Rangers Only (no Druids allowed)

[Arureal]

Now just to get this straight, my next class will be ranger, whether it is changed or not. That said, here are my thoughts on rangers.

Disarming Traps is a skill that rangers would have, but not to the extent of a rogue would, as a ranger’s experience with traps is more limited in scope. A score of 65 to 75 tops would reflect this well. They do have an understanding of many types of traps like deadfalls, trip wires, snares, pits, just not as much as ye old rogue.

Picking locks is a skill that rangers would possess little to none of, perhaps a score of 20 to 25 max, if that, and then only because so many people are used to rangers having this skill.

On the subject of the rangers’ ability move stealthy. Unlike a thief, their skill is related to the outdoors, not cities and dungeons. To reflect this they should have fewer random encounters on the world map, and a reduced movement cost as opposed to other classes.

When it comes to melee, I have no complaints with the class; it is about where it should be. I do like the idea put forth that quivers should be containers that will hold the arrows of your choice. I also like the concept of crossbows doing more damage, and then they must be reloaded. Very realistic, and brings some strategy to missile weapons. Bow use should not be speeded up, it takes several tenths of a second to draw an arrow from its quiver, and several more to draw and release it. Only a few archers in the world have been proficient in this fast of a shot, even Howard Hill had his limits, people watch too many movies. But these last ones are not just ranger issues.

I will await more comment before I continue as I am suffering from sleep deprivation at the moment.

Arureal

High-Lord of Lowbies

[Isabelle]

everything you posted Arureal seems to be fair.

i have no problem with any of those above mentioned ideas.

i like the less encounters on worldmap idea

[weems]

Realism doesn't matter.

[Quintos]

Realism doesn't matter.

It doesn't!? Come on, can't we all fly and breath fire at people while distorting time and space them and warping their form just before they come at us and spin around in circles 5 times in a second, cutting off all of our limbs?

[weems]

Realism doesn't matter.

It doesn't!? Come on, can't we all fly and breath fire at people while distorting time and space them and warping their form just before they come at us and spin around in circles 5 times in a second, cutting off all of our limbs?

You are my hero.

[Vogar Eol]

Arureal....

I am completely surprised you actually know who Howard Hill is. Howard Hill was the first well known archer of his time to go back to the longbow, and the use of wooden arrows. He did however perfer to use compressed wood for the shafts. He even has taken down elephant with a longbow. That aside, lets talk about what you stated about weapon speed for bows.

First, you do realise that mud time is NOT real time? The mud day is only eight hours long. Taken into account that the average missile weapon has a fire rate of about 4 to 5 seconds, thats about 12-15 seconds per shot. That is more then enough time for even a beginner to aim and fire. 150 pound longbows were NOT held that long.

And yes, bows were made to be atleast 150 pounds if they were ment to pierce armour. Skilled archers were able to put two arrows into the target at one time, one via shooting the arrow in a high arc, the other dead on. Since the first arrow to a longer route both hit at the same instant, one from the front, one from above. Both arrows can not effectively be blocked.

Now if archers that trained all their lives to use a bow can put a two arrows on a target at the same instant, how long do you think their aim to fire time is? Did they take and wet a finger, stick it in the air? Did they grab a little dust and sprinkle it? Did they then carefully notch the arrow, draw it slowly, carefully hold that 150 pound bow for about 5 more seconds, then release it? Did they repeat this whole thing for the second shot? Or did they draw, pull and release all as one motion, trusting to years and years of practice?

[Quintos]

After looking up a couple facts on Howard Hill I found that he set a record of shooting an arrow 391 yards. This is well over 1000 feet. Seeing as how he felt modern bows took away the fun from archery, I would assume this was using a longbow. In the game, we can only shoot a longbow from only 300 feet. I am aware that his record of over 1000 feet was probably without great accuracy due to its arnge, but why can't we effectively shoot arrows up to 500 feet if we are highly skilled rangers?

[Arureal]

Vogar Eol…

First let me say first that I agree with everything you said, latter I will explain why I said what I did in my prior post. The reason I know who Howard Hill is because I am an old fart; he was one of my childhood heroes. I am a certified gunsmith in the state of Kentucky, which means I had to be a machinist first. I was in the SCA from the mid 70’s to mid 80’s. Started playing D&D in the 70’s and started being a DM in 1980. I am an ex Marine, my unit was the Thundering Third Herd 3/155 2nd F.A.G. 2nd Mar. Div. it was disbanded not long after the Vietnam conflict ended. We have a lot in common. Howard Hill did a lot of research with materials for bows. He was also very fond of a laminate with Yew wood at the core and Japanese bamboo for the rest. He even started a plantation for these materials to be grown in the U.S. for his use. Howard Hill took all the Big 5 of Africa and still holds most of the world records with a bow. Most of the bows he used for this ranged from 145lb’s and up in draw weight. Most were also special designs that allowed an overdraw so arrows of +40 inch’s in length could be used for greater penetration. Other than big game hunting, he used more standard bow’s designs from 120lb’s to 175lb’s draw weight. His style of bow use did not hold the bow back at full draw but for the briefest instant, the style I use, its all done in one smooth motion.

So yes shots can be made like you said, even that lob 1 arrow and the next straight at the target so they both hit at once, and at a faster rate of fire than we now have. A look at English history will show how effective well trained longbowmen can be. But I did not state this view, why?

A look at English history will also show that this level of skill was hard to maintain due to the long hours of practice needed. They even had to pass laws requiring archers to practice in order to try and keep them at this level of skill. It did not work. I am not the shot I used to be either.

Because the Ranger is not a pure melee class, I did not feel they had the time to maintain this degree of skill with a bow. If someone were to propose a pure melee class Archer, it would be a whole different story. They would have the time to devote in bow use to reach and maintain these skill levels.

Arureal

High Lord of Lowbies

[weems]

Celeborn, give ranger multishot.

And Arureal, realism doesn't matter.
[/thread]

[Isabelle]

celeborn, ignore weems

[weems]

celeborn, ignore weems

Yeah, instead he can either...
A. Rework every single skill in all of DL to be realistic, while adding new Ranger skills that meet the same realistic requirement.
or B. Make the Rangers skills realistic, completly ignoring the fact that no other class's skills are.

Come on Isabelle.

Why not just add in the skills that make sense on a fantasy role playing game level? A major theme in all such games is that we can accomplish feats that are impossible in real life. Like, for example, breathing fire on dragons and killing them. Or spinning around in a blur and attacking every monster all at once.

[Quintos]

*Spins around and around with 2 large axes, gets dizzy, disembowels himself, but manages not to hit any monsters*

[Silvanos]

I think if D&D is using multishot or the same principle in their games, i dont think well be crossing the line on DL Arcane Archer - Hail of Arrows feat.

[Vogar Eol]

In all truth a "multi-shot" that fired two arrows would be completely authentic, just so long as it was described as two arrows hitting at once, and not two arrows fired at once.

Could you fire more then one arrow from a bow? Sure you *could*, but it would not be accurate beyond point blank. Arrows flex under the preasure of release, and two or three arrows fired as shown in that picture would have a shotgun effect at the best. Not to mention it would hurt power.



Now concidering how ranger has nothing what-so-ever going for them. I feel they ARE the archers of this game. Why? Because we can multiclass. If I want a traditional ranger character I would need to go Warrior/Rogue/Archer to get the end result that the class RANGER does not give me.

Personally, the way things are going I think the ranger class should be changed into a completely ranged weapons class. Let the ability to multiclass make up for any thief and magic user skills.

[Arureal]

Changing ranger to a completely ranged weapon class and using multi-classing to gain thief and magic skills would be a good solution under the current system. Doing that or making a new class is the only way to truly represent missile use without adversely affecting game balance.

Voice your thoughts now. Should we change ranger to a missile weapon specialist, or start a new class. Vote now or forever hold your piece.

P.S. Thanks for mentioning arrow flex and its affect on accuracy, and the problems with shooting more than one arrow at a time Vogar Eol, in this day and age that is not common knowledge.

Arureal

High Lord of Lowbies

[Kiasyn]

remember, for each new class you have to think up a whole new set of epic names

[Isabelle]

there are ways to make them more powerful without giving them multiple shots per round. They arent firing a Gatling Gun, it's a bow

elemental arrows, arrows which do specific damage types, (poison, fire, etc etc) more damage on arrows.. theres many many ideas, and by limiting those things to solely the ranger class, it becomes useful.

a bard can't hit people for tons of damage per round, yet people still like making them.. whats my point? It's that you dont need to turn a class into a super fighter character that breathes fire and crushes entire armies with a wave of their hand, there are non-lethal ways to make the class desirable.

[Gilgolad]

OK then, i say we keep it as a ranger, and give them all the ranged weapons, and let them keep the stuff one would expect them to have like detrap.

[Isabelle]

or.. not give them detrap, but rather make new traps for rangers, and make these traps 'detrapable'

ranger traps would be things like snares, doing different types of damage.

i dont want them picking chests and doors, i want them doing nature stuff

[Gilgolad]

Right, that's the kind of trap stuff i was thinking about. I should have been more specific. My knowledge and basic mental immage of rangers comes entirely from LOTR, i'm reading the first one right now actually, and whenever i think of a ranger i think of someone that looks, acts, and posesses knowledge like Aragorn does.
Yeah yeah, LOTR is not the only thing most fantasy stuff is based on but it was one of the first major works in fantasy Lore and alot of the other stuff derives from it though.

[Dunadan]

I like the idea about the special arrows that only Rangers could use, would make rangers better with bows. Or maybe give them some kind of spell that lets them make bows/arrows better, kind of like holy avenger but with bows and rangers instead .

[weems]

Retreating Shot (or some other name, can be called anything).

A skill that allows rangers to fire an arrow, or bolt (whatever), and retreat at the same time. The retreat would function just as a normal retreat would, or maybe half distance depending on how powerful it turned out to be. The speed of the attack would depend on whether they performed a 'jab' 'thrust' or 'lunge'.

[wizoch]

Heres my thought, rangers can make traps they can also detrap they're own traps because you know they can detrap it unless they make a mistake and get choped up by they're axe but whatever back to my point.They should be able to make traps and detrap them ,but no one elses.I agree on the multishot but the chance of hitting should be lowered like 25%.I think instead of sneaking you could hide you know because like in some movies people are trying to get food they set up a trap and go hide in the bushes and wait for something to come by.

[Quintos]

Retreating Shot (or some other name, can be called anything).

A skill that allows rangers to fire an arrow, or bolt (whatever), and retreat at the same time. The retreat would function just as a normal retreat would, or maybe half distance depending on how powerful it turned out to be. The speed of the attack would depend on whether they performed a 'jab' 'thrust' or 'lunge'.

'Jab' 'thrust' and 'lunge' are really missing from bows...adding comparable commands (suggestion in my new class thread) would help a bit in this area. Might not make them great, but it could be nice.

[weems]

Retreating Shot (or some other name, can be called anything).

A skill that allows rangers to fire an arrow, or bolt (whatever), and retreat at the same time. The retreat would function just as a normal retreat would, or maybe half distance depending on how powerful it turned out to be. The speed of the attack would depend on whether they performed a 'jab' 'thrust' or 'lunge'.

'Jab' 'thrust' and 'lunge' are really missing from bows...adding comparable commands (suggestion in my new class thread) would help a bit in this area. Might not make them great, but it could be nice.

I realize that, and that was part of the idea, and the reason I quoted them. I think bows should have varying strengths of attacks as well, just for the added versatility.