Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
romeo_longsword

Ranger and Paladin

Recommended Posts

I am actually a little suprised that why this thread is moved, I dont mean to question our lovely Phosphor's decision on his power and duty, but, but I do actually, why is this moved?

 

Edit: Actually may be its because its about 2E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean by "chat"? Is that some sort of term for experience cap? I seem to recall that certain classes advanced in level faster than others...

 

Otherwise, I don't know. If they had animal companions way back when, that would explain it, but it didn't. They had the sneak skill, and could go the archery path for bonuses over archer/fighters even, and stuff, and were decently effective as either ranged or frontline fighters. I remember that my 300 times re-rolled stats made my ranger pretty awesome, but other than that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i suspect that is intended to be chart

 

in short because of the sneak and spellcasting

 

if i have to give the long answer i'll need to do some searching for links i'm not sure exist anymore, it has to do with class balance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... I remember that my 300 times re-rolled stats made my ranger pretty awesome, but other than that...

 

LOL! I admit I did the same for few of my characters :ph34r:

 

Yes, Ewen Brown was right, I ment to say Chart.

 

Back in the 2E days, Ranger and Pally require more experience to advance in levels than other classes.

 

In comparing with a Ranger in BG and a Pally in BG, Ranger its quite sucky, I wounder if Ranger has somthing special in 2E PnP back then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They changed that Paladins need more experience per level than other classes? I remember playing a Paladin in Death Knights of Krynn and I thought it was sooo awesome having to collect 2-2.5 times more xp per level than (for example) a thief! It really made me work hard to advance my character and when he finally got his levels it really paid off (especially in that game)..


Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2nd Ed. had different experience tables for some classes.

3.0 standardized experience across the board for all classes.

 

The Paladin and the Ranger are basically the Warrior caste of their respective clergies - Clerics in the case of the Paladin, and Druids in the case of Rangers. Their abilities are derived from that.

 

Personally, I think the Ranger is one of the most versatile classes in the game. You have more versatile combat, lots of bonus feats, a LOT of skill points (especially in 3.5), etc. A Ranger may be more useful in PnP than in a CRPG though.

 

Rangers have always had animal companions, if they chose to use the Animal Friendship spell. That's been slightly modified in 3.5e by changing the spell to a class benefit of Rangers & Druids.

 

I'll be putting an article up in a couple weeks on NWN2News.net with more specifics about the differences of Rangers in 3.5e.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2nd Ed. had different experience tables for some classes.

3.0 standardized experience across the board for all classes.

 

The Paladin and the Ranger are basically the Warrior caste of their respective clergies - Clerics in the case of the Paladin, and Druids in the case of Rangers.  Their abilities are derived from that.

 

Personally, I think the Ranger is one of the most versatile classes in the game.  You have more versatile combat, lots of bonus feats, a LOT of skill points (especially in 3.5), etc.  A Ranger may be more useful in PnP than in a CRPG though.

 

Rangers have always had animal companions, if they chose to use the Animal Friendship spell.  That's been slightly modified in 3.5e by changing the spell to a class benefit of Rangers & Druids.

 

I'll be putting an article up in a couple weeks on NWN2News.net with more specifics about the differences of Rangers in 3.5e.

 

I have only experienced DnD throug CRPG, would you tell us more about why you think that Ranger is one of the most verstile classes in PnP? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in third edition everyone has the same experience chart. However, a straight comparison of a Paladin and a Ranger will show that a Paladin is still a more powerful class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have only experienced DnD throug CRPG, would you tell us more about why you think that Ranger is one of the most verstile classes in PnP? :(

Well, that's what I've been working on :D I'll make sure there's a post when the article is up.

 

Well, in third edition everyone has the same experience chart. However, a straight comparison of a Paladin and a Ranger will show that a Paladin is still a more powerful class.

I'd love to hear more details about that. But bear in mind I said Rangers are more versatile, not more powerful. The Paladin is (basically) a fusion of the Cleric and Fighter - Both relatively combat-oriented classes. The Ranger is a fusion of the Fighter and Druid; more of a scout, but generally better in combat than a Rogue.

 

It's a tank vs. a Humvee - It depends on the application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paladins have better saves because they add their CHA to their saves. I did a chart on this, but I'm not going to bother right now.

Paladins can heal, and have a much better spell selection. Never underestimate the ability to heal in combat. Not dieing is vastly more important than trying to kill someone else.

Paladins can wear heavy armor. A higher armor class is pretty nice.

Most of the Paladin abilities can be used fairly universally. A Ranger's abilities require that you be in a certain environment.

Smite comes into play more often since you run into tons of evil creatures naturally in most settings. Rangers only run into favored enemies when the DM decides you do.

I've never seen a DM really do anything to cater to the Track ability.

The Paladin Mount is far superior to the weakened companion.

Paladins get a full D10 hitdie. Ranger's are the only figter BAB class who gets less than a D10, including all the classes in Warrior supplements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paladins also get an impressive 2 skill pts / lvl, compared to the ranger's measly 6.


Hadescopy.jpg

(Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am more concern in how the two classes will be interpreted in a CRPG, where skill in climbing, swimming and jumping might not be so important (although I certainly hope NWN2 will overcome that).

 

If NWN2 will have mount, and if what I hear about a Pally can get a Dragon as a Mount at level 20 is correct, in comparing with a Ranger who would get a flipping Owl at 20, than Pally is almost overpowered. I certainly don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, in third edition everyone has the same experience chart.  However, a straight comparison of a Paladin and a Ranger will show that a Paladin is still a more powerful class.

 

 

If you're a numbercrunching powermunchkin :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, in third edition everyone has the same experience chart.  However, a straight comparison of a Paladin and a Ranger will show that a Paladin is still a more powerful class.

 

 

If you're a numbercrunching powermunchkin :devil:

 

Heh.

 

Personally, being aware that a Paldin is more powerful than a Ranger in gernal combat is not and should not be seen as an idea of powergaming.

 

In the tradition of CRPG culture, hack and slash asspect is a very strong core of the game, therefore, it is natual that if EnderWiggin compare the two classes in a striaght forward view like such.

 

From my personal experience, when I play online, servers that say they are "hardcore" RP, filled with many roleplaying nazie, whome are very oftern calling others "powergamer", I found that they are the one who are the powergamers themselves. Please see the thread in my sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're a "roleplayer" they're about equal.

 

If you're a "rollplayer", yes the Paladin is better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a DM/GM/ST I feel the need to break down rules and look for exploits. As such, I constantly look for loopholes players might use, etc.

 

I've never played a Paladin, nor do I have any desire to do so. I like playing hero characters, but I think the Paladin class isn't balanced personally.

 

Nothing is really balanced in D&D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're a "roleplayer" they're about equal.

 

If you're a "rollplayer", yes the Paladin is better.

 

 

The nature of this thread is about comparing the two titled classes in terms of what logic lead them shared the same experience chart back in 2e. Not about their role-playing value in your view. :-

 

Additionally, even in a role-playing environment, I would say, they are certainly not "about equal", they are indeed very different indeed :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a DM/GM/ST I feel the need to break down rules and look for exploits.  As such, I constantly look for loopholes players might use, etc.

 

I've never played a Paladin, nor do I have any desire to do so.  I like playing hero characters, but I think the Paladin class isn't balanced personally.

 

Nothing is really balanced in D&D.

 

Hey Ender,

 

I think at the end of the day, DnD is surely not balanced and its never intended to be. I think its a great social medium, so balance in terms of every class have equal power is quite out of the picture. So why does it bother you if there is loopholes or not? :-

 

But there must be somthing in the Ranger and the Pally class, back in the 2e days that is considered as greater than other classes, as they had a higher experience chart than other classes. At least, may be WOTC or whoever was in charge at the time thought so, may be! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D&D caters to party roles. I'm fine with that. I've played various editions of D&D. I'm actively playing in a D&D game these days despite not really liking the system.

 

I'm not vehemently against D&D. I just think there are much better systems out there that few people seem to try because D&D is so popular. It bugs me that everyone is willing to accept an inferior game when superior games get little exposure.

 

To boot, I'm not crazy about Wizards of the Coast, just like I wasn't crazy about TSR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a DM/GM/ST I feel the need to break down rules and look for exploits.  As such, I constantly look for loopholes players might use, etc.

 

I've never played a Paladin, nor do I have any desire to do so.  I like playing hero characters, but I think the Paladin class isn't balanced personally.

 

Nothing is really balanced in D&D.

 

Paladins are balanced by their "severe" roleplaying limitations.

 

if you don't think "lawful good" is a limitation, you're not playing it right ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...