Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Are rangers underpowered and lack definition?

1235»

Comments

  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 654
    edited July 7
    @byrne20 5e works a very different way. The attack bonus, like the old thac0 is the same in every class. Weapon profs is feats and class features, very different. Fighters are the best at fighting, rangers gain useful spells, archery etc and roleplaying abilities. But every class in the 3,5-5e is advancing the same xp table so the ranger dont need superior xp to advance like in 2e.

    Post edited by Danacm on
    gorgonzola
  • PsicoVicPsicoVic Member Posts: 199
    byrne20 wrote: »
    I think possibly giving Ranger mastery over weapons but not high master or grand mastery might be a good idea. I don’t really know how 5th edition works though. Do we still have 5 points to put to get to grand master in 5th edition? Or is it weapon focus?
    What @Danacm said...

    https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/fighter

    Danacm
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 393
    DreadKhan wrote: »
    I'd like it if Barbs and Rangers could take Mastery at about lvl 9. Probably too good though.
    byrne20 wrote: »
    I think possibly giving Ranger mastery over weapons but not high master or grand mastery might be a good idea.

    When Weapon Specialization was first introduced, Fighters AND Rangers could DOUBLE Specialize...

    Also, remember that in BG GM is nerfed only granting an additional 0.5 APR rather than the full 1 APR it should (as in IWD). That extra additional 0.5 APR would make pure Fighters much better and help differentiate them more.

    DanacmDreadKhan
  • byrne20byrne20 Member Posts: 303
    @elminster 100% agree with that. It always bugged me that Paladins got level 4 spells but Rangers only went to level 3 spells.

    RAM021
  • DreadKhanDreadKhan Member Posts: 3,799
    Yeah lvl 1 to 3 in Druid is crummy vs the more useful by far cleric 1 - 4, which can turn a paladin into a better fighter, or even summon meatshields to chip in. I hate Jaheira in BG1, since she takes forever to reach 4th lvl spells, and is a crummy fighter in the meantime.

    Mastery would be a great buff imho, making rangers way more viable, and comparable to a buffed Paladin.

    RAM021Danacm
  • jmerryjmerry Member Posts: 101
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Also, remember that in BG GM is nerfed only granting an additional 0.5 APR rather than the full 1 APR it should (as in IWD). That extra additional 0.5 APR would make pure Fighters much better and help differentiate them more.
    In the EE for the Baldur's Gate games, grand mastery is fully powered, including the +1 APR.

  • OlvynChuruOlvynChuru Member Posts: 2,171
    jmerry wrote: »
    In the EE for the Baldur's Gate games, grand mastery is fully powered, including the +1 APR.

    In BG:EE and BG2:EE, specialization gives +0.5 attacks per round and grand mastery gives an additional +0.5, for a total of +1 attack per round. In IWD:EE, specialization gives +0.5 APR and grandmastery gives an additional +1 APR, for a total of +1.5 attacks per round. This may be the source of confusion.

    RAM021Danacmgorgonzola
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 393
    jmerry wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Also, remember that in BG GM is nerfed only granting an additional 0.5 APR rather than the full 1 APR it should (as in IWD). That extra additional 0.5 APR would make pure Fighters much better and help differentiate them more.
    In the EE for the Baldur's Gate games, grand mastery is fully powered, including the +1 APR.

    Combat & Tactics disagrees: "Grandmasters gain one additional attack per round above and beyond a specialist's rate of attacks for their level..." (pg 76)

    Icewind Dale does this correctly; Baldur's Gate does not :(

    PsicoVicDanacmgorgonzola
  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 654
    RAM021 wrote: »
    jmerry wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Also, remember that in BG GM is nerfed only granting an additional 0.5 APR rather than the full 1 APR it should (as in IWD). That extra additional 0.5 APR would make pure Fighters much better and help differentiate them more.
    In the EE for the Baldur's Gate games, grand mastery is fully powered, including the +1 APR.

    Combat & Tactics disagrees: "Grandmasters gain one additional attack per round above and beyond a specialist's rate of attacks for their level..." (pg 76)

    Icewind Dale does this correctly; Baldur's Gate does not :(

    Its balance reasons. The original devs toned down grandmastery in bg2 to balance the gap between fighters(berserkers ophell :D ) and rangers/paladins. In bgee its upgrade back to bg1 level but the true pnp is in iwd.
    Thats one from the lots of incosistencies what adnd 2 optional rules have. If they just use basic rules everythint should be more balanced ( like just simple specialization ).
    Yeah the rule set in bg-iwd games is clumsy and teeming with bad houserules.
    But at least the story is one of the best of all rp games.

    gorgonzolaPsicoVic
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 15,899
    edited July 8
    Yea in 2e pnp only single class fighters can even specialize in a weapon (in combat and tactics there is an option to give fighter multiclasses, rangers and paladins weapon expertise, but that doesn't grant them the Thac0 or damage bonus). Grandmastery in this case was specifically balanced around the idea that you would be a single class fighter and (unless you dual classed at either level 9 or level 12*) not a dual class character. You had to spend years training and hunt down a weapon master for your choice of weapon.

    Also you couldn't get mastery in a weapon until at least level 5.

    Also (and this isn't related to anything anyone has said I just learned it and its kind of neat) according to core 2E rules bows actually took 2 proficiency points to get you from proficiency into specialization. Bow specialists also didn't get the extra 1/2 attack.

    * Its not really clear if you could hold back on using your level 3 point for it until after you were level 5.

    Post edited by elminster on
    DanacmPsicoVic
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 393
    Danacm wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    jmerry wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Also, remember that in BG GM is nerfed only granting an additional 0.5 APR rather than the full 1 APR it should (as in IWD). That extra additional 0.5 APR would make pure Fighters much better and help differentiate them more.
    In the EE for the Baldur's Gate games, grand mastery is fully powered, including the +1 APR.

    Combat & Tactics disagrees: "Grandmasters gain one additional attack per round above and beyond a specialist's rate of attacks for their level..." (pg 76)

    Icewind Dale does this correctly; Baldur's Gate does not :(

    Its balance reasons. The original devs toned down grandmastery in bg2 to balance the gap between fighters(berserkers ophell :D ) and rangers/paladins. In bgee its upgrade back to bg1 level but the true pnp is in iwd.
    Thats one from the lots of incosistencies what adnd 2 optional rules have. If they just use basic rules everythint should be more balanced ( like just simple specialization ).

    Possible, although that is just your opinion. The implementation was changed between Baldur's Gate & BG2. Now was that for balance or due to the engine upgrade? Nevertheless, GM was so nerfed in BG2 it was reduced to irrelevance. The AD&D2 optional rule is internally consistent and greatly improves fighters - hardly the most OP class.

    As the thread has been dedicated to how underpowered Rangers are, there are better ways to improve them than nerfing Fighters as seen in IWD.

  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 654
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Danacm wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    jmerry wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Also, remember that in BG GM is nerfed only granting an additional 0.5 APR rather than the full 1 APR it should (as in IWD). That extra additional 0.5 APR would make pure Fighters much better and help differentiate them more.
    In the EE for the Baldur's Gate games, grand mastery is fully powered, including the +1 APR.

    Combat & Tactics disagrees: "Grandmasters gain one additional attack per round above and beyond a specialist's rate of attacks for their level..." (pg 76)

    Icewind Dale does this correctly; Baldur's Gate does not :(

    Its balance reasons. The original devs toned down grandmastery in bg2 to balance the gap between fighters(berserkers ophell :D ) and rangers/paladins. In bgee its upgrade back to bg1 level but the true pnp is in iwd.
    Thats one from the lots of incosistencies what adnd 2 optional rules have. If they just use basic rules everythint should be more balanced ( like just simple specialization ).

    Possible, although that is just your opinion. The implementation was changed between Baldur's Gate & BG2. Now was that for balance or due to the engine upgrade? Nevertheless, GM was so nerfed in BG2 it was reduced to irrelevance. The AD&D2 optional rule is internally consistent and greatly improves fighters - hardly the most OP class.

    As the thread has been dedicated to how underpowered Rangers are, there are better ways to improve them than nerfing Fighters as seen in IWD.

    Adnd2 optional rules never were consistent. A lots of illogical staff here, what further editions try to upgrade.
    Engine upgrade ? Not really, in bg1 you cant reach gm so it doesnt matter, but in bg2 yes you can.

  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,250
    my ideal ranger woud have spell progression similar to IWD:EE (HoW), tweaked to just continue the P&P (standard vanilla) progression, with max 3 slots per spell level, spell power capped at 9, up to spell level 6, but limited to animal and plant spheres (no healing and weather like in divine remix).

    RAM021
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 393
    Danacm wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Danacm wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    jmerry wrote: »
    RAM021 wrote: »
    Also, remember that in BG GM is nerfed only granting an additional 0.5 APR rather than the full 1 APR it should (as in IWD). That extra additional 0.5 APR would make pure Fighters much better and help differentiate them more.
    In the EE for the Baldur's Gate games, grand mastery is fully powered, including the +1 APR.

    Combat & Tactics disagrees: "Grandmasters gain one additional attack per round above and beyond a specialist's rate of attacks for their level..." (pg 76)

    Icewind Dale does this correctly; Baldur's Gate does not :(

    Its balance reasons. The original devs toned down grandmastery in bg2 to balance the gap between fighters(berserkers ophell :D ) and rangers/paladins. In bgee its upgrade back to bg1 level but the true pnp is in iwd.
    Thats one from the lots of incosistencies what adnd 2 optional rules have. If they just use basic rules everythint should be more balanced ( like just simple specialization ).

    Possible, although that is just your opinion. The implementation was changed between Baldur's Gate & BG2. Now was that for balance or due to the engine upgrade? Nevertheless, GM was so nerfed in BG2 it was reduced to irrelevance. The AD&D2 optional rule is internally consistent and greatly improves fighters - hardly the most OP class.

    As the thread has been dedicated to how underpowered Rangers are, there are better ways to improve them than nerfing Fighters as seen in IWD.

    Adnd2 optional rules never were consistent. A lots of illogical staff here, what further editions try to upgrade.
    Engine upgrade ? Not really, in bg1 you cant reach gm so it doesnt matter, but in bg2 yes you can.

    The entire '2.5' Ed Options are certainly more consistent than the core rules and you should try BG1 dual-classing...

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,131
    I always thought the Dark Sun high-level advancement rules were better than the '2.5E' Player's Option stuff...

    Danacm
Sign In or Register to comment.