Author Topic: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]  (Read 250310 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #600 on: October 05, 2008, 03:52:14 PM »
Bad combination. Being able to buff yourself to be a better fighter then the Fighter is not only broken, its stupid.

So...how badly do we need to scale back the overpowered so they're not stealing the spots of the other classes?

The biggest part of that is spells, and the number that they have access to, clerics having everything on the cleric list is pretty nuts for a start.

But to begin with, the Fighter and Co. need to be scaled up so they can at least pose a threat to opponents of their CR, followed by adding enough special stuff/options that they are interesting to play. As is, the Fighter has limited means to force a fight, being both melee focused and low mobility(worse if they take full advantage of heavy armor) makes that a foregone conclusion.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

RabidPirateMan

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #601 on: October 05, 2008, 04:00:39 PM »
Fighters don't have to be melee focused- they make great archers.

Anyway, spellcasters will be brought down with spells being brought down.  Cleric and Druid casting certainly needs tweaking so they don't know every spell, but after that its much more equal.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #602 on: October 05, 2008, 04:17:07 PM »
Well, considering that a pretty large number of Fighters are melee focused though, they should get something...well, besides ubercharging.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #603 on: October 05, 2008, 07:00:01 PM »
Quote from: RabidPirateMan
4.  I wholeheartedly think we might be overpowering some aspects of the ranger with our fixes.  Full Animal Companion progression is huuuuuuuuuge.  The new way TWF is being done works fine, give him the ability to make two attacks as a standard at 6 and a rend attack at 11.  Dead levels?  I thought WotC had updated dead levels on their site?  Spells will be fixed when we fix... spells... and as for FE, I still like my suggestion of changing bonuses on the hour and changing choices on the downtime between adventures.  At that point, I really think the Ranger is coming out ahead.
As for Skirmish, Swift Hunter is a feat that could use a bit of a rewrite- it should hinder the Ranger's other abilities more.  Taking the feat now with full AC levels is still very easy.  Maybe requires Skirmish 2d6?
Just because he's not a wizard of a cleric doesn't mean we must make him a god.  I'm getting the feeling we're a bit too liberal when it comes to handing out power to noncaster classes because we are so willing to take casters down a notch.
Overpowering Compared to What?
Does that really make him God?
What are you thinking with this?
Not only are you saying it swift hunter should be made WORSE... which what you need to understand is that they made it as a ranger fix, because a ranger needed(S) some extra damage.
 Espousing the idea that the ranger shuold have FE anything. Changing on the hour, this is the one thing I'm certain shuold NOT happen. You may as well give him FE every other level.
 
  I reassert the goal "Tier 3" so it needs to be brought up to the TOB level. Binder level. Dread Necro levels. We need to keep those in mind as the weight on the other side of the scale.
So pick one and make the ranger equal.
  I choose crusader, as a comparison mostly because someone might actually make a Crusader for Nature... and as long as a Crusader is the Clear mechanical victor then we're failing in the design goal.
ON FIGHTERS
Quote
Fighters don't have to be melee focused- they make great archers.
Most people sitting down to play a fighter are picking up a sword, the fighter has to be able to do both. That means the fighter in its original form failed at 75% of what its supposed to be doing.
Further we've fixed the fighter and posted it at the front so the fighter Can be a melee-ist.
ON SPELLCASTING
The only thing I have to say about spellcasters is we have to fix them "AFTER" we've review the spell thread, to see what changes have been done to the spells. Otherwise we're using the wrong knowledge base... We don't a real base to change the Casters untill we what has been done to "FIX" The spells.

So therefore the ranger.

Quote
When Robby pointed out that rangers have the advantage and gave them dual strike or whatever and rend
 I thought "Good" now both styles are in synch witheach other and closing in on the
8th level...
8D8 crusders strike + 2d6 weapon + thicket of blades + power attack/ followed by white raven tactics on an ally.
So:
8th:  2 attacks as a standard action 1d8 Longsword + 2d6 skirmish/1d6 shortsword +2d6 skirmish
Lets just round and say thats 6d6 damage +  plus an attack from an animal compaion (which will actually dangerous if we increase its levels any.) It could be 8d6 if we spend a feat on improved skirmish and move 20 feat. Which is great for the archer if you want to play that game.
.....
I kinda had it in my mind when everyone was still arguing about the already completed monk. So soon as my the Scout+ranger = 1 class was dismissed I settled in and fully expected 2 pages of debate when people never really adressed the problem with the ranger to begin with.
.... But please... please ..
Do you're own analysis and share it.


So we can do any mid level comparison really and show how appropriate skirmish is on a ranger putting it in line with other tier 3 people.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2008, 07:24:41 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #604 on: October 05, 2008, 07:17:30 PM »
Sorry about the back to back posting but I had to adreess this and that ^that^ was separate.

To Jaronk: I've never really had to deal with the "Wildshape Ranger" is that from UA? Frankly, I never consider anything from that book as its just a big book of variants. Nor will I proceed to try to the Cloistered cleric.
Though I'll say this... if it's what I'm thinking of...

Okay... found it;
Quote from:  From SRD
Simple Variant
A ranger might forgo training in weapon combat in exchange for the ability to take animal form and move swiftly through the woodlands.
Gain
Wild shape (as druid; Small or Medium animals only), fast movement (as barbarian).
Lose
Combat style, improved combat style, combat style mastery.

What? How can we even consider that?

Do we have a fix for polymorph? What does Wildshape do currently? Yeah if you give the Ranger WILDSHAPE + FAST MOVEMENT + FULL ANIMAL COMPANION + GOOD BAB + anything else You've broke it. Mostly cause you're not playing a ranger!
You're playing a druid lite.
Oh yeah
This is something that shouldn't exist.
Does anyone feel like rangers should get wildshape as one of the 3 fighting styles? Wow. just Wow.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2008, 07:19:14 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

SiggyDevil

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Magmar, the ultimate butthead
    • Feybook Project
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #605 on: October 05, 2008, 07:43:22 PM »
UA has some nice ideas. You just have to pick through the irrelevant stuff to get to it.

The classes, though, are not meant to be combined with just any setting; they must be agreed upon by both DM and players involved.
They aren't valid for comparing balance unless you're talking about radical change.


A Wildshape Ranger isn't unbalanced, though, since most of the power involving Wildshape comes from the fact that Druids can also cast their fucktastic spells while doing so.

A straight-out warrior that turns in to animals is just that; still a warrior.

In short, they SHOULD get Wildshape as a fighting style.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #606 on: October 05, 2008, 08:05:15 PM »
Quote
UA has some nice ideas. You just have to pick through the irrelevant stuff to get to it.
You're right whirling frenzy and cloistered cleric come from there. Still this isn't one of them.

Quote
The classes, though, are not meant to be combined with just any setting; they must be agreed upon by both DM and players involved.
They aren't valid for comparing balance unless you're talking about radical change.
  What classes? The UA classes. What you just said applies to all clasees and everything else for that matter, so. Meh.

Quote
A Wildshape Ranger isn't unbalanced, though, since most of the power involving Wildshape comes from the fact that Druids can also cast their fucktastic spells while doing so.
Really? Are you sure? A big part of it has to do with wildshape being Polymorph "lite" and the ability ignore physical stats until you can become a Siliver back Gorrilla. Then an elemental...Then a Tyranosaur...etc...
Also... A wildshape ranger isn't unbalanced compared to what?
Cause already we're giving the new ranger full animal compaion progression and some extra damage dealing mechanic is getting in obiously be it skirmish or Favored Enemy: any  like some people suggest.
Wildshape is unbalanced itself because becoming monsters is unbalanced.

Quote
A straight-out warrior that turns in to animals is just that; still a warrior.
No. No it isn't. It is then a druid or a witch, or a lycanthrope and a passable assassin. Or whatever the fuck it needs to be because it's then a shapeshifter.

Wildshape isn't a fucking combat style, its a superpower and is a footnote in a book of variants...
...and I can't take anything you say seriously because we both dislike each other you're biased vs M_v and I dont' like you either so to hell with your opinions.

So generally I'm not talking to you but for the sake of everyone else.

Quote
In short, they SHOULD get Wildshape as a fighting style
Why?
What ranger archtype does it fill?
Any? Can I get one mythological, folk, popculture reference to a ranger that turns into a wolf? Whose primary character motivations isn't "I'm a druid, I'm a lycanthrope, I'm other wise a mage?
Be serious. . . that is just garbage.

My point
Wildshape itself needs a hard look before we can attempt to balance the wildshape ranger with the Traditional 2 fighting styles.
It should not be a consideration when balancing the base ranger. Its should be considered when we tackle the druid.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2008, 08:19:14 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

SiggyDevil

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Magmar, the ultimate butthead
    • Feybook Project
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #607 on: October 05, 2008, 08:44:45 PM »
Wildshape is unbalanced itself because becoming monsters is unbalanced.

Well, yeah, I agree. But Wildshape and the sloppy process of comparing monster to PC is the problem, not the fact that Rangers have it.

Lycanthropes are essentially Rangers without item weapons (sans Favored Enemy and animals, natch). However they don't need to be just as they are in the MM; a low level Lycan could easily be as weak as any Fighter. They could be compared easily to the fighting capabilities of a nature-based Monk.
That's what a Wildshape Ranger can be like, essentially

You seem to be confused concerning 'role', though. When I state that a Wildshape Ranger = a warrior, it means that even though the character looks, smells, sounds, and fights like a bear, T-Rex, bullette, whatever, all it does is charge-and-attack or do a full-attack routine.
That's the warrior role; take hits, make weapon attacks.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #608 on: October 05, 2008, 09:32:03 PM »
How about trapfinding? Rangers are supposed to be fairly good with  snares and stuff as well.
Well, I wouldn't consider it an integral part of the class, but a weaker version could probably be added in with little effect on the game.  Something like:

Snarefinding
In an outdoor environment, the ranger can use Survival to find and remove snares and traps as a rogue could use Search and Disable Device.

That's just a simple write-up.  It might get tricky to define "snare" and the proper environment.  The last thing we want is a 15 minute argument everytime the ranger finds a "snare" that the DM thinks is a "trap". ;)


Really? Are you sure? A big part of it has to do with wildshape being Polymorph "lite" and the ability ignore physical stats until you can become a Siliver back Gorrilla. Then an elemental...Then a Tyranosaur...etc...
Also... A wildshape ranger isn't unbalanced compared to what?
Cause already we're giving the new ranger full animal compaion progression and some extra damage dealing mechanic is getting in obiously be it skirmish or Favored Enemy: any  like some people suggest.
Wildshape is unbalanced itself because becoming monsters is unbalanced.
Well, I agree that Polymorph lets in abuses, but the Wildshape ranger can only change into small or medium animals.  This cuts back on a lot of the abuses, but not all of them.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Psychic Robot

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #609 on: October 05, 2008, 09:33:26 PM »
Since I'm not reading through this entire thread...

Did anyone change the blackguard at all?

Eldariel

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 459
    • Email
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #610 on: October 05, 2008, 10:02:20 PM »
Wildshape is unbalanced itself because becoming monsters is unbalanced.

Well, yeah, I agree. But Wildshape and the sloppy process of comparing monster to PC is the problem, not the fact that Rangers have it.

Lycanthropes are essentially Rangers without item weapons (sans Favored Enemy and animals, natch). However they don't need to be just as they are in the MM; a low level Lycan could easily be as weak as any Fighter. They could be compared easily to the fighting capabilities of a nature-based Monk.
That's what a Wildshape Ranger can be like, essentially

You seem to be confused concerning 'role', though. When I state that a Wildshape Ranger = a warrior, it means that even though the character looks, smells, sounds, and fights like a bear, T-Rex, bullette, whatever, all it does is charge-and-attack or do a full-attack routine.
That's the warrior role; take hits, make weapon attacks.

Wildshape in and of itself isn't unbalanced. Wildshape without restrictions as to what abilities you can acquire is. If you can only acquire certain flight speed, certain burrow speed, certain swim speed, certain degree of ability modifiers, certain NA cap and so on, it just becomes yet another buff with interesting tradeoffs. We were talking about this earlier - Polymorph is being retained while reigned in. Same could be done to Wildshape - it's a flavourful ability and a really interesting way to create different, versatile characters and to allow PCs play normally-unplayable creatures so as long as it's not breaking the game. To avoid breaking the game, simple limitations will do as opposed to smiting the whole damnable mechanic. We're balancing the game, not remaking it.

AndyJames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Meep?
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #611 on: October 05, 2008, 10:43:08 PM »
Base Wildshape off Alter Form. Not Polymorph. Fixed.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #612 on: October 05, 2008, 11:19:20 PM »
What is Alter Form, and where is it found?  You're not talking about Alter Self, are you?
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

AndyJames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Meep?
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #613 on: October 05, 2008, 11:19:47 PM »
What is Alter Form, and where is it found?  You're not talking about Alter Self, are you?
Alter Self.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
[Rebalancing 3.5] I don't want you to have to read it all. So Summary.
« Reply #614 on: October 05, 2008, 11:28:13 PM »
Endariel: okay okay if the wild shape ranger gets a fixed mechanic or whatever ...
Andyjames: Say it gets wildshape off of Alterself... on the table.

The actual argument as I understand it is this:
 
Me: If we give the ranger a natural skirmish advancement, (ala swift hunter) along with the TWF fighting we bring the ranger up to par damage wise with the Tob classes. Further it obviates needless debate that may or may not lead to an overpowerd version of Favored enemy (FE: ALL)

Jaronk: Initially, I dislike the idea of giving the ranger skirmish because it steps on the toes of the Scout. Further, skirmish maybe overpowered when applied to wild shape ranger.

Me:
1. Rangers already have skirmish. Scouts already have favorite enemy. Almost every build you can think of between the two benifit from swift hunter it was an intentional power up for both classes so they have to have something aside from thier damages to differentiate them. At least 3 base classes get smite, and yet the paladin isn't infringed because of it. If skirmish is the only reason to play scout. That is a problem with scout.

2. Wildshape (researches wildshape ranger)1. shouldn't really be that much a consideration when balancing ranger its just a variant.
 Though even at that if we fix the wild shape mechanic to be equal as a choice to the other two styles...
then the ranger as a whole still needs a damage boost, and skirmish fits that perfectly.
As its already attactched to the class.

Its elegant and requires little modification. Unlike changing Favorite enemy, which... has been on the table for a while and hasn't wen't anywhere.

Psi Robot: [spoiler]We had several pages of debate concerning the blackguard in the original thread and in the samurai thread ironically.
On the table so far: Use the Owa variant Paladin as a base.
The Blackguard and the variant paladins are all one class: Blackguard.
Blackguard is a base 20 level class.
Paldins are offered a chance by team evil to join, they don't actually have to summon an evil outsider they'll be asked.
Its a one-for-one exchange of levels with no added benifits so Paladin -> blackgaurd isn't a good optimized choice. Its just a choice. Do you want to seek atonment or join team evil. So the whole playing *gotcha* with a paladin is over.
Smite may be the only real benifit. It maybe become Smite like the crusader instead.
Capstone idea: Rise again.
Die as a 20th level blackguard: You disentergrate and then reconsitute as in the nearest wasteland... as a Deathkight. (or rather gain a template with some semblance thereof)[/spoiler]
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

AndyJames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Meep?
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #615 on: October 05, 2008, 11:34:37 PM »
The entire Wildshape thing has had people howling about brokeness and stuff. It is one of the reasons why I hate howlers (who howl by default, not when someone really deserves a beating). The main exploit using Wildshape is to dump physical stats and stay in Wildshape all day long. Which is all fine until you base it off Alter Self, which doesn't give you the physical stats. Suddenly, there are no more dump stats.

Simple way of getting rid of a problem.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #616 on: October 05, 2008, 11:43:38 PM »
The entire Wildshape thing has had people howling about brokeness and stuff. It is one of the reasons why I hate howlers (who howl by default, not when someone really deserves a beating). The main exploit using Wildshape is to dump physical stats and stay in Wildshape all day long. Which is all fine until you base it off Alter Self, which doesn't give you the physical stats. Suddenly, there are no more dump stats.

Simple way of getting rid of a problem.
Exactly!  :clap

Which bring us back to the point. Ranger
How do you make it tier 3.
Basically my summation is that with the ingredients Robbypants added all thats missing is skirmish.

It makes the ranger as good an option as playing Crusader: Nature. Which is what we're supposed to be shooting for.
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #617 on: October 06, 2008, 12:03:23 AM »
So the Alter Self idea is that you pick up movement modes and natural armor?  What about attack forms?  Should those be added in as well?   Maybe we should just write up a list of abilities that the form grants.  This will let us limit any problematic Ex abilities.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Elennsar

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
  • The Emperor is watching, the Emperor knows.
    • Email
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #618 on: October 06, 2008, 12:08:00 AM »
And possible things to transform into. "Can transform into any other critter" is probably more unbalanced than "any small or medium sized natural animal" or "any natural animal (not dire, legendary, etc.)" etc.

As for ranger archetypes: How many rangers use TWF...other than those made since 3e D&D?

Personally, I'd rather give rangers any-combat-feats-they-want at those levels, and make their "I am a master of survival." mean something (which as written it doesn't, either for the class in particular or for any other Survival guy...spells make it redundant.)
Faith can move mountains. It still can't deflect bullets.



"Communication with humans." is a cross-class skill for me. Please bear this in mind.

AndyJames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Meep?
Re: D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]
« Reply #619 on: October 06, 2008, 12:10:50 AM »
To me, Ranger is stalker, hunter and survivalist, not skirmisher.

So, I would give him a bonus to Move Silent and Hide while in natural terrain.

Then, I would give him the Dread Commando's ambush abilities while in natural terrains.

Combat Styles would have to be improved:

Archery: Extra damage on archery (+Dex, perhaps useful against all his favoured enemies, OR Order of the Bow Initiate's extra d8 damage thing). Rapid Shot, Point Blank Shot, Multishot (out to 60ft), Improved Multishot, Improved Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Improved Precise Shot bonus feats as he goes up in levels (not in that order, of course)

TWF: TWF at level 2. ITWF and -2/-2 at level 6. GTWF and 0/0 at level 11. TWDef at level 2. ITWD level 6, GTWD level 11. TW Rend level 8. Dual Shot (hit once with each weapon as standard action or on charge) at level 12, TW Pounce (full attack with TWF) at level 15.

Give him Improved Evasion at 16.

Decrease ACP and increase MDB of light armour, scaling by level.

Uncanny Dodge at 7.

Give the Ranger more of the Druid's spells. Animal Growth at 4th, for example. Give the Ranger his own version of the Fortify or Augment Familiar spell for his AC (the one with the 1hr/level duration, I forgot which one).

Give the Ranger the Druid's Animal Companion. Switch the half Animal Companion to the Druid (not that the Druid needs the silly thing...).


These are off the top of my head.




Alter Self gives you:
Movement modes (if they are Ex)
Natural AC
Natural attacks (but not more than 2 arms or however many arms your original form has)