Kit Revisions (Rangers)

[kreso]

I'll give you feedback on Ranger and Archer in 3 days or so.

[Blades of Vanatar]

Concerning Backstabbing. IMO, giving Rangers a level higer (turning x1 into x2, etc..) is not overpowered. The whole point of the backstab is to, hopefully, have a one-shot kill or at least cripple your opponent. x2 for a Ranger is not much of a bonus and you are better off using a non-theif weapon to attack with, like a two-hander. I always felt the Stalker was weak because of his low mulitplier. Backstab is already limited to Thief weapons, so you won't see Minsc backstabbing away with the Warblade for tons of damage. Either up it or forget about adding it.

[kreso]

Suggestions about Ranger spellbook:

From level 1 - remove Armor of Faith, Bless, Magical Stone (I'd vote Doom as well, but I'm sure many would disagree)

- add Faerie Fire and Sunscorch

level 2 seems ok

level 3 - remove Contagion (I'd vote for Dispel Magic removal as well )

- add Hold Person or Animal

level 4 - remove Free Action, Poison, Cloak of Fear, maybe Lesser Restoration as well

[Kalindor]

Agree with removing Armor of Faith. Bless is probably too priestly as well. Magical Stone is borderline. No addition of Sunscorch, please. That seems invocation-y for a Ranger. Faerie Fire would be great.

 

I have no problems with Contagion. Dispel Magic could be removed as kreso suggests.

 

No problems with Free Action or Poison. Lesser Restoration is borderline. Agree with removing Cloak of Fear.

[Demivrgvs]

Ranger's spellbook

Suggestions about Ranger spellbook:

From level 1 - remove Armor of Faith, Bless, Magical Stone (I'd vote Doom as well, but I'm sure many would disagree)

- add Faerie Fire and Sunscorch

level 2 seems ok

level 3 - remove Contagion (I'd vote for Dispel Magic removal as well )

- add Hold Person or Animal

level 4 - remove Free Action, Poison, Cloak of Fear, maybe Lesser Restoration as well

First of all I need to say one thing: because of technical reasons I cannot remove spells which are supposed to be available to a cleric/ranger (*), such as Armor of Faith and Bless. Otoh, SRv4 planned changes include to make such spells not available to druids anymore, and thus rangers too. In exchange they will get new more appropriate PnP spells. So...

 

Level 1 - as mentioned above Armor of Faith, Bless, and Doom are already candidate to be removed from druids and rangers. Druids could keep Magical Stone imo, not sure about rangers. Sunscorch really isn't supposed to be available to rangers, and in PnP not even Faerie Fire. For some reason I'm kinda open to give them the latter but in terms of utility it kinda overlaps with their Tracking skill imo. If we remove all these spells we need at least a couple of new entries, that's why I suggested Camouflage (though as a simple +x% to hide, as per PnP, it is kinda meh imo - a self only invisibility is worth trying out) and Longstrider.

 

Level 2 - when it comes to vanilla's spells I agree, they are fine. I'm almost sure we will at least try Snare and Hunter's Eye.

 

Level 3 - I kinda agree Contagion doesn't suit rangers. They don't get Dispel Magic in PnP, but removing it depends on (*). I have issues with Hold Person or Animal simply because holding persons is kinda borderline (I guess druids get it because of their close relation to fairy creatures such as nymph), but I'm not completely against rangers getting it if necessary.

 

Level 4 - "remove Free Action"? I did not expected this. Rangers get it in PnP and I actually think it really fits them, why do you think it doesn't? I agree about removing Poison and Cloak of Fear, though the latter might depend on (*). I really don't know about Lesser Restoration. Considering they don't get NPP I guess they could keep it, but in theory they shouldn't.

 

(*) I could try something odd, like removing cleric-only spells from the True Ranger, and then re-assign it to cleric/rangers a second later, but it would not be flawless, and I don't know how it would work with dual classed cleric-rangers. That being said, as soon as SRv4 is out all of this would be useless, because all those spells won't be avaliable to druids and rangers anyway, except for Dispel Magic.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Demivrgvs

[kreso]

Ranger's spellbook

I have issues with Hold Person or Animal simply because holding persons is kinda borderline (I guess druids get it because of their close relation to fairy creatures such as nymph), but I'm not completely against rangers getting it if necessary.

It's not necessary, but if they get backstab why not?.....I'm not against backstab because it's OP (it's surely not, considering when they get level 2 spells) but for conceptual reasons - it's imo at least, like you're giving Paladins "Poison weapon". Doesn't fit somehow....rangers are inherently good, noble characters and I cannot see them skulking in shadows and slicing throats with daggers.

 

Level 4 -

"remove Free Action"? I did not expected this. Rangers get it in PnP and I actually think it really fits them, why do you think it doesn't?

I'd remove this from Druids as well, and keep it for Clerics. Anyways, if it's per PnP, leave it then.

 

(*) I could try something odd, like removing cleric-only spells from the True Ranger, and then re-assign it to cleric/rangers a second later, but it would not be flawless, and I don't know how it would work with dual classed cleric-rangers. That being said, as soon as SRv4 is out all of this would be useless, because all those spells won't be avaliable to druids and rangers anyway, except for Dispel Magic.

There's no need for that. Needles to say, I don't play C/R.

[Kalindor]

Free Action seems to suit the Ranger rather well IMO. The more I think about it, the less I like Rangers being able to cast a Hold Person spell. I suppose a new Hold Animals spell would be too useless to consider. Perhaps if it were level 1 and had a saving throw penalty? Use your discretion, but I vote for no holding people on Rangers.

 

In terms of the Cleric/Ranger, I think your workaround is fine in theory. It only sounds noticeable for people who pause while leveling up, but the current system is also wonky if you do that. Maybe go ahead and give it a try.

[Ardanis]

(*) I could try something odd, like removing cleric-only spells from the True Ranger, and then re-assign it to cleric/rangers a second later, but it would not be flawless, and I don't know how it would work with dual classed cleric-rangers. That being said, as soon as SRv4 is out all of this would be useless, because all those spells won't be avaliable to druids and rangers anyway, except for Dispel Magic.

I wouldn't bother because, as you say, SR will attend to it.

[kreso]

Feedback on ranger

For note, I didn't use Armor of Faith spell.

In BG1, due to how important an effective AC is, I used him as a tank. If someone can

wear full plate and carry a big shield, that's what he'll do.

Stealth is useful from time to time, but in general, ranger is a tanky class and I used him as such.

Two-weapon style is nice, again, I generally used a shield. Those 2 * are a boon, however, since if he isn't focused in combat he can swith to dual-wielding style for more offensive power. It's also useful early for clearing batches of low-level monsters which can't punch through full-plate offered protection.

The fact that later he can cast Barkskin onto himself pretty much puts him in line with Paladins regarding

how defensive they can be, even better sometimes. I didn't particulary like it, but it's very useful.

In BG1, his best spells were Sillelagh, slow poison, Entangle and Barkskin.

I didn't find Tracking to be of much use in BG1. The penalties involved, slow in particular, make it very clumsy and dangerous if stealth check fails.

One thing that makes it somewhat useful is that you can use stealth while in that stance.

It is quite cool tbh, I simply didn't find that much use for it. In BG1, even with Leather, he won't be making stealth checks always and you don't want to be slow moving in front of a bad wizard and archers, especially in leather armor. It will be better with SRv4 I guess.

Not all is bad about this skill - the feeling when using it is exellent. Crawling around, hidden in shadows, marking the target for the kill. It actually makes him quite fun to play, which surprised me since I'm not a big fan of the class.

I'd still improve it somehow (i.e. adding small AC penalties to creatures afffected, giving stealth bonus or something similar. This would make it much more useful in BG1).

I don't know is this a bug or not, but it's only usable 1x/day, unlike Wild Empathy.

His Entangle imunity makes for an interesting tactic in BG1 - cast Entangle, send him in front with his AC tankyness and demolish the opossition with ranged weapons and Fireballs. This spell is really powerful with it's no-save slow feature. This worked even in late SoA. (I had an Archer in party as well)

Wild Empathy - ummm....it's not that this ability is bad, but BG2 just isn't about animals. It's neat, it could be made as a no-save as well, but it wouldn't help much.

Come BG2, I used him as a dual-wielder warrior on frontlines. With high-level barkskin, his AC was exellent and he was very durable. Prot fire/cold was very useful there, being able to refresh such things on-the-fly is exellent.

One thing that bothered me, is that he lacks some defining feature. Spells are ok, but nothing to write home about in BG2 levels.

I don't know just how Quarry will be implemented.

Now, I assume that he really shouldn't tank, yet he excells at that.

In light of this playthrough, I'd really limit them to Medium Armor (yes, I also used to dress Minsc in full-plate, but he is quite a special kind of ranger. Thing is, even with dex penalties, full plate and especially Ankheg armor are too good to pass out on.), medium shields (very little sense to carry Tower shields in wood) and a suggested Hit Dice of 1d8 feels fine - think Ardanis suggested something similar. To somewhat "balance" this, (and assuming that improving his fighting skills isn't gonna cut it) Quarry should be a really good skill, his spellbook won't do it alone for this kit.

If it could be made something like +x to critical hit chance modifier against marked target it would be awesome. If not doable, then -x to resistance/AC should do it (in addition, Know Oponnent could be made slightly different -2AC, THAC0, no save, bypass resistance - if you "know your oponnent" you can "forsee" his attack patterns etc). This Quarry would be quite a powerful ability, and ranger should spend time "marking" the target (1 or 2 rounds I guess). To balace it, maybe add penalties similar to low-level Tracking? Or make it "channelling" - ranger can't take action when tracking the target.

Anyhow, I think the kit has great potential for being both unique/fun and a useful party member when Quarry gets implemented, especially in BG2. Without it, he lacks a defining feature, even tough this is much more noticable in BG2. He's a very useful party member in BG1. I'd put Paladin slightly higher, due to immunities and LoH ability, along with Smite Evil.

 

 

Archer

Bg1 - as expected I guess, even better once Entangle comes online. His greatest asset was that he can quite consistently hit mages under defensive buffs. His biggest weakness is esentially "protection from missiles" spell, which tends to make him useless, since apart from Inquisitor there are no means of dispelling that. Othervise, for as long as he has room to breathe, he kills stuff very fast.

His ranger abilities I never used. Somehow, on an Archer, it's a waste of time. Every round not spent attacking is a round spent in the wrong way - that's his job, dps. Spells are ok, Barkskin/Entangle come to mind as very powerful even later in game.

Once equipped with Long Bow of Marksmanship, his power increased drastically.

Has troubles in certain fights due to confined spaces, but otherwise, if you're careful with positioning (Entangle + Protector of the Second armor help with that) he does his job as intended.

Called shots, with archery gauntlets and Bless, are made at practically no penalty at level 4.

In addition, chance for him missing twice in a round are almost non-existent, therefore starting at level 4 (when CS comes available, even tough it slipped at level 1 also) you can freely use it to ensure no big enemy ever gets either away or close to you.

BG2 - again, I witnessed a huge leap in power (this is probably for IR forum, but anyways) when I equipped him with HeartSeeker. Prot missiles spell is no longer an issue (Breach available. Otoh, is this spell supposed to be so powerful? I mean, the 2 minutes duration usually means the mage will unload his entire spellbook), and this weapon's power is immense. Otherwise, Disarm CS I used on any hard-hitter such as dragons/Tazok and the like, and Trip is exellent vs mages. Overall, I think Trip is usually a better choice. Ther are certain battles which conviniently destroy your positioning, and that's when the full extent of his weakness become apparent, and his limited use as a dps/disable character. A high-level fighter can do the same, and still fight in melee, tank etc. Archer simply can't.

His +ac vs missiles is quite irrelevant, for me at least - if an enemy wields a bow, I immediately target him. It makes him a bit better (Sahaugin+Underdark in particular come to mind) but the bonus is really small.

Overall, I'd rate him lower than a True Fighter in BG2 somehow. Simply, he doesn't scale that good.

As for suggestions....well, he was always a "glass-cannon". I like the idea of keeping him such. However, late in BG2 fighter is simply better with his full plate, adaptability, versitality and combat stances (Offensive stance is very powerful in conjuction with ranged weapons, due to THAC0 bonuses from DEX, weapon and arrows). Now, hopefully Rangers will get 1d8 dice for HP, making Archer even more fragile. How about giving the archer a stance of his own? Slow movement (or none)/extra damage (+2,+4,+6 level scalable or something like that, Increased Criticals, max damage.... basically anything to distinguish himself). As he is, in BG2 he feels like a nerfed fighter with some spells (Stealth is much better in BG1, due to abduance of invisbility sources).

 

P.S.

This I'll need to try out more, but Called Shots saving throw penalty seems really big. I'll try it out some more to see full extent of it's use, but as it is my knowledge now, failing a save is almost certain.

Edited August 10, 2013 by kreso

[Kalindor]

I agree with kreso that, if the Ranger can indeed tank similarly to a Paladin, that this should be ameliorated by removing their heavy armor proficiency, and maybe even their shield proficiency. I would be reticent to touch the d10 HP simply because I think of them as a warrior class. If everyone else is for d8 HP, I will have no complaints. As kreso says, I would really like to see some offensive firepower or serious utility bestowed upon the Ranger if you are going to nerf both armor and HP simultaneously.

 

I regret that my research is preventing me from devoting too much time to testing this mod at the moment. I will try a party of a True Fighter, True Ranger, and True Paladin in the Black Pits component of BG:EE this evening and report the results to you.

 

 

*Preliminary testing results: Tracking is cool and gives the Ranger a bit of a niche. I think it could stand to improve later on, either through increased chance of detection or reduction in movement penalties. A+ on this stance.

 

The Ranger's automatic two points in two-weapon fighting style actually allow you to have the leisure of specializing in a ranged weapon at level 1. Normally fighters are tempted to invest two stars in a melee weapon and two in a fighting style, but the ranger is more free to also choose a ranged weapon. If only you didn't have to go to the inventory to unequip your off-hand weapon before switching to a ranged weapon...

 

Wild Empathy has an unfavorable combination of being too conditional and too weak. I would either make it less conditional (improves to affect monstrous/magical beasts as well) or make it more powerful (-2 save penalty, improving to no save at all at high levels). Animals are not a large percentage of opponents, especially threatening animals worth charming. It does happen sometimes in BG1 with bears, but in BG2 it is not often useful.

 

Choosing heavy armor over stealth is a no-brainer early on. I would either: a) restrict Rangers armor proficiency, or b) make stealth more useful. When I say "make stealth more useful," I am not referring to increasing the chance of entering stealth mode, but rather making stealth mode open up more options for the Ranger than what it currently does. Right now it's only helpful for scouting around, and scouting around is not mandatory by any means. I'm not certain that there is anything within your power to make it more interesting, sadly. Right now there is almost no reason to forgo heavy armor in favor of stealth. Honestly, even without heavy armor I am not sure how often I'd use stealth on a ranger.

 

Woodland Stride is very nice in combination with Entangle. It would be extra nice if there were other situations where it was useful. Perhaps some new higher-level terrain modifying spells for the Druid and Ranger are in order? The existence of spells that create poisoned brambles or quicksand would make Woodland Stride greatly appealing.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Kalindor

[kreso]

If only you didn't have to go to the inventory to unequip your off-hand weapon before switching to a ranged weapon...

This. IWD2 may have been quite crappy with it's limited gameplay and predictability, but both combat system and especially UI were much better than BG2.

 

Choosing heavy armor over stealth is a no-brainer early on. I would .... make stealth more useful. When I say "make stealth more useful," I am not referring to increasing the chance of entering stealth mode, but rather making stealth mode open up more options for the Ranger than what it currently does.

And this.

However, and unfortunately, stealth is very limited in terms of what you can do while at it. I was even thinking that it might not be a bad idea to give them a x2 backstab later on as a "permanent" feature, just to make stealth appealing. However, this makes it none better for BG1, assuming that if they got it there they'd be as Stalkers.

[James]

Seeing as i am making a nuisance of myself in the kit revisions forum, it occurred to me as I was limping back to the FAI from Cloakwood that a Ranger ability to have the option to avoid random encounters would be quite handy.

 

Probably can't be done but thought I would share anyway

[kreso]

Lol. I guess you played Fallout . It would indeed be cool, but I don't think it can be done.

[James]

Actually I think i nicked the idea from TOEE :-)

[Demivrgvs]

Seeing as i am making a nuisance of myself in the kit revisions forum, it occurred to me as I was limping back to the FAI from Cloakwood that a Ranger ability to have the option to avoid random encounters would be quite handy.

 

Probably can't be done but thought I would share anyway

Actually something like that could be done imo, but not within KR. An eventual Quest Revisions (I think that would be Arda's favourite Revision project) could check via scripts if the party has a ranger PC and react accordingly (e.g the supposed ambushers could not be prebuffed if a Ranger is detected), but I fear things like this are just dreams.