Keen rapier? Read again!

Remove all ads!

Azardu, I agree with a lot of what you say but the dual wielding I think is still the sticking point for me. archtype ranger don't dual wield. It's all because of the damn Drow that dual wielding became a 'core' skill for rangers. I agree about the shield issue but I see not problem with using only a single handed weapon with nothing in the off hand. The spear, a classic ranger weapon can be used with one hand, so can a hand or battle axe. I just see the set feats as too restrict for class concept. It's like saying that all mages should have to learn color spray and magic missile at first level. It maybe useful but I'd rather have the flexibility.

 

Yes, the Aragorn scene in LotR was very impressive. However, it could hardly have been the basis for the second edition idea. A little matter of the 10 or 15 years that 2nd ed has been out. Besides, that in the book that's just one line and Aragorn has a torch in each hand because none of his weapons would do diddly to a Nazgul.

 

I never said anything about a ranger being better for roleplaying than a fighter. I simply said that he had more non-combat abilities, which I refer to roleplaying abilities. I am beginning to think that you deliberately misunderstand me.

 

Well, its easy to do when you write using idiolectal definitions. "Roleplaying" and "non combat" are not interchangable for most people. Using them in that way is bound to cause confusion and provoke arguments about the definitions as well.

 

Sol'Kanar, I understand what you are saying now, but please don't equate non-combat with role-playing. I find the association implies that combat abilities do not equal role-playing. I just want to point out that this paints a connection between game mechanics and player ability. I can see you are trying to highlight the power gamer fixation on combat ability. “If it doesn’t help me in combat what good is it?” But in an attempt to banish power gaming all together I’d like to be a disconnect between game mechanics and role-playing all together. To many player focus too much on the number on their sheet and not on the ideas in their heads. The main point that I was trying to make is that any character can be role-played. You statement suggested that fighter were less ‘role-playable’ then rangers. This bothered me. I think we are on the same sheet of music now. Get you players to sit down before rolling anything and come up with a character concept. This is the key to the whole game.