Skip to content

does anybody else play rangers

124»

Comments

  • BelleSorciereBelleSorciere Member Posts: 2,108
    edited May 2016
    A reason elves take longer is that their perspective allows for it.

    This argument isn't going anywhere, however. The same points are being repeated over and over again, as if no one has explained how and why elves mature the way they do.
  • TsideshowTsideshow Member Posts: 7
    I think that we are mostly in agreement.
    They are allowed to take longer, time has a different meaning for them, culturally - that explains why an elf that grew with humans would mature much faster.

    Anyway..Back to the point, erm, rangers and fluffy things!
    :)
  • JumboWheat01JumboWheat01 Member Posts: 1,028
    Tsideshow said:

    Anyway..Back to the point, erm, rangers and fluffy things!
    :)

    This does remind me that I've yet to actually make a ranger. I've made one of every other class (though not every single kit,) but I've yet to do a ranger. Maybe I should do a stalker one of these days or something.
  • mashedtatersmashedtaters Member Posts: 2,266
    Stalkers are pretty sweet! I like going for a elven (or human) stalker using large swords and short swords (btw, I always use the G3 tweaks to adjust the proficiencies to my liking). I switch his paper doll and avatar to look like an elven thief (just fits better) and write a cool backstory for him.

    My last stalker, although good, was more trusting of those who wore their feelings on their sleeve and were willing to compromise, and thus traveled with characters like xzar and montaroon and then Edwin and Viconia. He couldn't stand keldorn and Ajantis, or Jaheira and aerie. He was actually the only guy that was of good alignment in the party, lol. Oh, and he killed Yoshimo on sight because he knew he was hiding something.
  • TsideshowTsideshow Member Posts: 7
    edited May 2016

    Tsideshow said:

    Anyway..Back to the point, erm, rangers and fluffy things!
    :)

    This does remind me that I've yet to actually make a ranger. I've made one of every other class (though not every single kit,) but I've yet to do a ranger. Maybe I should do a stalker one of these days or something.
    Glad to be of assistance! I am the harbinger of fluff!

    You really should make a ranger, especially if you played any other class, and stalkers are very fun.
    In my opinion stalkers and archers are really the only viable options when it comes to rangers.

    Also, this is terrible, I'm starting to feel the desire to start a new BG run...
  • OrlonKronsteenOrlonKronsteen Member Posts: 905
    Great thread! Stalkers and archers all the way. Even vanilla ranger is fun. The free dual wielding points are sweet, and the favourite enemy, if chosen carefully, can make some of the hardest fights in the game much easier. As for grand mastery, you don't really need it (BG2 was designed with nerfed grand mastery). Personally, I enjoy having proficiency in a number of really cool weapons.
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,235
    Ranger stronghold is a personal favorite of mine.
  • OlvynChuruOlvynChuru Member Posts: 3,076
    I'm a big Beastmaster fan. Their summons are awesome, especially in Icewind Dale.
  • PK2748PK2748 Member Posts: 381
    Rangers started with 2d8 and got a d8 per level if I recall right from AD&D, 1st edition. They were badass
  • PaulGreystokePaulGreystoke Member Posts: 63
    PK2748 said:

    Rangers started with 2d8 and got a d8 per level if I recall right from AD&D, 1st edition. They were badass

    Yes, & instead of getting 9 dice like Fighters or Paladins, they got 11 dice - which is 2 more hit dice for their Constitution bonuses to be applied to. Mathematically, 9D10 = 11d8 = 49.5 HP average - but getting 2 more dice meant that a 1E Ranger got more bang out of a high CON than a Paladin or Fighter. (Slower XP progression vis a vis the Fighter did even this up a bit.) My 1E Rangers always prioritized CON highly as a result.

Sign In or Register to comment.