Jump to content

Kit Revisions (Rangers)


Recommended Posts

I think that Rangers should not be allowed both dual and multi class with other classes like paladin.

 

Actually, Rangers are only able to choice Cleric by dual/multi class, but it's quite unbalanced because Ranger/Cleric multi class can use all of Druid's spells.

And that kind of restriction is to me, stupid ... cause we can make the possible unbalanced effect go away, without the need to actually change much, yes, when you make the spells, you can restrict them based on the alignment the caster is going to have... the the base druids having only one kind, you can easily restrict the true druid specific spells to just base druids... this also allows great modification ability... if a druid kit doesn't wish to have the unbalanced spells for the ranger build, then they set the alignment restriction to exclude the True Neutral, or whatever, based on what we set them with...
Link to post
What about allowing halflings access to the archer kit with the use of slings only. I don't know if there are hard coded limitations but halflings have always seemed to be inately tuned into nature. The ranger kit seems to be a natural fit. Halflings also have a natural talent with slings.
"It's not doable". I mean, having a class with different proficiencies depending on character's race. The only way to do this it to allow any Archer to reach grandmastery in slings, but I don't like it much, I'd prefer to have a separate Slinger class, though adding new kits isn't in my plans.

 

It always puzzled me why Mazzy used a bow instead of a sling. :)
I agree with you, a sling could have been more appropriate, though less paladin-like for some reason.

 

 

I think that Rangers should not be allowed both dual and multi class with other classes like paladin.

 

Actually, Rangers are only able to choice Cleric by dual/multi class, but it's quite unbalanced because Ranger/Cleric multi class can use all of Druid's spells.

And that kind of restriction is to me, stupid ... cause we can make the possible unbalanced effect go away, without the need to actually change much, yes, when you make the spells, you can restrict them based on the alignment the caster is going to have... the the base druids having only one kind, you can easily restrict the true druid specific spells to just base druids... this also allows great modification ability... if a druid kit doesn't wish to have the unbalanced spells for the ranger build, then they set the alignment restriction to exclude the True Neutral, or whatever, based on what we set them with...
Since when we can restrict spells to "true neutrals"? There's an "evil-only" and a "good-only" flag, but there's no "neutral-only" flag afaik. Ranger/cleric is indeed a broken class, but the only way I know of to fix it would involve drastical changes to the spell system to make it work a la Divine Remix.

 

Conceptually I agree with leania that multi or dual rangers generally don't make much sense. Rangers are a sort of fighter-druid, while I don't see how the life of a ranger can be mixed with the one of a cleric (an urban ranger with church duties?). That being said, the ranger/cleric is there and I don't plan to remove it (is it even possible to remove it?).

Link to post
Since when we can restrict spells to "true neutrals"? There's an "evil-only" and a "good-only" flag, but there's no "neutral-only" flag afaik.
What ? If you set this to a .spl file:
COPY ~spprxxx.spl~ ~override~ //custom clerical spells spell file
WRITE_BYTE ~0x001e~ ~0b0010111~

Since from here:

bit 0: Exclude Chaotic priests. (BG2 & HoW)

bit 1: Exclude Evil priests. (BG2 & HoW)

bit 2: Exclude Good priests. (BG2 & HoW)

bit 3: Exclude GENeutral priests. (BG2 & HoW)

bit 4: Exclude Lawful priests. (BG2 & HoW)

bit 5: Exclude LCNeutral priests. (BG2 & HoW)

bit 6: Exclude Abjurers

bit 7: Exclude Conjurers

...

You get a True Neutral. The "Good only" is actual a combo of Evil and GENeutral(which is actually the Good-Evil scales Neutral)...
WRITE_BYTE ~0x001e~ ~0b00001100~

Edited by Jarno Mikkola
Link to post

Ohh, very interesting Jarno. I should have investigated it more but it's good you did, and if you're right that could be an easy way to finally fix that lame ranger/cleric class. The only downside is that it would interfere with tweaks which allow druids to be neutral good/evil, which I think are relatively common (and they even make sense imo).

Link to post
The "Good only" is actual a combo of Evil and GENeutral(which is actually the Good-Evil scales Neutral)...
WRITE_BYTE ~0x001e~ ~0b00001100~

Well, now I cannot edit the above post, and I see I made a mistake... so the "Good only" is actually:
WRITE_BYTE ~0x001e~ ~0b00001010~

While the "Evil only" is:

WRITE_BYTE ~0x001e~ ~0b00001100~

Hopefully this time it's correct... But anyways.

 

The only downside is that it would interfere with tweaks which allow druids to be neutral good/evil, which I think are relatively common (and they even make sense imo).
But those tweaked druids aren't really real base druids... and thus they could actually gain different bonus spells... say you have a Neutral Evil druid... and they gain spells like: Summon Twisted Treant, Natures Wrath, Predator Instinct...
Link to post

Alter the CLAB files of all Rangers so that, upon each Level Up, they get Remove Spell [all Druid-only spells above Level 3], with a 1-second delay. (The game will automatically try to put them back the next time they gain a level, which is why you have to do it every time.) Pureclassed Rangers/kits will be unaffected, except for a barely-noticable delay after each Level Up as the game deletes all the spells that you don't have.

 

Cheesy players could still Pause, then Level Up, then memorize the Druid-only spells into slots before the 1-second delay kicks in, but hey, if they're willing to knowingly abuse the engine, who are we to stop them.

Link to post
Alter the CLAB files of all Rangers so that, upon each Level Up, they get Remove Spell [all Druid-only spells above Level 3], with a 1-second delay. (The game will automatically try to put them back the next time they gain a level, which is why you have to do it every time.) Pureclassed Rangers/kits will be unaffected, except for a barely-noticable delay after each Level Up as the game deletes all the spells that you don't have.
As said, there is no need to do that... and how are you going to handle every ranger kit ? The original Ranger Kits are easy, but the mod kits aren't... and there's mods that add the 4th and 5th spell levels to Rangers...

This is one of the failures that mods like the Divine Remix fails in... as it kinda makes the whole system a Total Conversion, and in my opinion that's what we should avoid.

Edited by Jarno Mikkola
Link to post
how are you going to handle every ranger kit ? The original Ranger Kits are easy, but the mod kits aren't... and there's mods that add the 4th and 5th spell levels to Rangers...

Mod kits aren't KR's responsibility, we have no business meddling with another modder's work. With that said, I'm a bit dismayed to learn that there are mods that grant Rangers access to higher-level spells--because, as far as I know, the only way to do that involves granting that access to ALL Rangers, including kits and NPCs added by mods, which I've been deliberately avoiding because it violates the "don't meddle with other mods" rule.

Link to post

I suggest a simple idea for True Ranger though I don't know whether it can be implemented or not.

 

Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting:

It allows True Ranger to gain a whole attack per round bonus to off-hand as main-hand.

 

That is, True Ranger has 4 attacks per round when he/she uses Two-Weapon Fighting style, but it's different from general situation because the Ranger's is combined 2 apr of main-hand (Ranger gains additional 1 apr at 13th level, you know) with 2apr of off-hand, not 3 apr of main-hand with 1 apr of off-hand.

 

I'm not sure whether it should be HLA or normal ability which can get higher level.

 

Maybe this is implemented in NWN2 for Rangers...

 

This and Ranger's stealth ability with midium armor make True Ranger to be unique since the other Rangers can't wear midium armor (though Beast Master can wear heavier armor than lether partially).

Edited by leania
Link to post

Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting:

It allows True Ranger to gain a whole attack per round bonus to off-hand as main-hand.

 

That is, True Ranger has 4 attacks per round when he/she uses Two-Weapon Fighting style, but it's different from general situation because the Ranger's is combined 2 apr of main-hand (Ranger gains additional 1 apr at 13th level, you know) with 2apr of off-hand, not 3 apr of main-hand with 1 apr of off-hand.

This is not doable, but I tried to suggest doing the most similar thing we can do within engine restrictions. Quoting myself from this very topic: "What about a feature which improves his fighting skills and works slightly better while dualwielding? I'm talking about a sort of flurry of blows/cleave ability, a +x% chance on a successful melee hit to gain a +1/2 apr on the following round."

 

 

Ranger's allowed armors

This and Ranger's stealth ability with midium armor make True Ranger to be unique since the other Rangers can't wear midium armor (though Beast Master can wear heavier armor than lether partially).
Actually I'm not sure we reached a consensus about restricting rangers to medium armors, though I'd clearly vote for it.

 

I'm instead pretty sure about Beast Master's usability: they should be able to wear any armor a druid can use (e.g. a medium armor like Ashen Scale or a heavy one like an Ankheg Plate Mail).

Edited by Demivrgvs
Link to post

RE: Rangers and armour restrictions, I would still grant true rangers access to heavy armours, I'm all for versatitlity in unkitted classes. Oh and otherwise Minc's classic line "Full Plate and packing steel!" would make zero sense.

Link to post
RE: Rangers and armour restrictions, I would still grant true rangers access to heavy armours, I'm all for versatitlity in unkitted classes. Oh and otherwise Minc's classic line "Full Plate and packing steel!" would make zero sense.
Well, I could as easily say that the entire "Minsc is a ranger" thing makes zero sense considering his background (he's a rashemi following his witch in the dajemma), his stats (a ranger with no wisdom and thus unable to cast spells?!?) and attitude (Minsc going stealth and scouting the area with circumspection?!? :) ). Minsc should have been either a barbarian or a berserker, especially considering the well established lore of FR. Edited by Demivrgvs
Link to post

I agree Minsc would have been a barbarian had the class been available in BG1. But as it wasn't, the designers went with the closest fit, and the character was developed accordingly. He still has many ranger-esque qualities, not least of all his affinity with animals. Ability to cast spells however is something I do find ridiculous... hmm, would it be too presumptuous of KR to deny spellcasting to Minsc?

Link to post
Well, I could as easily say that the entire "Minsc is a ranger" thing makes zero sense considering his background (he's a rashemi following his witch in the dajemma), his stats (a ranger with no wisdom and thus unable to cast spells?!?) and attitude (Minsc going stealth and scouting the area with circumspection?!? :) ). Minsc should have been either a barbarian or a berserker, especially considering the well established lore of FR.
There's already a mod that gives Minsc those classes, the NPC kitpack here at G3, but I think the Ranger class is perfect for Minsc as is.

There's the hamster, and the "Full Plate" speach and rage that goes that really suit the less than the sharpest tool in the box -ranger, that Minsc surely is.

 

hmm, would it be too presumptuous of KR to deny spellcasting to Minsc?
Presumptious, yes, if you go and deny his rage ability, stealth ability or the charm animal. Other than that, Minsc is unable to cast spells in the regular game, so there is no issues.

 

But this is a Kit Revision mod, why aren't we talking about the KITS, but the class ?

Edited by Jarno Mikkola
Link to post
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.

×
×
  • Create New...