The World of Layonara
NWN Discussions and Suggestions => NWN Ideas, Suggestions, Requests => Topic started by: steverimmer on February 05, 2007, 01:15:21 PM
-
I was looking at the rather meager collection of spells availible for rangers in NWN recently and when comparing it with the PnP handbook, it does seem as if they've been fairly hard done to as a class by bioware. The recent threads in the forums made me think that maybe they are under powered as a class compared to some of the others. I thought that one way to improve the class would be by giving them some extra spells which would prove more useful than the few they have now, this would be better than giving them over powered feats like HIPS.
The problem is that most of the PnP ranger spells won't translate well to NWN, except for a few which are all level 2:
Barkskin (I can't belive that Bioware never included this in the rangers spell list!)
Bear's Endurance
Cat's Grace
Owl's Wisdom
Spike Growth (Another under used spell that druids get, however with druids its often overlooked as they have much better spells in that level)
All of the above spells rangers get in PnP but not in NWN, but I'd like to ask the team to consider some others which are not Ranger PnP spells but neither are they overpowered and they fit in with the same sort of theme. Not suprising as they're druid spells :) They are;
Quillfire (An underpowered poison spell that most druids hardly use)
Infestation of Maggots (Another nice spell thats not two overpowered)
Greater Magic Fang and Awaken (There are alot of spells in the PnP rangers repetior which deal in manipulating animals, something which you can't do in NWN so I thought that one or both of these could make up for their loss. I know they are powerful but...the PnP ranger has other powerful spells which wouldn't work in NWN)
All of these spells already exist in the game so no new spells would have to be created, although it might be better if they weren't all level 2 in the rangers spell list as they don't get many spell slots to play with.
On the other hand if the team felt like adding a few other spells I'm sure our ranger friends wouldn't complain :)
-
Nice compilation Steve. I agree totally.
-
I'd like to see some of those spells added and it wont make them too strong. Just look at the spellslots rangers get. Not to less and not too much.
Thoug rangers already have some of the spells mentioned ig, like Cat's Grace or Greater Magic Fang.
-
Thanks for thinking and bringing this forward.
Cats Grace and Greater Magic Fang are already available.
Greater Magic Fang is a great spell but the animal companions are really to weak to take advantage of it. Realistically, you are adding the spell to a regular animal. It cannot be casted on a summons.
Other spells that seem fitting:
True Seeing -- it would seem that things that use stealth would know what to look for
Find Traps
Shapechange -- would be more fitting than polymorph
Clairaudience/Clairvoyance
Ranger's spell progression, with a normal wisdom, is:
1st at Level 6
2nd at Level 10
3rd at Level 12
4th at Level 15
Perhaps spells equivant to a Wizard/Sorcerer/Druid 7th level spells also be considered
-
Shapechange -- would be more fitting than polymorph
We already had a thread about changing polymorph for rangers. Though we still need to remind ourselves that there are many different kinds of rangers as Pankoki stated earlier.
We might even be able to change a spell this way to make the transformation dependable on a ranger's diety? We got diety summons for clerics after all.
This are just suggestions after all.
And please let us keep this a constructive thread :)
-
Besides which I was mainly thinking about Rangers having spells which are available to them in PnP but not in NWN. Other spells could be added to make up for the PnP spells which are not suitable for NWN but they'd have to stay in the ranger theme, otherwise Rangers could very well ending up being something else rather than Rangers.
-
That's true .. Ranger's are no spellcasting class at all. They got a few, but useful spells.
And I really would like to see some added :)
-
steverimmer - 2/6/2007 8:43 AM
Besides which I was mainly thinking about Rangers having spells which are available to them in PnP but not in NWN. Other spells could be added to make up for the PnP spells which are not suitable for NWN but they'd have to stay in the ranger theme, otherwise Rangers could very well ending up being something else rather than Rangers.
This is true...but sometimes you have to use a game mechanic to get a "skill". For example, foraging for wood. Beautiful thinking on the Teams. However, a fire has to be built. Now I know when I pick up branches in my own yard, I have no need for a fire. But, that is the mechanic that has to be used.
Also, how do you put out a camp fire in the game? Bash it! But not really, you kick dirt on it or shovel sand on it and even get in the nearby stream and splash water up on it, whatever. But the game mechanic is bashing. It just has to be offset by RP.
Same with some of the 'spells'. Yes, they are spells and have to be cast. But they can be RP as being a 'skill'.
-
Well to be honest, as far as the shapechange spell is concerned I'd rather that is taken away completely. Instead Rangers could have the 'Advanced Shapechange Feat' that Druids get, but as a spell rather than a feat. It'd be a lot better as the shapes are consistant with the class and they are not overpowered. However I'm not sure if its possible to do unfortunately.
-
Druids don't actually just get the advanced wildshape feat. They have to spend 1/2 feats on it.
Also I'd have to say rangers aren't really shapeshifters... Druids are, shifters are. Rangers are rangers.
-
I agree Idii, except in NWN they get the shapechange spell anyway, and the NWN version doesn't go very well with the class in my opinion. The only shapechange spell they get in PnP is the Tree Shape one, whatever its called.
However I can't think of a better spell for them to have unless it's the teleportation spell 'Tree stride', a spell they get in PnP and an ability our Druids get at level 14 :)
-
Well it's Polymorph self they get in NWN, not Shapechange which is a lvl9 spell. Just to clear up any possible confusion above.
And personally I think rangers are more like combatants than casters. They get high BAB together with paladins/fighters/barbarians. The spells are just little extra.
They should of course get spells that boost their combat abilities in the same way as paladins do. Which they about get. Except the paladin spells are a bit more combat oriented since they're more the warrior/tank type.
Anyway I'd rather see some improvements in the other ranger areas than their spells. Though I think they could use barkskin, bull's strength if they didn't get that already and some other little buffs I guess.
-
Barkskin, Bull's strength...no they don't get those. My first post is an attempt to get some of the PnP spells granted to the Rangers in NWN. The problem with Bioware's version of the Ranger is that it is a half finished class. Its true that most of the PnP spells and abilities would be difficult to bring to NWN but there are some that are already in the game, its just that the Ranger hasn't got them for some reason. Since it would be harder (I think) to grant them feats and abilties that they would get in PnP, that leaves the spells.
I agree though that this would require careful thought as it would be easy to end up with a ranger who wasn't a ranger at all.
-
I don't see any need to add new spells to rangers. I am however in agreement with the line of thought that says they should have more of the spells that they ordinarily have in PnP. Bioware made a lot of really strange decisions in spell arrangement, above and beyond what they moved around to attempt compensating for their really strange method of specialization for the Wizard class.
-
Well, maybe no "new" spells, but adding some of their pnp spells is alright in my opinion. Yeah, what Raye already said.
-
Well I'll list my opinions of spells to add here. Just spells that exist in NWN already.
It's not necessarily spells they have in PnP but I think they'd make some sense.
Level 1:
- True Strike
Level 2:
- Bull's Strength
- Barkskin
Level 3:
- Spike Growth
Level 4:
- Stoneskin
I'm somewhat going to compare the ranger spells with the paladin ones. Since they have the same spell progression and I can say I've played a paladin a lot here.
Alright then a bit of explanation why these. The level one spell, True Strike would be about as useful as the level 1 spell paladins get Divine Favor. Short duration combat spells both, and about equally powerful seeing as the true strike duration is pretty short and rangers aren't usually huge damage machines like paladins.
Then the lvl2 spells... Bull's strength would make sense since paladins get that and Eagle's Splendor too. This way both classes would get two of the ability spells. Barkskin would help the rangers' defense abilities quite nicely and would about bring them up to the same level with the paladin spells since they get Aura of Glory that's awesome.
The Spike Growth as a lvl3 spell would be useful for controlling enemies in a combat situation which is somewhat a ranger thing. So you could use a bow and make your enemies slower with the spikes and damage them too. Cool stuff, mostly a flavor spell though.
Then finally stoneskin as a lvl4 spell. They get the lvl4 spells at like lvl14 and I think it would be a pretty appropriate level to give them something defensive and scaling with levels like stoneskin. It's still not an insanely useful spell. And seeing as how paladins get things like Holy Sword and Death Ward at lvl4, it would make sense to give rangers stoneskin as their "highest" spell or so to speak.
-
I agree Idii that seems like a reasonable list of spells...though I'd suggest that they lose polymorph at level four which isn't a Ranger Spell in PnP, in exchange for Stoneskin which isn't a ranger spell either although its more appropiate for the class and Layonara.
-
Indeed, I agree with IDii and steve here. Polymorph isnt really that big of a loss. I don't know if Stoneskin is that fitting for a ranger though. But I agree with everything else here.
-
True strike while being a level 1 spell and pretty good one for fighters is actually very arcane in nature.
Bards don't get it for a reason after all.
It's bending the weave in such a way you can predict, subconsciously perhaps, the next few moments. And I really don´t see a link to nature there.
Stoneskin makes sense, after all, druids get it I believe. Though together with bladethirst and the spells they already have they´ll pretty much be able to ditch the mage and go off alone.
EDIT: DR was I think, always limited in Layo. Ethereal Visage was changed for a reason there. I don't know, perhaps a lesser version of the spell. Much like blade thirst is good, yet not quite as good as greater magic weapon.
-
Blade Thirst is only 1 round/level. And they still wont be able to go off alone, it just improves things a bit.
And about the True Strike, you can get a bow with TS anyways, so I dont really see a real problem here.
-
Well rangers get invisibility purge too. I wouldn't exactly call that a nature spell either.
True strike on a ranger would be about the same as a divine favor on a paladin. Well worse actually but it's a different kind of spell, one that fits the ranger better. A paladin with true strike would be bit of a bad joke.
I'd be worried about rangers getting true strike if they could deal insane 30-100 damage hits all the time. But when's the last time you've seen a ranger do that?
Blade thirst is a waste of a spell slot actually. +3 weapon for round/lvl? Yeah right.
And any non-cleric class ditching the mage and going off alone will only happen in your dreams.
Sorry about sounding a bit sarcastic here. I was just kind of trying to imagine a ranger doing something even remotely powerful and for some reason ended up in a weird mood.
-
You do make good points there. Though, I'm wondering what the exact argument behind these spell changes should be?
Giving the ranger a bit more to play their part as ranger, giving spells that really should have been there in the first place? Or are we also talking about making them a more competent class then they are now?
EDIT: By competent, I mean better in melee as opposed to just focussing on the fuzzy little rp bits.
-
Well for me it is seeing the Ranger as close as possible to the discription in the PnP handbook...for some reason Bioware decided not to include most of the spells and feats that the PnP ranger has. I just wanted to see the ones already in the game restored to the rangers spellbook with the minimum of fuss...some of the missing feats would be nice too though.
-
Well I think both Filatus. Giving them some spells would add possibilities to RP as a ranger, some spells at least, as well as balancing the class a bit.
This is not only melee though. True those suggested spells are mostly used for melee, but even archers like barkskin or stoneskin for example and some might not have the strength for +3 bow parts, so Bulls will help there as well.
-
Giving the ranger a bit more to play their part as ranger...yes
...giving spells that really should have been there in the first place? yes
Or are we also talking about making them a more competent class then they are now? yes
Greater Magic weapon duration is 1 turn/level, Bladethirst is 1 round/level. Significant difference. Also, GMW can go up to +5, Bladethirst cannot.
Stoneskin would help against other archers firing in. I keep thinking about the pesty giant stalkers.
Bullstrength would be helpful in both melee and ranged.
-
I'm really just interested in game balance. But of course I wouldn't go for anything too artificial.
So I'm just trying to give some ideas to make them a more competent class and more fun to play without becoming anything they aren't meant to be.
-
Blade Thirst also happens to add vampiric regeneration to the weapon it's cast on, something that no other spell in the game offers. Lest we remember.
-
The amount of hp gained is not that much, almost unnoticeable (I think about 3hp and for a short duration spell, it is pointless), that is why I never use it. It is one thing to have a spell and then another to have a useful spell. No matter if it is the only one in the game or not.
-
Due to the spell slots available, these will already be limited if added.
Also, this may revive the class a bit. The new players that start a ranger charatcer quickly learn that the class is in serious need of attention and love and usually submit for a character that they can do something with. In addition, there is such a small number of upper level rangers (four characters community wide, I beleive), these spell should not have that much impact on the server.
Wish List:
Add:
Barkskin at Level 2
Stoneskin at Level 3
Woodland Stride at Level 3
Premonition at Level 4
True Seeing at Level 4
Remove:
Polymorph Self
-
True seeing and premonition don't make much sense to me... The former isn't about knowing how to spot stealthed creatures, and premonition is...premonition. The others, and really all the ones in the original suggestion and ID's seem more fitting. And rangers can use some love, yeah.
-
Whilst agreeing....I'm not too sure about Stoneskin being in there. Although I would LOVE to have Stoneskin for the Ranger's, I do think thats a little too much.
Barkskin and Woodland Stride would be a definite though
Although hazy on some spells....Concealment might be worth mentioning for a Lvl 4 slot. ( heh....if it's not already there )
-
Whilst agreeing....I'm not too sure about Stoneskin being in there. Although I would LOVE to have Stoneskin for the Ranger's, I do think thats a little too much.
Barkskin and Woodland Stride would be a definite though
Although hazy on some spells....Concealment might be worth mentioning for a Lvl 4 slot. ( heh....if it's not already there )
Aye for barkskin and woodland stride. Rangers dont have concealment and should not really get it imo. Stoneskin really depends on the balance.
-
Stoneskin really depends on the balance.
The ranger is so far out of balance it almost seems that something drastic has to change to get some sort of balance.
I have been playing a ranger character for over 2 years (I know LoTF, you have been playing for some where close to that) on pretty much a consistant basis. I have also played a sorceress for about a year. There is SO much of a difference that balance should NOT even be mentioned.
True seeing and premonition don't make much sense to me... The former isn't about knowing how to spot stealthed creatures, and premonition is...premonition.
Yeah, maybe not premonition, but something that will help to offset the use of light armor or that will allow some sort of protection other than relying on the armor...perhaps the evasion spell. Most classes that use light armor have other means of protection and damage reduction, usually in the form of spells, feats, and skills. The ranger really has nothing and tends to take a beating from about anything and everything.
-
Just to note.
The Rogue class has nothing in the way of protection that the Ranger does not have (excepting class-specific armor), and, in addition, lacks the Animal Companion and greater Hit Die that the Ranger has. And the spells. And Dual-wield.
I am constantly baffled by the assertions that the Ranger class is weak. I've played most of the way through the OC with one, on Hardcore rules, and the fellow pretty much pwnzed anything in his path once he got Improved Two Weapon Fighting. Before that, he was still a force to be reckoned with...
-
I am constantly baffled by the assertions that the Ranger class is weak. I've played most of the way through the OC with one, on Hardcore rules, and the fellow pretty much pwnzed anything in his path once he got Improved Two Weapon Fighting. Before that, he was still a force to be reckoned with...
I invite you to submit one and play here so you do not compare apples and oranges.
-
I invite you to submit one and play here so you do not compare apples and oranges.
I've actually been planning to, as soon as I get the concept hammered out. A darkie, too.
But that still doesn't address my point about the Rogues also being "woefully underpowered." :)
-
But that still doesn't address my point about the Rogues also being "woefully underpowered."
This a post on rangers, not rogues. If you have suggestions and or recommendations on the rogue class, please start another thread.
-
This a post on rangers, not rogues. If you have suggestions and or recommendations on the rogue class, please start another thread.
My point there was to draw a parallel between the Rogue class and the Ranger class... And I then pointed out the various things that make surviving as a Ranger much easier than surviving as a Rogue.
I feel that the Rogue class, like the Ranger class, is perfectly well-balanced. There are indeed a few spells that should be added and removed, but that is to suit the flavor of the class rather than alter the strength of them. The spells proposed to add do indeed improve the combat strength of the class, but this would seem to be in accordance with what's been said in this thread.
My main point was that I do not feel Rangers are underpowered - at least, not moreso than Rogues (who I do not feel are underpowered, but rather underchallenged).
To return to the spirit of the thread...
Added spells:
Level 1:
- True Strike
Level 2:
- Bull's Strength
- Barkskin
Level 3:
- Spike Growth
Removed spells:
Level whatever:
- Polymorph Self
-
*gives this thread a little bump*
Anything happening or is this already tossed into a trashcan? :)
-
Some of these spells would be wonderful!! May encourage some to pull those Rangers out and start playing them again. ;) Is there any chance for it?
-
I wouldn't really count on it ... wouldn't be the first time suggestions came up.
-
It's not a matter of the "trash can" but rather a matter of available resources. Since any of the above would require HAK changes, and we have HAK changes in store for the next update, now might be the time to consider doing this.
However, I'm not going to make any promises.
Is the list under Stephen's last post the most generally agreed-upon set of changes?
-
I would rather see IDii's or Twidget's myself.
-
I would rather see IDii's or Twidget's myself.
I think you may be biased on the last ;)
Anyway...can I get a consensus here? Last thing I want is to keep going back and forth to this.
For what it's worth, I don't personally see True Seeing as a Ranger Spell. It's not a PnP Ranger spell (based on 3rd Edition rules) and just doesn't seem to fit the class. I'd rather see them have Find Traps (also not a PnP Ranger spell) for the +20 to Search, which makes a heck of a lot more sense for them.
Since I don't have a Ranger character, I'm not really going to offer much more in terms of suggestions.
Anyway, let's please get to some 90% solution here, meaning the option that makes 90% of you happy...or all of you 90% happy.
-
I think you may be biased on the last ;)
*with a look of surprise* :o Now what would make you think that?
But I do think Idii's sounds more fair.
Twidget isn't here to put his vote in but you can tell by his post what his would be. He loves playing the ranger class and this is something he gets into. Wish he was here to say more on the subject. Which most know he is always more than willing to. ;)
-
Well, my list is more or less the same as IDii's, only lacking Stoneskin, which I think fits the Ranger class well enough.
So far that's three (me, Lynn, IDii) who support IDii's list... Though I will again say that perhaps removing Polymorph would be a good idea.
-
Level 1:
- True Strike
Level 2:
- Bull's Strength
- Barkskin
Level 3:
- Spike Growth
Level 4:
- Stoneskin
I'm fine with IDii's list. Or maybe some concealment instead of concealment but I leave that as a balancing question.
On that note I think rangers can life with losing polymorph self. The only shape that is actually fun is pixie. If it could be replaced with something with plain wild shapes for RP it would be neat as well. Those don't need to be uber as they would simply add some spice to RP. Something like lvl 5 companions, a wolf, a hawk, bear, and something cat like for example :)
After all it is just a suggestion but remove polymorph self and maybe add this suggestion instead? :)
-
Level 1:
- True Strike
Level 2:
- Bull's Strength
- Barkskin
Level 3:
- Spike Growth
Level 4:
- Stoneskin
I think these would make fine additions, though I am not 100% convinced True Strike makes sense, but at the amount of level 1 spells a ranger has access to I dont think it would be an unbalanced addition.
-
Probably just my wrong thinking , but ....wouldn't a skin as hard and tough as stone lower the dex ?
Would a ranger give up his agility to have a harder skin ?
The rest off the spells do indeed look like things rangers should know , with perhaps the "true strike " as strange one in-there .
-
Probably just my wrong thinking , but ....wouldn't a skin as hard and tough as stone lower the dex ?
Would a ranger give up his agility to have a harder skin ?
Wouldn't barkskin do such a thing as well? ;)
I don't really see True Strike as a big deal as it lasts for only one round, so like one or two strikes/shots. You could see it as he ranger is channeling energy for one shoot that will hit. Focusing on one strike so to speak.
-
Wouldn't barkskin do such a thing as well? ;)
I don't really see True Strike as a big deal as it lasts for only one round, so like one or two strikes/shots. You could see it as he ranger is channeling energy for one shoot that will hit. Focusing on one strike so to speak.
Aye ...so would using both barkskin and stoneskin get the ranger to lose any bonuses from dex then ? ;)
-
The weave provides .. it is magical *winks* Else it has to be altered for all casters ^_^
-
The weave provides .. it is magical *winks* Else it has to be altered for all casters ^_^
A dex penalty wouldnt be too strange , even if its magical ..it makes the skin tougher and sturdier .
-
Nah...there's no reason to add DEX penalties for Bark/Stoneskin. It is magic, afterall.
-
As one who has extensively played a ranger though not much recently, I would have to agree with IDii's list. Rangers as frontline fighters are weak due to AC. I know, cause I die a lot.. a whole lot. Even dual wielding, I can't last nearly as long in a melee as even a much lower level fighter. While the arguement is that is not the Ranger's role, and I would agree, there are many times the ranger gets overlooked in party formation because they don't have the ability to hold own in a fight for long, can't cast helpful wards, and can't cast healing or other useful party based spells. Giving ranger class the oportunity to stay in the fight a bit longer will go a long way to helping them be sought after when forming a party. Just my two cents.
-
Originally Posted by IDii
Level 1:
- True Strike
Level 2:
- Bull's Strength
- Barkskin
Level 3:
- Spike Growth
Level 4:
- Stoneskin
I IDii's list seems fair.
I don't play a ranger, but I have seen plenty of them fall in combat.
True Strike makes sense as rangers are all about making the kill fast.
What I like about Barkskin and Stoneskin is that they scale with level. So a pure Ranger would finally be rewarded at higher levels over a multiclass ranger. Currently multi class rangers have a lot better survivability then the pure ranger.
Cheers,
Stragen
-
i like the idea of those spells for the ranger class. They would go long way to making us abit tougher.
Granted I try not to play abi as a frontliner, but often enough she gets caught up in a fight where she has to.
-
I'd add ironguts as a lvl 1 spell. Poisons are an important part of nature that ranger have to deal with in the form of spiders and such. This would give rangers a nice edge in something they should supposed to shine in.
-
I hope I'm not making things overly confusing by throwing in more suggestions, but what about awaken as a level 4 spell for rangers? It makes animal companions a whole lot more useful, which can be fun for RP as well as mechanically.
-
The combination of barkskin and stoneskin for a ranger at level 16 is pretty darn strong though.
+5 natural AC and DR 10/3
Might consider giving barkskin a lvl 4 spellslot as well, just so it will mean a ranger needs to invest in wisdom to be able to combine these two.
-
The combination of barkskin and stoneskin for a ranger at level 16 is pretty darn strong though.
+5 natural AC and DR 10/3
Might consider giving barkskin a lvl 4 spellslot as well, just so it will mean a ranger needs to invest in wisdom to be able to combine these two.
hmm cant say I agree with that, rangers cant wear heavy armors (and keep their special abilities) forcing them to put more points in wisdom them the 14 they need to cast lvl 4 spells would in my eyes defeat the idea of giving the ranger the spells and push them towards druid instead
-
A Ranger with less than 14 WIS seems like a terrible idea, to me. Let's not forget that these hunters are supposed to be insightful. Harrumph.
-
A Ranger with less than 14 WIS seems like a terrible idea, to me. Let's not forget that these hunters are supposed to be insightful. Harrumph.
you need the 14 simple to cast 1 lvl 4 spells filatus suggestion is to make Barkskin a lvl 4 spells a well so the Ranger need to put more wisdom in then 14 not saying they should got lower... only reason for that would be if you dont want your ranger to cast spells.. but why post in this thread then ;)
-
Ehm.. at lvl 20 rangers gets three lvl 4 spells? That is without taking in any wisdom modifier.
Just trying to balance things here. But if you want a class that can both fight and cast spells, don't complain about needing more than one ability.
-
hmm cant say I agree with that, rangers cant wear heavy armors (and keep their special abilities)
sorry to say that if a ranger wears medium or heavy armors he lose the benefits of dual wields
forcing them to put more points in wisdom them the 14 they need to cast lvl 4 spells would in my eyes defeat the idea of giving the ranger the spells and push them towards druid instead
as far as I know the more points in wisdom will not only affect the numbers of spells, but also the strength and duration of those spells. And on the rp side of things it will also help the rangers in situation where his wisdom would be needed for him or others.
-
Just trying to balance things here. But if you want a class that can both fight and cast spells, don't complain about needing more than one ability.
You are talking about the MOST underplayed class in the ENTIRE game and you are worried about a little balance or making the class too powerful? All but about three rangers are played as rangers but have multiclassed. That is the thing that will hold the straight ranger from getting these other abilities. And seriously, the ranger class has never really been about casting spells. They do fight well, but they cannot go toe-to-toe with anything. A little magical protection will help the class.
As far as the stoneskin/barkskin argument, what is the difference if the ranger casts it or if someone casts it on him/her?
-
You are talking about the MOST underplayed class in the ENTIRE game and you are worried about a little balance or making the class too powerful? All but about three rangers are played as rangers but have multiclassed. That is the thing that will hold the straight ranger from getting these other abilities. And seriously, the ranger class has never really been about casting spells. They do fight well, but they cannot go toe-to-toe with anything. A little magical protection will help the class.
Firstly, I doubt they are the MOST underplayed class, always had that feeling about barbarians actually. If you go for straight classes, you'll have a hard time getting a long list of several, barbarians, fighters, rogues even bards because they're just perfect for multiclassing.
But until I actually read hard facts, you won't hear me say that. And a solid yes, balance lays at the very essence of a fun game, so yup, I think it's important. I thought this whole thread was about balancing for rangers?
My suggestion actually FAVOURS the straight ranger over choosing to multiclass. As it should be, I'm sure you agree on that. A ranger 15 / rogue 5 has one lvl 4 spell, a ranger 20 has three of them. So how do you give something to the straight ranger here, rewarding going full class by giving them some edge in their understanding of nature?
As far as the stoneskin/barkskin argument, what is the difference if the ranger casts it or if someone casts it on him/her?
In a low magic world that focuses on group combat, it's a big difference I'd say.
There's nothing wrong with being passionate about this topic. But I think it's not necessary to be so defensive about it. Balance is your friend! ;)
-
I still like IDii list but...slightly off current topic and a lot more work. I would like to see polymorph self for rangers and clerics with the animal domain replace with some like polymorph animal.
I think polymorph self is a great roleplay spell, but it just doesn't make sense with the current forms. If the forms were animals then it would be great!
Yeah its too much work to do.
Polymorph Animal:- Giant Spider
- This form has a Poison (http://lore.layonara.com/Poison) attack.
- Ancient Dire Wolf (same as summons)
[/COLOR]- This form regenerates Hit Points (http://lore.layonara.com/HP).
- Something?
[/COLOR]- This form has True Seeing (http://lore.layonara.com/True%20Seeing).
- Cheetah (same as druid form)
[/COLOR]- This form has an increased movement rate.
- Raven
- This form has [lore]Take to the Air[/lore]
-
I think polymorph self is a great roleplay spell, but it just doesn't make sense with the current forms. If the forms were animals then it would be great!
That is a great idea!!! :)
-
I just want to mention something.
I'm currently considering making additional spells available to Rangers, but one thing I won't be doing is adding new spells specifically for Rangers or changing the behavior of any existing spells specifically for Rangers.
-
I just want to mention something.
I'm currently considering making additional spells available to Rangers, but one thing I won't be doing is adding new spells specifically for Rangers or changing the behavior of any existing spells specifically for Rangers.
According to LORE barkskin requires a Holy Symbol to be worn while casting that spell. I know that Aid was altered for rangers to Ranger's Valor as a holy symbol did not make that much sense or something like that.
So in case rangers get barkskin ... would rangers need holy symbols again or will it get altered?
-
I don't know. As I said, I'm only considering it. Problem is this:
NWN does not know what class is casting a spell, so in order to make a spell behave differently specifically for rangers, I have to make a new spell for Rangers specifically. Barkskin is probably a light example, but when we get into things like Ranger-specific polymorph forms, it's a lot more involved.
So for spell effects, Rangers will have to cope with what everyone else uses. For spell components/holy symbol requirements, I'll have to see. No guarantees.
-
Yeah I know. Polymorph for rangers already came up in the past but it would have been quite some workload.
I doubt rangers will moan about a material component, more about an amulet though. There was a reason why it was altered for aid anyways, heh. But then it is not much of a problem as you could simply switch amulets, cast and then switch back or simply consecrate an amulet, hehe.
Anyways, we'll see in the end :)
-
There's nothing wrong with being passionate about this topic. But I think it's not necessary to be so defensive about it. Balance is your friend! ;)
Defensive? Passionate? Perhaps. I have played the ranger class since PNP. I love the concept of the ranger class and it reminds me of the way I was growing up near the woods. Getting up and going out all day walking miles over the country and going through woods until sun down. As I got older, hiking and caving peeked my interest and the Mammoth Cave National Park was a large getaway for me.
I have played a ranger here for 3 years. This thread has been going for a year. I have seen people create rangers and a week later submit for a new character to abondon their ranger character. I have seen good people that played the ranger class just up and leave. Defensive? More like saddened and dishearted. Do I want a powerhouse? No, or I wouldn't have stayed with Rodlin for all these years. I do agree with balance as well, but there are some seriously powerful characters out there and to take a class that is suffering and hesitant to beef it up is a little on the frustrating side. That is all, really. Passionate is a good word for it.
All it boils down to....
I just want to stop getting beaten by goblins! ;)
-
This has been implemented (http://forums.layonara.com/845062-post58.html)! Thanks go to all who discussed this topic, and to those who implemented the idea (including a brand new spell)!
-
We got a brand new spell? ^^
-
Nah...Not completely new, just a customized Barkskin with adjustments for a) not requiring a holy symbol and b) effects based on a ranger's unique spell progression.
-
<<; It has a new name. So it's new. Nyah.
<3
-
I must say, after doing some game time with the new tricks, it has gone far to put rangers back in the game. Thanks and kuddos to the team for being responsive and implimenting some of these ideas and making adventuring much more enjoyable.