Skip to content

Just leveled my ranger...

...By killing random neutral animals (elks, squirrels, etc) near my cabin in Umar (I was ~50PX short). Am I the only one that thinks I should have lost my ranger status? It is likely much more against the ranger code (as in AD&D ranger) than having a reputation of 7.

Comments

  • ShinShin Member Posts: 2,345
    From an RP-perspective, considering the way you did it, most likely. However, it would seem like a troublesome implementation - a fireball cast by the party mage kills a squirrel and a groundhog, and suddenly the charname ranger is fallen without having any clue why and maybe not even noticing it until much later. It would appear likely to generate a lot of complaints.
  • MacHurtoMacHurto Member Posts: 731
    edited January 2014
    @shin Good point. AoE would be a problem unless damage on neutrals was checked on character and not group level.
  • abacusabacus Member Posts: 1,307
    It's just hunting... Stocking up for a long winter.
    Doesn't get much more Rangerish than that.
  • ShadowHunterShadowHunter Member Posts: 143
    It depends on the way : You could hunt for stocking just like Abacus said or you could hunt for the bloodlust and the thrill. Then you'd be an evil ranger , what IMO should be changed . Why can't rangers be evil ? In NWN 2 we have Bishop, he's evil. Every believer of Malar is evil and he's the god of the hunt etc...
  • RingoRingo Member Posts: 39
    Evil and neutral rangers were hiding from the tyranny of goodness until 3rd edition, possibly masking as fighter/thieves.
  • MacHurtoMacHurto Member Posts: 731
    Yes, I guess he could tell himself it was hunting for the village and not the XP :-)

    AD&D was taking the ranger class after the Dunedain or something, I guess, so they are always good. Much better in 3rd edition, I agree.
Sign In or Register to comment.