I'd have to check again, but I think Necromancer is restricted to non-good. I don't have an issue with one kit (or several, if there are as many as in the case of mages) are restricted in some way. It just really limits the fun and roleplay angles (and hence party combinations) to lock an entire class away from either alignment.
Hence I also think there should be a neutral kit in Paladin and Monk. Paladin is completely off limits for neutral (despite Ajantis and Keldorn being paladins of Helm - who is the deity for the neutral cleric kit, that's really confusing) and Monk effectively says "vanilla or stfu" to neutral. (It opens a new can of worms (YUM) to argue these cases, just wanted to mention it.)
Edit - Just remembered why I was confused about necromancer. It's actually human-only, and I remembered trying to make a elf necromancer. Guess they live long enough to not need to raise the dead.
@KidCarnival - I think Necromancers and Assassins were restricted to be evil in some other D&D game (perhaps IWD, or ToEE). My only real mage was a Necromancer, but he was Evil anyway...so i don't know as well. I don't know about Monk...The LG monk kit is interesting and seems powerful, but I would not be able to play LG. The LE monk kit is useless, so my LE monk used the vanilla "martial arts" kit anyway.
I don't mind Ranger being locked to Good too much, Chaotic Good would still let you get away with some things...
But the one thing I think should go is the Fallen Ranger state...
Fallen Paladins make sense, but I don't really see why Fallen Ranger would be a thing...
If the ranger can't fall anyway, you can open the class to neutral and evil.
I don't mind if a kit within a class is alignment-restricted (i.e. necromancer), but the entire class, I do mind. Druids are the one exception, balance and neutrality is the whole point of them. But then, they are also in the very middle, not the 'extreme' of good or evil, hence less issues with mixed parties and rp options to lean into either direction. There are only 2 kits now that are restricted to evil - blackguard and necromancer. Everything else can at least be neutral. On the other hand, the entire paladin class was restricted to good (and now it's still only one kit as exception) and ranger still is. Throw the evil players a bone and let them make use of all classes, even if it's just one kit.
This us debateable.
ZanathKariashi said:
The evil thing is subjective, and it's no so much opposed to evil, it's that rangers themselves are good only, leaving straight neutral and evil groups SOL if they want a ranger along. Also their lack of any divine spells makes it literally impossible for them to fall, since they have no patron on whom their abilities depend, merely their training and expertise and it's more the nature of what they do that prevents them from being good.
And even if they did have divine abilities, much like a blackguard, the forces of evil just don't care. If you turn against one, another is perfectly willing to take over supply your powers to work against their rivals, knowing that lure of the unfettered power and self-fulfillment will eventually draw you back eventually even if you dabble in Goodness for awhile. Good can only fail once (at least in 2nd edition), while evil doesn't care if you backslide, the easiest way to draw someone back is to continue offering them an easy means to indulge their depravity.
Lateralus:
I was thinking along the lines of a non-divine reputation limit. Correct me if I am wrong but when a good aligned ranger falls from grace, he losses many non-magical abilities. Such as two-weapon fighting, racial enemies, and stealth. The perception here is that they lose confidence, and the will to do what they do. So say if a ranger accidentally killed a bunch of innocent people with an arrow of detonation, he would fall into despair and question everything he does. Sure his deity isn't going to be thrilled about that accident but I don't think they can make a person unlearn how to be sneaky, can they?
For a Dark Hunter, animosity is everything. He's not bold like a blackguard, who is so evil that he radiates it like it were a heat source. A dark hunters greatest weapon is convincing the world that he is not a dark hunter. If he has a heroic reputation he is going to enter a new town and everybody is going to point and stare, whispering things like, "I wonder who's beer he is here to poison?" and "Oh man I totally should not have taken that huge dump in the forrest the other night, especially after eating Lantonesse!".
No.
So they keep a low profile or else they lose their edge, and their state of mind becomes the same as a fallen ranger. Dark hunters just want to appear to be fighters, or good aligned rangers to those without divination powers, not revealing their treacherous nature until it's time to strike.
Nah, elves love nature and consider arcane necromancy an affront to their beliefs, since only the gods have the right to have power over the dead (and only evil gods would allow the souls of the dead to be bound in permanent service against their will (In PnP pretty much all animation spells last until the subject is destroyed, not on a timer like BG does). Though they have no problems with undead per say as long as it's for sake of duty, such as Baelnorn liches who are made with aid from the Elven gods to help watch over areas of important to elvenkind or as protectors or advisers to their communities.
The one step rule applies in 2nd just as in 3rd. Helm is LN, paladin are LG, it's within one step. Technically Blackguards could also worship Helm, if they really wanted to, since LE is also 1 step away from LN.
The only real exception is Sune, who has a paladin order despite being CG.
Though it's actually up to the god in question if they want to follow the one step rule (Nature gods favor neutralry regardless of their personal alignment, but some like Mielikki and Meliel or Malar allow other alignments as well (Mielikki and Meliel share the same rules since Meliel is Mielikki's immediate suborinate, and allow druids to be CN and NG, in addition to true-neutral and have looser vows. Malar allows lycanthropes of alignment to be druids or clerics, but if they're ever cured (in the case of afflicted) he stops granting spells to them unless they're TN for Druids or NE, CE, or CN for clerics). Midnight allows worshipers who are within one step of either LN (old Mystra) or NG (New Mystra), since she didn't want to split the church due to her different outlook from the old Mystra.
@Southpaw: That could be. Somewhere in my mind is a mental note that necromancers have to be evil/can't be good.
I could be wrong, but it sounds like you're talking about the pale master prestige class from the Neverwinter Nights games. That was pretty much the only necromancer-centered class which had a non-good alignment restriction.
@Southpaw: That could be. Somewhere in my mind is a mental note that necromancers have to be evil/can't be good.
I could be wrong, but it sounds like you're talking about the pale master prestige class from the Neverwinter Nights games. That was pretty much the only necromancer-centered class which had a non-good alignment restriction.
Nailed it. I did play NWN as Pale Master. Adding this to mental note.
About paladins - yeah, the lore may support that. It's still confusing for people to see Helm as the neutral deity and have a lawful good paladin of Helm in the same game. It wouldn't be a stretch to add a neutral paladin kit that serves either Helm or another neutral deity. Either would make enough sense and open the class to neutral players.
You have it WAY backwards. Having maxed rep is the best thing a DH could hope for, since they're known far and wide by the general populous to be a paragon of justice and right, and not only that, as long as they cover the tracks well, no one will even suspect of them crimes commited there in. Villains with good publicity are the hardest to take down, because they have popular support, and you need absolutely iron-clad, no possible way out proof of their guilt to just have a CHANCE of pinning something on them.
Even blackguards lack that level of open ruthless evil, except for only the most low intellect, deep end of Chaotic evil. In battle, or when they have you at their mercy, yes they can evil incarnate, but they're also being of strong, powerful charisma and learned of the honeyed words their malefactors are so fond of to get people to do what they want and would see benefit of cultivating a popular opinion of themselves in order to have recruits that fawn over their exploits that they can mold into loyal pawns to cater to their own egos.
The DH is subtle, favoring their traps and poisons, stalking their target methodically and striking when it's weak, while remaining unnoticed and unsuspected of what they intend.
And even then, you have to go out of your way to show over a long period of time that they've been doing this and that it wasn't just a moment of weakness, that any mere mortal can stumble sometimes, but by their record it's clear it's not going to be a freq
If anything, having a low rep would hurt them MUCH more then having a medium one, and a high reputation would have everyone kissing their ass all day long.
As I've said several times, why you do something is much much more relevant to good vs evil then what you do in most cases.
We could keep it the same for an evil kit, but your theiry doesn't jive with the games mechanics. If they love being popular so much, why do they leave when the rep hits 19?
There are several characters and I dare to say ALL classes that would benefit from good reputation. As example, Eldoth is a con man and depends on his charisma and ability to gain the trust of his victims. Why in the world would he rather be unpopular? Makes no sense, but that's the game mechanics and the flawed reputation system.
I think their is certainly a scope for a evil ranger, Brigands and Outlaws could live in a forest or in the wilderness which would include murderers and criminals but also would have to survive off the land with and around animals so I think a evil ranger kit would be certainly within the norm in a role-playing element
There are several characters and I dare to say ALL classes that would benefit from good reputation. As example, Eldoth is a con man and depends on his charisma and ability to gain the trust of his victims. Why in the world would he rather be unpopular? Makes no sense, but that's the game mechanics and the flawed reputation system.
Well, it's easier to design a kit around the exisiting mechanics rather than tweak the mechanics to accomodate a kit, wouldn't you agree.
There is a definate need for not only an evil option for the ranger class, but a trap using kit. It can be said that a good alinged ranger would never use traps, for as wardens of the woodlands they would destroy them instead. An evil ranger kit, (whether we call it Dark Hunter or Trapper) would trap animals, people, whatever. They could be themed as radical protectors who enjoy hanging the guilty with the innocent for the sake of prevention. Or perhaps they are fallen rangers who were approached by an evil entity and seduced to the dark side. In exchange for getting those powers back they are bound by a blood pack to be evil and do evil tasks. Especially to their former allies and the woods they dwell in.
...wait...a non-good Ranger...a grizzled veteran, possibly turned from the "good ways" by PTSD*, "Combat Pragmatist" hiding in woods, setting traps, killing trespassers and those who hunt him - that sounds suspiciously like the story of the first Rambo movie.
... can we have an evil Ranger kit with the name "Rambo" ???
*PTSD = Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (common with ex-soldiers)
He was actually a pretty chill guy until a bunch of bored, corrupt police officiers pushed him too far via Torture, for NO REASON. He was just fighting in self-defense the whole time after he escaped to the woodlands, and the only people he attacked were the ones trying to shoot him.
@ZanathKariashi - yes, I've watched the movie (albeit long time ago). I understand that he just wanted to be left alone and the asshole police officer who met him pushed him off the edge and got him into the "survival" mode, where he disabled a lots of the men that were after him. But you must admit, that describing our wanted evil ranger kit as "a badass, hiding in the forest and bringing down his enemies via cunning and traps" DOES sound suspiciously similar to the movie's plot. And I'd love to play an evil Ranger bad ass kit. (I actually played a Stalker in BG1tutu and BG2 and GateKeepered his alignment to lawful Evil.)
There is a definate need for not only an evil option for the ranger class, but a trap using kit.
That's the key here. This kit could fill more than just one gap. A restriction to "any non-good alignment" and focussing on skills and a strategy that sets it apart from other ranger kits, yet still fits the class. I always found it weird that clerics have the "find traps" spell, and rangers and druids had nothing to this effect. They are protectors of nature/the forest and finding/disarming traps would fit as traps harm animals. A good-aligned ranger should, in my opinion, have the ability to disarm them - not set traps like a thief, but find and disarm - maybe only outdoors to not be "thief with better melee ability", but it would be logical (except maybe stalker).
Rangers are outdoorsman and in PnP actually do get the ability to set simple snares (it's part of the warrior NCP pool, rangers simply get a bonus to success when setting snares in a wilderness area), such as leg catches, tripping-wires, simple pits, etc. Basically anything with very few moving parts and doesn't require in-depth knowledge of traps in general.
Rogues on the other hand get a NCP called trap-setting which allows creation of just about any trap (and at lvl 10+ (assuming they're a vanilla thief or bards) can even create magical traps, by using spell-scrolls in their construction (but has the same failure chance on activation as them attempting to use a mage scrolls normally does), as long as they have the materials to do so on hand, including advanced mechanical traps.
The PnP stalker kit is the only ranger kit who actually gets the ability to buy the thief version of trap-setting at normal cost and works as if they were a rogue. Though as good characters they generally shy away from poison use in their traps or traps that are likely to outright kill (but unlike other rangers CAN make them as a last resort), instead preferring traps that can disable enemies so they can be captured, since they still want them to face proper justice.
DARK HUNTER (aka Rambo) Advantages - +15% stealth bonus - can poison his weapon once a day/4 levels (like Assassin's poison weapon ability) - can set snares (like Thieves)...possibly also get Thieve's HLAs except for Whirlwind...or a combination of them (Traps + Whirlwind, no assassination, no UAI) - maybe backstab like Stalker (?)
Disadvantages - no spellcasting (makes sense) - no heavier than Studded Leather armors - restricted to Evil alignment
That sounds suspiciously similar to a Stalker, but it could just be his evil foil (basically replacing Stalker's advanced spellcasting for poisons and traps...?) I have always liked Stalkers, but thought their advanced spellcasting ... sketchy, not fitting and not really useable.
Stalkers get Improved Haste...they could just have a bonus to stealth and the extra mage spells and still be perfectly viable as a class, without being able to backstab at all. (Hell even the Beastmaster does well, despite their restrictions..it just forces them to use weapon types people generally shy away from in a warrior-class).
My idea for it was -
(same as normal ranger except where mentioned)
Advantages-
Can poison weapon and trap progression at the same rate as an Assassin (set trap skill equal to stealth progression)
generic +1 hit, instead of a favored enemy
x2 BS, doesn't increase.
Disadvantages-
No spellcasting and cannot dualclass as a cleric or druid.
No armor greater then studded leather
Restricted to only daggers, short-swords, bows, and darts. (changed from my initial draft...give them free two-weapon as a normal ranger, but take most of their other weapon training, due to disdain for fighting fair).
Neutral and evil only (they are for all intents and purposes an Assassin, built on a warrior frame instead of a thief frame, and see no reason at all why they should be limited to just evil, for the same reasons assassins can be neutral or evil).
---------
The key difference between the two in this version would be, the stalker while stealth oriented is still a straight forward warrior and has some powerful tricks up their sleeves at higher levels even when their scaling BS (which caps at x4) becomes less useful.
The Dark Hunter on the other hand completely disdains straight combat, prefer to bleed their enemies down with traps and poison, and once they're sufficiently weakened attempt to finish them off with a surprise attack.
The x2 BS is more of throwing them a bone in the early game, due to their set trap only breaking the 50% mark at lvl 7, and only having a few charges of poison weapon. The x2 BS would allow them to still contribute meaningfully despite their limited equipment choices, when they were out of poison or their traps were failing. At higher levels would largely fade in the back ground, as their trap and poison use moved into their bread and butter damage source.
As a result favoring weapons that can attack from afar or spread their poisons quickly, or can be easily concealed so they can strike a target unaware more easily.
In a pinch, they're still a warrior and can fight it out if they have no choice, but their specialization towards killing discreetly and making targets suffer, makes them less efficient then the more general purpose training most other rangers receive.
I'd leave them with the warrior pool of HLA (Epic traps and access to UAI is WAY too much for a class build on a warrior skeleton). With those equipment restrictions, they still won't be nearly as powerful as the other warriors in straight combat, but in situations where they can trap or utilize their poisons they'll have an edge.
I agree with the restriction to bladed weapons. However, I'd maybe bump the BS to x3. After all, Studded Leather isn't really protective, so he needs some edge. Also, the Stealth skill is fairly low below end-of-BGEE.
However, I'd vote for the Spike Trap HLAs (no UAI) from Thieve's HLAs when this is a trapper-style Thief/Warrior combo.
Nah, they don't need higher BS, the Beast-master does just fine with leather only and clubs/QS for melee, and their benefits are no where near as strong as having traps/poison would be. The poison and traps is entirely why I don't recommend a stealth bonus, they're already THAT powerful.
Boots of stealth + shadow armor easily push a ranger's stealth skill up to useful levels with just those items at lvl 1 (boots of stealth giving the lion's share of benefit and is free), and by 8 by they can get by with just shadow armor if they'd rather use boots of speed (though due to a weaker BS there's not much point to hit and fade).
Still gonna veto any thief HLA...they're way too strong for a warrior to ever have. A warrior can turn even a dagger into a murder stick already, while a thief is mostly useless in melee and needs their extra stuff to compensate vs enemies that can't be back-stabbed.
At the end of the day, they're still a warrior, just one who prefers to fight dirty.
Assassins get thief HLA because they don't get d10 hp, fighter con bonus, ex str, specialization, warrior bonus attacks, fast thac0 progression, fast proficiency progression AND free two-weapon.
They are WELL compensated.
(and IMO, the epic traps should be Bounty Hunter exclusive...they're just that broken as currently implemented. Though I'd also recommend UAI be exclusive to vanilla thieves, to make up for them getting screwed out of their lvl 10 scroll use perk, that none of the thief kits are allowed to have. Assassination exclusive to assassins, and WWA exclusive to Swashys).
There are those who disrespect nature, and escape the reach of the shadow druids. That's when they turn to their adaptable agents, a sect of rangers known as the: Dark Hunters. Their means are unorthodox, they are often confused with bounty hunters or assassins. To a Dark Hunter, those who do not respect nature are weak, and need to be removed like thinning a herd of cattle. While a ranger would guide a group of nobles around the dangers of the woods, dark hunters would lead them into a trap and show them how meaningless their gold is compared to the power of nature. Their general opinion of other rangers is that they are naive and weak. They can stalk their prey equally well in the woods or urban surroundings. They use cunning traps, poison, animal companions, and stealth to surprise and eliminate their marks. Like all rangers they are fearsome warriors trained to fight multiple foes at the same time.
Advantages: *Beginning at level 1, they gain set snares as per the thief class, and gain an additional use every 5 levels. The skill progresses on par with their stealth skill.
*Beginning at level 5, they gain use poison as per the assassan kit, and gain an additional use every 5 levels thereafter.
Under consideration: * x2 backstab that does not improve.
*+2 to hit from behind.
Disadvantages: * No divine spell casting.
* Must be evil.
* Reputation cannot exceed 12 or they lose ranger skills and kit advantages.
* No racial enemy
Under consideration: * Armor limited to chain mail, studded leather, leather, small shields, and bucklers.
EDIT: Removed the lack of free slots into two-weapon fighting as a disadvantage. Added "no racial enemy" as a disadvantage. Increased availability of trap usage.
Backstabbing should not he an option for the evil ranger kit, it belittles the stalker kit
@Lateralus - maybe to start having poisons at lvl 1 too. A man does not spend several years hunting people in the woods and only then discover that there are venoms to use. Also - Blackguard and Assassin have a similar ability and they both start at level 1. I'd still add BS x2 as per Zanath. It doesn't really belittle the Stalker kit, just provides a foil - it's evil counterpart. Anyway, evil kits tend to be a bit more powerful (Look at Blackguard, which is downright OP, Assassin or Priest of Talos) to outweigh the non-good requirement. Especially because the "reputation can not exceed 12" rule is quite harsh.
We can mimic the assassan kits usage. That leaves us with a main feature of that theif kit, a strong feature of the theif class (trap setting), all rolled into a martial weapons class that is already complimented with stealth, animal charming, and free weapon pips.
The advantages still seem to be missing something unique...
How about a +2 to hit from behind? This would help them apply the poison, and use animals for flanking.
Interesting. Sounds good. But that would still need someone from Overhaul to decide (possibly adding their creative input) and develop the kit. I know it can be modded, but I am afraid that a modder would make the kit his "Marty Stu" and make it too ridiculously overpowered. Nobody is safe from that. Look at the recent kits. The Blackguard seems hugely overpowered. The Dwarven Defender is powerful and interesting and I have used it in Black Pits. The Dragon Disciple is a bit underpowered (a bit!) and Shadow Dancer (once fixed) also sounds very powerful.
Advantages: *Trap setting. Same as a theif, skill progesses at same rate as stealth skill. *Poison use. Identical to assassin and blackgaurd. *+2 to hit from behind.
Disadvantages: *No racial enemy bonus. *Limited Armor: Chain mail, studded leather, leather, small shield, and buckler. *No divine spells. *Must be evil. *Reputation limit of 14 or lose all advantages and perks.
Edit: dropped the free 2ws pips to one to reflect the lack of full ranger training. Raised the rep limit to 14.
Looks good. Very good. I would play such a kit. Probably also try to solo some parts of the game (No divine spells would be quite hard for soloing though. Almost no healing, no buffs.)
Btw - what about "Racial Enemy - humans and demi-humans" (basically playable races) +1 to hit and damage. (Maybe replacing the +2 to hit from behind). That's pretty unique.
Giving the non-good ranger traps, poison, backstab, stealth and animal companion reads a bit much. The only real drawback would be the lack of divine spells, which doesn't really come into play in BG1 anyway. It's also counterproductive to try and make the concept "likes to fight dirty/not as capable in melee as other rangers" and then give them an animal that can easily make up for that. In other words, I don't see animal companion fit the concept.
Rep can't go higher than 12 is way too harsh and too close to the default rep you start with, even chaotic evil. Regular rangers fall if they drop below 6 (I think? I keep mixing it up with paladins). That would make the "opposite" 14.
I like the inability to dual class to divine casting classes, makes perfect sense. Also the restriction to thief armor and weapons sounds good. I'd give the bonus on ranged weapons (darts, daggers, axes) though, not all thief weapons, to further go into the avoiding melee direction.
Here's my favorite theme for the kit, it explains everything:
A long time ago there lived a man named Rambo. His past was tortured by the loss of his family, murdered at the hands of mercenaries who were hired by greedy land developers. He dedicated his life to vengence, and sought out the secrets of the rangers. Rambos methods did not adhere to the ranger code, and he was banished before being allowed to take the sacred oath. His anger twisted out towards them, and he began to question why they didn't stop the attacks that ended his family. His training half finished, he set out to devise methods of his own means. Maddened, he sought to destroy the rangers by ruining their reputation by framing them for murder and theft. In time he recruited others and created his own sect of rangers, bound by a blood oath to do evil. Calling his new family the Dark Hunters.
Comments
Hence I also think there should be a neutral kit in Paladin and Monk. Paladin is completely off limits for neutral (despite Ajantis and Keldorn being paladins of Helm - who is the deity for the neutral cleric kit, that's really confusing) and Monk effectively says "vanilla or stfu" to neutral. (It opens a new can of worms (YUM) to argue these cases, just wanted to mention it.)
Edit - Just remembered why I was confused about necromancer. It's actually human-only, and I remembered trying to make a elf necromancer. Guess they live long enough to not need to raise the dead.
I don't know about Monk...The LG monk kit is interesting and seems powerful, but I would not be able to play LG. The LE monk kit is useless, so my LE monk used the vanilla "martial arts" kit anyway.
ZanathKariashi said:
The evil thing is subjective, and it's no so much opposed to evil, it's that rangers themselves are good only, leaving straight neutral and evil groups SOL if they want a ranger along. Also their lack of any divine spells makes it literally impossible for them to fall, since they have no patron on whom their abilities depend, merely their training and expertise and it's more the nature of what they do that prevents them from being good.
And even if they did have divine abilities, much like a blackguard, the forces of evil just don't care. If you turn against one, another is perfectly willing to take over supply your powers to work against their rivals, knowing that lure of the unfettered power and self-fulfillment will eventually draw you back eventually even if you dabble in Goodness for awhile. Good can only fail once (at least in 2nd edition), while evil doesn't care if you backslide, the easiest way to draw someone back is to continue offering them an easy means to indulge their depravity.
Lateralus:
I was thinking along the lines of a non-divine reputation limit. Correct me if I am wrong but when a good aligned ranger falls from grace, he losses many non-magical abilities. Such as two-weapon fighting, racial enemies, and stealth. The perception here is that they lose confidence, and the will to do what they do. So say if a ranger accidentally killed a bunch of innocent people with an arrow of detonation, he would fall into despair and question everything he does. Sure his deity isn't going to be thrilled about that accident but I don't think they can make a person unlearn how to be sneaky, can they?
For a Dark Hunter, animosity is everything. He's not bold like a blackguard, who is so evil that he radiates it like it were a heat source. A dark hunters greatest weapon is convincing the world that he is not a dark hunter. If he has a heroic reputation he is going to enter a new town and everybody is going to point and stare, whispering things like, "I wonder who's beer he is here to poison?" and "Oh man I totally should not have taken that huge dump in the forrest the other night, especially after eating Lantonesse!".
No.
So they keep a low profile or else they lose their edge, and their state of mind becomes the same as a fallen ranger. Dark hunters just want to appear to be fighters, or good aligned rangers to those without divination powers, not revealing their treacherous nature until it's time to strike.
The one step rule applies in 2nd just as in 3rd. Helm is LN, paladin are LG, it's within one step. Technically Blackguards could also worship Helm, if they really wanted to, since LE is also 1 step away from LN.
The only real exception is Sune, who has a paladin order despite being CG.
Though it's actually up to the god in question if they want to follow the one step rule (Nature gods favor neutralry regardless of their personal alignment, but some like Mielikki and Meliel or Malar allow other alignments as well (Mielikki and Meliel share the same rules since Meliel is Mielikki's immediate suborinate, and allow druids to be CN and NG, in addition to true-neutral and have looser vows. Malar allows lycanthropes of alignment to be druids or clerics, but if they're ever cured (in the case of afflicted) he stops granting spells to them unless they're TN for Druids or NE, CE, or CN for clerics). Midnight allows worshipers who are within one step of either LN (old Mystra) or NG (New Mystra), since she didn't want to split the church due to her different outlook from the old Mystra.
About paladins - yeah, the lore may support that. It's still confusing for people to see Helm as the neutral deity and have a lawful good paladin of Helm in the same game. It wouldn't be a stretch to add a neutral paladin kit that serves either Helm or another neutral deity. Either would make enough sense and open the class to neutral players.
You have it WAY backwards. Having maxed rep is the best thing a DH could hope for, since they're known far and wide by the general populous to be a paragon of justice and right, and not only that, as long as they cover the tracks well, no one will even suspect of them crimes commited there in. Villains with good publicity are the hardest to take down, because they have popular support, and you need absolutely iron-clad, no possible way out proof of their guilt to just have a CHANCE of pinning something on them.
Even blackguards lack that level of open ruthless evil, except for only the most low intellect, deep end of Chaotic evil. In battle, or when they have you at their mercy, yes they can evil incarnate, but they're also being of strong, powerful charisma and learned of the honeyed words their malefactors are so fond of to get people to do what they want and would see benefit of cultivating a popular opinion of themselves in order to have recruits that fawn over their exploits that they can mold into loyal pawns to cater to their own egos.
The DH is subtle, favoring their traps and poisons, stalking their target methodically and striking when it's weak, while remaining unnoticed and unsuspected of what they intend.
And even then, you have to go out of your way to show over a long period of time that they've been doing this and that it wasn't just a moment of weakness, that any mere mortal can stumble sometimes, but by their record it's clear it's not going to be a freq
If anything, having a low rep would hurt them MUCH more then having a medium one, and a high reputation would have everyone kissing their ass all day long.
As I've said several times, why you do something is much much more relevant to good vs evil then what you do in most cases.
There is a definate need for not only an evil option for the ranger class, but a trap using kit. It can be said that a good alinged ranger would never use traps, for as wardens of the woodlands they would destroy them instead. An evil ranger kit, (whether we call it Dark Hunter or Trapper) would trap animals, people, whatever. They could be themed as radical protectors who enjoy hanging the guilty with the innocent for the sake of prevention. Or perhaps they are fallen rangers who were approached by an evil entity and seduced to the dark side. In exchange for getting those powers back they are bound by a blood pack to be evil and do evil tasks. Especially to their former allies and the woods they dwell in.
... can we have an evil Ranger kit with the name "Rambo" ???
*PTSD = Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (common with ex-soldiers)
He was actually a pretty chill guy until a bunch of bored, corrupt police officiers pushed him too far via Torture, for NO REASON. He was just fighting in self-defense the whole time after he escaped to the woodlands, and the only people he attacked were the ones trying to shoot him.
And I'd love to play an evil Ranger bad ass kit.
(I actually played a Stalker in BG1tutu and BG2 and GateKeepered his alignment to lawful Evil.)
Rogues on the other hand get a NCP called trap-setting which allows creation of just about any trap (and at lvl 10+ (assuming they're a vanilla thief or bards) can even create magical traps, by using spell-scrolls in their construction (but has the same failure chance on activation as them attempting to use a mage scrolls normally does), as long as they have the materials to do so on hand, including advanced mechanical traps.
The PnP stalker kit is the only ranger kit who actually gets the ability to buy the thief version of trap-setting at normal cost and works as if they were a rogue. Though as good characters they generally shy away from poison use in their traps or traps that are likely to outright kill (but unlike other rangers CAN make them as a last resort), instead preferring traps that can disable enemies so they can be captured, since they still want them to face proper justice.
DARK HUNTER (aka Rambo)
Advantages
- +15% stealth bonus
- can poison his weapon once a day/4 levels (like Assassin's poison weapon ability)
- can set snares (like Thieves)...possibly also get Thieve's HLAs except for Whirlwind...or a combination of them (Traps + Whirlwind, no assassination, no UAI)
- maybe backstab like Stalker (?)
Disadvantages
- no spellcasting (makes sense)
- no heavier than Studded Leather armors
- restricted to Evil alignment
That sounds suspiciously similar to a Stalker, but it could just be his evil foil (basically replacing Stalker's advanced spellcasting for poisons and traps...?)
I have always liked Stalkers, but thought their advanced spellcasting ... sketchy, not fitting and not really useable.
My idea for it was -
(same as normal ranger except where mentioned)
Advantages-
Can poison weapon and trap progression at the same rate as an Assassin (set trap skill equal to stealth progression)
generic +1 hit, instead of a favored enemy
x2 BS, doesn't increase.
Disadvantages-
No spellcasting and cannot dualclass as a cleric or druid.
No armor greater then studded leather
Restricted to only daggers, short-swords, bows, and darts. (changed from my initial draft...give them free two-weapon as a normal ranger, but take most of their other weapon training, due to disdain for fighting fair).
Neutral and evil only (they are for all intents and purposes an Assassin, built on a warrior frame instead of a thief frame, and see no reason at all why they should be limited to just evil, for the same reasons assassins can be neutral or evil).
---------
The key difference between the two in this version would be, the stalker while stealth oriented is still a straight forward warrior and has some powerful tricks up their sleeves at higher levels even when their scaling BS (which caps at x4) becomes less useful.
The Dark Hunter on the other hand completely disdains straight combat, prefer to bleed their enemies down with traps and poison, and once they're sufficiently weakened attempt to finish them off with a surprise attack.
The x2 BS is more of throwing them a bone in the early game, due to their set trap only breaking the 50% mark at lvl 7, and only having a few charges of poison weapon. The x2 BS would allow them to still contribute meaningfully despite their limited equipment choices, when they were out of poison or their traps were failing. At higher levels would largely fade in the back ground, as their trap and poison use moved into their bread and butter damage source.
As a result favoring weapons that can attack from afar or spread their poisons quickly, or can be easily concealed so they can strike a target unaware more easily.
In a pinch, they're still a warrior and can fight it out if they have no choice, but their specialization towards killing discreetly and making targets suffer, makes them less efficient then the more general purpose training most other rangers receive.
I'd leave them with the warrior pool of HLA (Epic traps and access to UAI is WAY too much for a class build on a warrior skeleton). With those equipment restrictions, they still won't be nearly as powerful as the other warriors in straight combat, but in situations where they can trap or utilize their poisons they'll have an edge.
However, I'd vote for the Spike Trap HLAs (no UAI) from Thieve's HLAs when this is a trapper-style Thief/Warrior combo.
Boots of stealth + shadow armor easily push a ranger's stealth skill up to useful levels with just those items at lvl 1 (boots of stealth giving the lion's share of benefit and is free), and by 8 by they can get by with just shadow armor if they'd rather use boots of speed (though due to a weaker BS there's not much point to hit and fade).
Still gonna veto any thief HLA...they're way too strong for a warrior to ever have. A warrior can turn even a dagger into a murder stick already, while a thief is mostly useless in melee and needs their extra stuff to compensate vs enemies that can't be back-stabbed.
At the end of the day, they're still a warrior, just one who prefers to fight dirty.
Assassins get thief HLA because they don't get d10 hp, fighter con bonus, ex str, specialization, warrior bonus attacks, fast thac0 progression, fast proficiency progression AND free two-weapon.
They are WELL compensated.
(and IMO, the epic traps should be Bounty Hunter exclusive...they're just that broken as currently implemented. Though I'd also recommend UAI be exclusive to vanilla thieves, to make up for them getting screwed out of their lvl 10 scroll use perk, that none of the thief kits are allowed to have. Assassination exclusive to assassins, and WWA exclusive to Swashys).
There are those who disrespect nature, and escape the reach of the shadow druids. That's when they turn to their adaptable agents, a sect of rangers known as the: Dark Hunters. Their means are unorthodox, they are often confused with bounty hunters or assassins. To a Dark Hunter, those who do not respect nature are weak, and need to be removed like thinning a herd of cattle. While a ranger would guide a group of nobles around the dangers of the woods, dark hunters would lead them into a trap and show them how meaningless their gold is compared to the power of nature. Their general opinion of other rangers is that they are naive and weak. They can stalk their prey equally well in the woods or urban surroundings. They use cunning traps, poison, animal companions, and stealth to surprise and eliminate their marks. Like all rangers they are fearsome warriors trained to fight multiple foes at the same time.
Advantages:
*Beginning at level 1, they gain set snares as per the thief class, and gain an additional use every 5 levels. The skill progresses on par with their stealth skill.
*Beginning at level 5, they gain use poison as per the assassan kit, and gain an additional use every 5 levels thereafter.
Under consideration:
* x2 backstab that does not improve.
*+2 to hit from behind.
Disadvantages:
* No divine spell casting.
* Must be evil.
* Reputation cannot exceed 12 or they lose ranger skills and kit advantages.
* No racial enemy
Under consideration:
* Armor limited to chain mail, studded leather, leather, small shields, and bucklers.
EDIT: Removed the lack of free slots into two-weapon fighting as a disadvantage. Added "no racial enemy" as a disadvantage. Increased availability of trap usage.
Backstabbing should not he an option for the evil ranger kit, it belittles the stalker kit
@Lateralus - maybe to start having poisons at lvl 1 too. A man does not spend several years hunting people in the woods and only then discover that there are venoms to use. Also - Blackguard and Assassin have a similar ability and they both start at level 1. I'd still add BS x2 as per Zanath. It doesn't really belittle the Stalker kit, just provides a foil - it's evil counterpart.
Anyway, evil kits tend to be a bit more powerful (Look at Blackguard, which is downright OP, Assassin or Priest of Talos) to outweigh the non-good requirement. Especially because the "reputation can not exceed 12" rule is quite harsh.
The advantages still seem to be missing something unique...
But that would still need someone from Overhaul to decide (possibly adding their creative input) and develop the kit.
I know it can be modded, but I am afraid that a modder would make the kit his "Marty Stu" and make it too ridiculously overpowered. Nobody is safe from that.
Look at the recent kits.
The Blackguard seems hugely overpowered. The Dwarven Defender is powerful and interesting and I have used it in Black Pits. The Dragon Disciple is a bit underpowered (a bit!) and Shadow Dancer (once fixed) also sounds very powerful.
Evil Ranger Kit:
Ranger Perks:
*ONE free ranks in two-weapon fighting.
*Stealth
*Charm animal.
Advantages:
*Trap setting. Same as a theif, skill progesses at same rate as stealth skill.
*Poison use. Identical to assassin and blackgaurd.
*+2 to hit from behind.
Disadvantages:
*No racial enemy bonus.
*Limited Armor: Chain mail, studded leather, leather, small shield, and buckler.
*No divine spells.
*Must be evil.
*Reputation limit of 14 or lose all advantages and perks.
Edit: dropped the free 2ws pips to one to reflect the lack of full ranger training. Raised the rep limit to 14.
I would play such a kit. Probably also try to solo some parts of the game (No divine spells would be quite hard for soloing though. Almost no healing, no buffs.)
Btw - what about "Racial Enemy - humans and demi-humans" (basically playable races) +1 to hit and damage. (Maybe replacing the +2 to hit from behind).
That's pretty unique.
Rep can't go higher than 12 is way too harsh and too close to the default rep you start with, even chaotic evil. Regular rangers fall if they drop below 6 (I think? I keep mixing it up with paladins). That would make the "opposite" 14.
I like the inability to dual class to divine casting classes, makes perfect sense. Also the restriction to thief armor and weapons sounds good. I'd give the bonus on ranged weapons (darts, daggers, axes) though, not all thief weapons, to further go into the avoiding melee direction.
A long time ago there lived a man named Rambo. His past was tortured by the loss of his family, murdered at the hands of mercenaries who were hired by greedy land developers. He dedicated his life to vengence, and sought out the secrets of the rangers. Rambos methods did not adhere to the ranger code, and he was banished before being allowed to take the sacred oath. His anger twisted out towards them, and he began to question why they didn't stop the attacks that ended his family. His training half finished, he set out to devise methods of his own means. Maddened, he sought to destroy the rangers by ruining their reputation by framing them for murder and theft. In time he recruited others and created his own sect of rangers, bound by a blood oath to do evil. Calling his new family the Dark Hunters.