Post/Author/DateTime	Post
echoota 05-24-06, 10:11 AM	For those experienced with the campaign, what would be the best creature type to pick for the ranger's favored enemy? I'd like to pick something that will see some use. I imagine most of my games will be coming from out of the region of Bissel, or the Bright Sands core moduels.
Arvagor 05-24-06, 10:24 AM	IMO, you can never go wrong with "Humanoid (human)"... :) It's what my Asherati ranger has as his 1st level choice; his 5th level choice will likely be "Monstrous humanoid"
kenobi65 05-24-06, 10:29 AM	This is probably a really good question to pose to your fellow Bissel players on your region's Yahoo group; they're the ones who will be most familiar with the particular threats in your region.
paigeoliver 05-24-06, 10:55 AM	Don't pick "animal". I have animal and man do I go a long time inbetween encountering them. After not encountering a single one for 3 levels I finally chased down an enemy ranger's fleeing animal companion and did it in. Human seems to be what most people pick. My ranger (a halfling) likes humans, so I picked animal because the idea of giant bears seemed frightening to her (an in character choice).
redgamer 05-24-06, 12:01 PM	Had you asked this question last year the clear winner would have been undead. Now that Evard is dead there won't be any undead in Bissel. If you beleive that I have some prime real estate in Hool Swamp to sell you. That said its unclear what will be the most common enemy in the future. Human is always a good choice but I find most PCs have a trick that is especially good at dealing with medium sized opponents so this is redundant in party makeup. Evil outsiders are common at high levels and IMO more deadly than typical humans. Giant covers a wide array of what should be but haven't been common enemies outside of geoff and cores. Pick something your character wants to be good at killing. This can be some race you like as you want to weed the bad apple out who discrace that races fame.
zoinks69 05-24-06, 12:22 PM	Outsider: Evil seems like a popular choice (actually this saved a group I was DM'ing as the 2 points was enough to knock down the bad guy just before he let loose (after having been Glitterdusted for the combat)). Magical beast might be decent. Construct is a solid choice (as this is a Ranger's biggest problem). Depends how many Favored enemy bonuses you will be getting (i.e. how many levels of Ranger you will take).
hynter 05-24-06, 01:57 PM	IMO, you can never go wrong with "Humanoid (human)"... :) It's what my Asherati ranger has as his 1st level choice; his 5th level choice will likely be "Monstrous humanoid" Hey would you look at that, I've got an Asherati Ranger who took Human as his first favored enemy too. Rary the Traitor is human, after all..
Arvagor 05-24-06, 02:31 PM	Hey would you look at that, I've got an Asherati Ranger who took Human as his first favored enemy too. Rary the Traitor is human, after all..As are the majority of his troops despoiling our homelands! ;)
Howie23 05-24-06, 03:37 PM	For those experienced with the campaign, what would be the best creature type to pick for the ranger's favored enemy? I'd like to pick something that will see some use. I imagine most of my games will be coming from out of the region of Bissel, or the Bright Sands core moduels. You've received several posts recommending Human. This isn't so much directed at you, as you're in Bissel, but PC races as favored enemies are frowned on by some members of the Nyrond Triad, with possible in-game consequences. David
Swiftbrook 05-24-06, 03:39 PM	IMO, you can never go wrong with "Humanoid (human)"... :) Yes you can. I did. Between 1st level and 5th level I confronted three, yes just three humans. The first one I forgot about my bonus as well :( . At 5th Level I chose Undead though Evil Outsider is a good choice as well. Actually, from my adventures, it may have be a better choice. -Swiftbrook
Lomiat 05-24-06, 04:02 PM	I'd recommend Undead and Evil Outsider. A number of other people keep talking about Ranger archers who take Elemental as their favored enemy, but when the Elementals at APL 8+ start getting DR 10/- and DR 15/-, the extra 4 points of damage is still hardly going to scratch them. Most of your damage against Elementals will come: a) from elemental/other enhancements to your bow, b) from other players in the party. Undead are probably the most common enemy in LG. Until you get to higher APLs. Then they seem to balance with Evil Outsider. NPCs (human) are common, too, but as someone else mentioned, other people do plenty to medium humanoids; creating an archer to take out humanoids proves redundant.
Arvagor 05-24-06, 05:07 PM	You've received several posts recommending Human. This isn't so much directed at you, as you're in Bissel, but PC races as favored enemies are frowned on by some members of the Nyrond Triad, with possible in-game consequences.Which means, IMO, they are mistakenly equating "favored enemy" with "someone I hate with every fiber of my being". Favored enemy means nothing more nor nothing less than, "I know the ins and outs of this type of creature; I know their habits, they way they move, and the way they think." I'm not sure why that should result in penalizing a player, simply because they know how to hunt a creature type that happens to overlap with a PC race. Do they penalize players who took "Humanoid (Dwarf)", even though the PC is from a land that has a great deal of conflict with duergar? Do they penalize players who took "Humanoid (Elf)", even though the PC is from a land that has a great deal of conflict with drow?
Greyson 05-24-06, 08:07 PM	I would go with Favored Enemy: Humanoid (human), too. Sure, triads may complain and threaten "in game" consequences. But, in these heady days of v.3.5 it is a legitimate character choice. The debate has been raised on the Nyrond Yahoo! Group with invective argument for both schools of thought. I stay out of the debate. Play your character they way you want - within the rules - which allow Favored Enemy: Humanoid (human), fortunately. Favored Enemy: Undead would be my second choice.
Cynric 05-24-06, 08:14 PM	Ok, my experience is limited to perrenland, but I would agree with the earlier post about evil outsiders as a favoured enemy. They just seem to be everywhere at high level, plus I have found them at a dew low to mid level mods as well.
Jay_Ibero_911 05-24-06, 08:56 PM	Well I picked Vermin for my bright sands character's FE, but only cause he will only get one FE and teh bonus is so small I chose it for flavor. And I got to make use of it in the first mod I played with him, so I'm satisfied...
JamesMaissen 05-25-06, 01:12 AM	First it depends if you will be getting a substantial bonus from it or not. If you are just dipping ranger then perhaps it's not the damage but the circumstance bonuses that can matter. A number of other people keep talking about Ranger archers who take Elemental as their favored enemy, but when the Elementals at APL 8+ start getting DR 10/- and DR 15/-, the extra 4 points of damage is still hardly going to scratch them. Most of your damage against Elementals will come: a) from elemental/other enhancements to your bow, b) from other players in the party. I admit I do tend to like the idea of a ranger archer with improved favored enemy and a resulting +7 vs elementals. Most Elementals you will find will have DR 5/- or 10/- and that shuts down alot of archers while a +7 to dam vs elementals pretty much makes them just like anything else. But then I like the idea of consistant damage and think of ranger favored enemy as more of a crap shoot. As an archer you bring damage to the table, anything that shuts that down needs to be addressed in one way or another. If your region/MR tends to favor an enemy as Bissel did undead, Geoff giants, or IUZ demons then you have an easy and solid choice there. Likewise going for the bane enhancement can simply ramp up damage a category as doing another 45pts or so a round will tend to do. -James
solbergb 05-25-06, 01:53 PM	Don't pick "animal". I have animal and man do I go a long time inbetween encountering them. After not encountering a single one for 3 levels I finally chased down an enemy ranger's fleeing animal companion and did it in. Oh I dunno. I chose animal as a roleplay thing (my archer was a hunter before he was an adventurer). It's been useful in forests, jungles, when fighting druids/rangers and when fighting mounted opponents. Quite often folks you are tracking have mounts too, or a dog or something that gives you that +2 to your roll. All mounts you can purchase, regardless of race, are animals. I get the bonus maybe one fight in 10, which isn't amazingly good, but it comes up a lot more often than, say, Goblinoid. It's similar to taking favored enemy Orc.
solbergb 05-25-06, 01:57 PM	You've received several posts recommending Human. This isn't so much directed at you, as you're in Bissel, but PC races as favored enemies are frowned on by some members of the Nyrond Triad, with possible in-game consequences. David Uh....and this is enforced incharacter how? Your favored enemy isn't stamped on your forehead. How could anyone possibly know what your favored enemy is, to cause "ingame consequences." It's an invisible game mechanic - indistinguishable from weapon spec, sneak attack or just rolling "lucky". It has no mystic traces and it isn't even clear that rangers themselves think of it the same way players do. Seriously, a judge who tried to rule this way with most players in my area would be laughed at. The whole idea wouldn't even be taken seriously. Ingame consequences for religious symbols, for casting a particular spell, etc, that's fine. But ingame consequences for favored enemy choice is like penalizing someone for specializing necromancy and forbidding abjuration - you can't possibly know that they did that in their build ingame, except possiby by the use of some spell like brain probe and even then it is debatable. I think perhaps the Nyrond triad needs to get over 3.0, and accept that in 3.5 favored enemy just means you know more about how to hurt someone, not that you stalk and kill them for money like an Assassin. Quite honestly, to me it makes more sense that you'd know how to interact with and damage your own race best than anything else.
Swiftbrook 05-25-06, 04:14 PM	Uh....and this is enforced incharacter how? Your favored enemy isn't stamped on your forehead. How could anyone possibly know what your favored enemy is, to cause "ingame consequences." It's an invisible game mechanic - indistinguishable from weapon spec, sneak attack or just rolling "lucky". It has no mystic traces and it isn't even clear that rangers themselves think of it the same way players do. I clearly state to the DM what my favored enemies are. In most of the games I've played the DM doesn't come out and say, "you're fighting such-n-such". In one encounter my favored enemy ability changed the entire combat. If the DM doesn't know your favored enemy is "humans" and you don't tell him, you could easily be surprised, or lose extra damage. -Swiftbrook
Mommy was an Orc 05-25-06, 05:19 PM	I clearly state to the DM what my favored enemies are. In most of the games I've played the DM doesn't come out and say, "you're fighting such-n-such". In one encounter my favored enemy ability changed the entire combat. If the DM doesn't know your favored enemy is "humans" and you don't tell him, you could easily be surprised, or lose extra damage. That's not the issue - just because the DM knows your favored enemy is human doesn't mean an NPC does. There's no way for 99.9% of NPCs to know this unless you advertise it some fashion. Furthermore, there's no odd flavor text behavior on the part of a 3.5 Ranger - just because humans are a particular Ranger's favored enemy, doesn't mean he hates them... If I play a Sheriff of a mostly human town that has problems with human bandits, and I decide to be a a Ranger, who am I logically going to pick for a Favored Enemy? Also, if anything, your favored enemy is less suspicious of you than other races - you get bonuses to bluff and sense motive due to your expertise...
clik_ml 05-25-06, 05:55 PM	I once made the mistake of making a ranger with shapechangers as his favored enemy (he was paranoid that every humanoid was a lycanthrope). If you can't make your DM remember that that is your favored enemy then you are gonna miss out on extra damage a lot. It's totally not worth it having to remind the DM through every fight.
Howie23 05-25-06, 08:01 PM	Uh....and this is enforced incharacter how? Your favored enemy isn't stamped on your forehead. How could anyone possibly know what your favored enemy is, to cause "ingame consequences." It's an invisible game mechanic - indistinguishable from weapon spec, sneak attack or just rolling "lucky". It has no mystic traces and it isn't even clear that rangers themselves think of it the same way players do. Brad, I'm not defending it, I'm just reporting it. Had I known about it, I wouldn't have chosen it...the conflict isn't worth it. So, I'm passing it on so that anyone else who makes the choice does so knowingly. I've played by ranger w/favored enemy human at a table judged by the Triad member in question. I didn't deal with humans the entire time, so I don't know how it might come up. I've gotten the sense that I should expect it in NPC interactions (either written into the mod or judge's interpretation?), possibly regarding things like royal meta-org membership, etc., all of which is purely speculative on my part. His view is that NPCs are effectively reacting a la a Sense Motive to seething hostility. In other words, he interprets it as something other than a just a game mechanic, and more in line with an observable condition. All of that is my interpretation; see the Nyrond board for his own words on it. Again, I don't promote it or defend it. [/QUOTE] David
Mommy was an Orc 05-25-06, 08:23 PM	His view is that NPCs are effectively reacting a la a Sense Motive to seething hostility. In other words, he interprets it as something other than a just a game mechanic, and more in line with an observable condition. All of that is my interpretation; see the Nyrond board for his own words on it. Which flat out makes no sense - a Ranger is better at hiding his true intent from his favored enemy via the game mechanic of having a +2 to his Bluff. Seriously, if I were in Nyrond, I'd make up that human lawman character who had to deal with human bandits, just to watch the reaction of every DM at being told my perfectly reasonable background meant I must have some deep hatred against humans.
solbergb 05-26-06, 02:47 AM	<rant, long - not on Nyrond board cause I'm not a nyrond resident> The way to improve this sort of behavior is to not put up with it. Don't let this guy trade on his Triad status to bully the region's judges into doing something that patently makes no sense and serves only to penalize perfectly reasonable character concepts. There's a reason there are 3 triads, and even they can't keep judges from running an honest game, even if they're all idiots. Pretty soon only that one prejudiced judge will behave that way, as all the other judges in the region will treat you fairly. Gentle teasing seems to work better than anger. As does rock solid support of your position from the rest of the table. I firmly believe that one reason you see less "autosurprise" now is that there was a groundswell of resistance, players that just refused to be bullied by boxtext anymore. This filtered up through judges who didn't run that way anymore to editors and authors who bend over backwards now to specify the conditions of each encounter, specify that the NPC plan is NOT hardwired into the mod but merely what happens in the absence of PC actions...sometimes even explaining how the spot+distance rules work and reminding them to use the statblock hide/move silent entries. Arbitrary rulings by triad that have no possible rules support should just be ignored by everyone but those forced to play at their table. The triad may be a strong contributor to the campaign in every other sense (indeed, we have an ex triad who is known for his strong opinions on many aspects of D&D, but he's a good guy and laughs about his own behavior sometimes...but you do get some odd rulings at his tables sometimes and just go with it) but memes like this should be stomped on and killed off before they spread. Repeat after me. Just because a higly placed campaign volunteer plays it that way doesn't mean it is right. Nobody can make houserules that override the core rules in clear cases and Judge's discretion in grey cases except the Circle, and they can only do it via Dispel Confusion and LGCS. We should tolerate it only so much as is necessary to enjoy the table you're at. We should not spread bad behavior or accept it away from the table. <end rant...this is after all a fairly minor and innocuous thing if it only happens at one table. If it squelches character builds though, by intimidating the judge pool via your triad hat...that's a bad precedent and bad for the game.>
clik_ml 05-26-06, 03:14 AM	Which flat out makes no sense - a Ranger is better at hiding his true intent from his favored enemy via the game mechanic of having a +2 to his Bluff. While there are many good arguments which show that 3.5 rangers should never be penalized for their favored enemy bonus, this isn't one of them. Their premise is that rangers hate their favored enemies. Everyone else at the table doesn't hate humans (as far as the judges know), so if the NPCs sense motive successfully on them, they read just fine, unlike Nyrond rangers. While a ranger is "better" at hiding his true intent from his favored enemy as opposed to a non-ranger who also hates said favored enemy, that matters not one whit. The argument that rangers aren't seething with hatred for their favored enemies because rangers are better at hiding their hatred is a non sequitur. The Nyrond triad premise is that rangers with favored enemy of humans for some reason hate humans. That premise is total bunk held over from 3rd edition mind you, but if it were true, then rangers, while better (by a measley +2) at hiding their hatred from other humans, actually do have something to hide. Tis best to simply attack their faulty premise.
Mommy was an Orc 05-26-06, 09:13 AM	While there are many good arguments which show that 3.5 rangers should never be penalized for their favored enemy bonus, this isn't one of them. While a ranger is "better" at hiding his true intent from his favored enemy as opposed to a non-ranger who also hates said favored enemy, that matters not one whit. The argument that rangers aren't seething with hatred for their favored enemies because rangers are better at hiding their hatred is a non sequitur. I'm not talking about hiding hatred. Rangers have a game mechanic which makes it harder for a favored enemy to Sense Motive them. Something which makes no sense if all the favored enemies automatically(or even on a roll) get to detect hatred and therefore severely penalize the Ranger's bluff check. It is giving the NPC two chances to defeat a skill roll.
Howie23 05-26-06, 03:13 PM	The way to improve this sort of behavior is to not put up with it. Pretty soon only that one prejudiced judge will behave that way, as all the other judges in the region will treat you fairly. We should tolerate it only so much as is necessary to enjoy the table you're at. We should not spread bad behavior or accept it away from the table. <heavily snipped > We all choose our battles. You protest it in your way (by soliciting a form of civil disobediance per the prior post), I protest it my way (by distributing the information so that others make their opinion known.) FWIW, I have never run into a circumstance at any table in Nyrond where any judge put this into practice. I have never run into a circumstance where it was written into a NYR mod. (In a way, it is written into an NMR mod). I brought this up because I relied upon advice that favored enemy human was a good choice, but was given partial information. If you see this as acquiesing or tacitly approving of it by failing to repeatedly protest, we'll have to disagree on this point. David
ithardin 05-31-06, 04:39 PM	Well if you live in Dyvers it never hurts to take halfling...since they are the root of ALL evil in the free city :) Think of it this way, if you have only fought against other humans who were trying to usurp your tribe, city, land, kingdom, etc they why would you take any other favored enemy then humans? I mean, seriously-how much contact can a 1st level ranger have with evil outsiders or undead? I know, I know...its a mechanics choice for use later in the campaign. But I think the new rules kind of account for that don't they? If a judge has a problem with your favored enemy choice, even though you have plausible in-game reasoning (human bandits killed my family, etc and I have hunted them ever since, etc) then that judge is being a dink. Especially when there are more legit reasons to have problems with players :) Look at where you live and what you think you may have faced and will face in the future. Check the ongoing regional, meta-regional, and core storylines and go from there. Above all have fun.
hynter 06-05-06, 09:57 PM	It's a shame Human didn't get a Monster Manual entry. If it did, it would probably read: Alignment: Any Humans are evil just as often as they are good.
trollbill 06-06-06, 12:30 PM	Human is the best power gaming choice. Outside of that, Undead is second. Undead are fairly common and hard to get bonuses against otherwise. Constructs, plants, oozes and elementals are similar, but not nearly as common.