having to pick a specialty by granting both. All I'm saying is that if they are now given Companions, the boon should be reevaluated.


That does not exclude the need for ranged combat to be overhauled. Nor does it exclude the need for Rangers themselves to receive some attention in terms of class-balance. I'm not saying that those things should not happen. If it takes the Devs actually getting around to fixing ranged combat to go hand-in-hand with Animal Companions... then that's what it takes.


Besides the other, and the far more important one, point I tried to make that seems to have been overlooked is that the Artificer Dogs are good for about the first five levels, then their use fades. And, since Animal Companions would not have the upgradeable weapons or armor that minimally extend the usefulness of Arti-Dogs... Animal Companions would be measurably worse in the long run.

That's also why I am not looking forward to Turbine's interpretation of Druidic companions or animal-form. After seeing, playing with, and evaluating the metal mutts... I think that they will do nothing but disappoint when we finally get Druids.


In any event... Rangers would be improved very little by giving them flesh equivalents of Arti Dogs. Out of all the things needed to improve Rangers, I'd rank Animal Companions dead last.

Your mileage may, of course, vary..

I would argue that this is not necessarily true. Turbine is perfectly able to incorporate some sort of Animal Armor and "Paw Wraps". Perhaps a Spiked Collar even Additionally, perhaps the Rangers Favored Enemy could apply to the Animal Companion also which would be a nice bonus and make them a bit more threatening in certain combats. Especially if the Hunter Capstone I suggested got implemented.

Much like Rangers have full caster levels I imagine that the Animal Companions would likewise count as full level as well.

Companions are relatively new and I understand that they are not really very good at all beyond the early levels, but perhaps that can change. Tweaks can happen to make things a bit better.

An aspect of Rangers that get ignored overall is the Spells. The ones we generally think of are Ram's Might, Barkskin, and Freedom of Movement. Add some other spells to improve combat ability. Blade Storm and Arrow Storm for the respective styles. See earlier post for a couple other spells.

Tempest 2 needs an upgrade. I'd have it make off hand attacks use full Str Mod instead of half.

DwS needs a complete overhaul and expansion.

AA could use some bumps preferably along the conjured arrow category.

Ranged Combat needs Tactical Feats ( Ranged Pin: Single Target Web, Ranged Sunder: As Sunder) and they should be granted like trip and sunder already are and use Dexterity and not Strength for DCs... Actually all Combat DCs (Monk Special Attacks would be the exception as they are tied to Wisdom) should be attached to whichever Stat is used to launch the attack, this would help out Weapon Finesse builds.

Ranged Combat could use a Power Attack like Feat (I call it Overdraw -3 Attack +5 Damage) exclusive with IPS. Rangers could have an enhancement line attached to it as well. maybe a two tier.
1. -1 Attack +2 damage
2. -1 Attack +2 damage
total -5 Attack +9 Damage

Elves could get the same line (stacking with the ranger one)

Aesop

[grodon9999]

Personally I'm the exact opposite. The fluff is the only reason that I'm here. I could have played WoW or AoC but I love me some D&D, so I chose this game over those. I'm not contradicting the "give rangers a real buff" portion of your post, I'm just saying that if they can do it in the form of utility pets then that would be awesome.

But then I'm also the kind of guy who can't stand it when people name their Fantasy Football teams something like "Over the Dwayne Bowe" or "Blood Bath and Beyond" - sure it's cute and clever, but it ruins my illusion that it is a real football team. And our Blood Bowl league (tabletop, not video game) has a rule that all players must be named and those names must be realistic and unique. So yeah, I may go overboard a bit with my fluff-obsession.

I don't want any grey-matter wasted on something this useless. The arti-dogs are worse than useless, they actually cause harm.

Hell no.

[Aesop]

I don't want any grey-matter wasted on something this useless. The arti-dogs are worse than useless, they actually cause harm.

Hell no.

They are here to stay though... Why not fix them to work? Any suggestions there? remember FIX not REMOVE

Aesop

[grodon9999]

They are here to stay though... Why not fix them to work? Any suggestions there? remember FIX not REMOVE

Aesop

I don't give a hoot about artificers, I don't have one and I have zero interest in playing one. I could care less about their dogs, let somebody who does. My way of handling it is anyone who's dog does something stupid that makes a quest more difficult gets kicked from the group.

The cause of this is the absurdly stupid AI. I don't see that getting fixed any time soon.

I don't want that garbage polluting my favorite class. Rangers, both Tempest and AA, need real love from the devs and I don't want some silly fluff done as a poor excuse for a buff.

I'm sorry, I prefer utility over fluff. After 2+ years and delusions of plot and RP have long been washed away. If a buff to a class doesn't actually add any value is is a waste.

[Chai]

I absolutly agree that ranged combat needs a massive overhaul - it has for the past six years (including beta).

Yet artificers are roflpwning stuff with ranged while the arcane archers sit back and drool.

However, the justification for giving Rangers both ranged and melee specialties - a rather large step away from the core rules - was that it was to make up for the loss of Animal Companions as a feature in DDO. The Devs couldn't figure out how to put em in in time for launch... so they gave Rangers a boon by not having to pick a specialty by granting both. All I'm saying is that if they are now given Companions, the boon should be reevaluated.

And that excuse was invalidated in a hurry when they put artificers into the game with strong pets.

That does not exclude the need for ranged combat to be overhauled. Nor does it exclude the need for Rangers themselves to receive some attention in terms of class-balance. I'm not saying that those things should not happen. If it takes the Devs actually getting around to fixing ranged combat to go hand-in-hand with Animal Companions... then that's what it takes.

If my arcane archer has to forfeit his TWF abilities simply due to PnP semantics, he better be able to put down the same DPS as a tempest, only with a bow.

Besides the other, and the far more important one, point I tried to make that seems to have been overlooked is that the Artificer Dogs are good for about the first five levels, then their use fades. And, since Animal Companions would not have the upgradeable weapons or armor that minimally extend the usefulness of Arti-Dogs... Animal Companions would be measurably worse in the long run.

I disagree. Ive seen those dogs trip orange named spiders. Ive seen them live through shroud runs where pile ons die. If they were made as useful as artificer dogs, theres only ONE reason to NOT put them in game. An artificer without their dog is still more powerful than a ranger.

The one reason to not balance that out - is ranger is not something that has an option for you to pay for in the DDO store, while artificers are purchasable.

That's also why I am not looking forward to Turbine's interpretation of Druidic companions or animal-form. After seeing, playing with, and evaluating the metal mutts... I think that they will do nothing but disappoint when we finally get Druids.

THey know full well that the minute druids are released, most of us are going to not even use the animal companion that relied on the horrid game AI, and instead roll up bear-barians with 110 sustainable strength scores.

In any event... Rangers would be improved very little by giving them flesh equivalents of Arti Dogs. Out of all the things needed to improve Rangers, I'd rank Animal Companions dead last.

Your mileage may, of course, vary.

I agree with this. THey need to improve ranger, but if they give us animal companions and then wash their hands of the issue declaring game balance has been achieved, Ill TR my ranger the same week.

[Aesop]

THey know full well that the minute druids are released, most of us are going to not even use the animal companion that relied on the horrid game AI, and instead roll up bear-barians with 110 sustainable strength scores.

Not me I'm going for a Drunk

and no, it will not be named Kung Fu Panda. That's just tacky.

Aesop

[Aesop]

My way of handling it is anyone who's dog does something stupid that makes a quest more difficult gets kicked from the group.

ugh... you used to be more fun to discuss stuff with.



They need more precise controls on the dogs that is true. They should stay pretty much on their leash unless deliberately let off and then only until called back at which time they should immediately return to the heel.

Aesop

[kafrielveddicus]

I would like an assortment of pets for the Ranger to call on at will for the one simple purpose of pulling levers, standing on pressure plates for activation and/or activating runes, these are basically the only uses I have for my artificers companion at this point.

P.S. also note if you are having your artificers companion disappear but still have an active bar, it is because you left a quest where you left the companion a distance away under passive/do no actions, just call him to you before you leave quest!

[Chai]

Not me I'm going for a Drunk

and no, it will not be named Kung Fu Panda. That's just tacky.

Aesop

YUS!!! Dr0nk®

[Aesop]

YUS!!! Dr0nk®

NOT DRONK

DRUNK


more Druid than Monk therefore they should have more letters... and Drunks are more fun than Dronks...

Aesop

[Freeman]

From running with my wife's arti, I've found the dogs have two modes: bugged and dead. When bugged, they won't attack, don't get any aggro, and don't die. When not bugged, they get aggro and die. Except for when they stand in a trap and die, which can happen in either state. Yeah, I think I'll pass on a pet for my ranger.

[Aesop]

From running with my wife's arti, I've found the dogs have two modes: bugged and dead. When bugged, they won't attack, don't get any aggro, and don't die. When not bugged, they get aggro and die. Except for when they stand in a trap and die, which can happen in either state. Yeah, I think I'll pass on a pet for my ranger.

I haven't had much problems. If they bug I unsummon them and resummon and alls the better.

Of course My Arti is low level (8 or so, another one is 6) still and I solo now a days. That may have something to do with it.

No doubt the AI could use work.

Aesop