Post/Author/DateTime	Post
mickshrimpton 05-03-04, 09:00 PM	I like the defense option in UA, but I'm a bit puzzled that Druids have a better rating than Rangers. Is this a mistake? I would think that, being a more "martial" class, Rangers would have a better defense progression than Druids. Is this just done for game balance or is there a logic behind it? Just curious.
Jack Daniel 05-04-04, 01:11 AM	Well I wouldn't say logic per se, but for some dopey reason, 3.5 rangers and bards lost their medium armor proficiency, and so UA gives them the "light armor" defense bonous. Druids, on the other hand, can use hide armor, so they get the "medium armor" defense bonus.
Lady Ishtar 05-04-04, 02:31 AM	i dont know about bards, but rangers cant, and never could, use their combat styles (ambidex & TWF in 3.0) and evasion when wearing medium and heavy armors, so now they they are not proficient in something they dont use.
Jack Daniel 05-04-04, 09:59 AM	Let's say for a moment that I want to play a greatsword-wielding ranger. Which combat style am I using, archery or two-weapon fighting? :rolleyes:
Lady Ishtar 05-04-04, 10:22 AM	Originally posted by Jack Daniel Let's say for a moment that I want to play a greatsword-wielding ranger. Which combat style am I using, archery or two-weapon fighting? :rolleyes: i think in this case you are using the Getting-the-Shaft combat style ;)
DungeonMaster 05-04-04, 08:10 PM	Lady ishtar, the loss of that armor proficiency is tangible. First of all mithral armor is considered one category lighter, so mithral breastplate is a real option as is mithral full plate. Likewise being an archer at low levels without decent armor is close to suicide. And besides, to the original poster, rangers are not a martial class in 3.5. And the 3.5 druid must in all ways own the ranger by design and intent.
mickshrimpton 05-04-04, 10:44 PM	Originally posted by DungeonMaster And besides, to the original poster, rangers are not a martial class in 3.5. And the 3.5 druid must in all ways own the ranger by design and intent. With respect, I disagree that the Ranger is not a martial class. I consider them to be one in that their BAB is equal to that of the other fighting classes. The Druid does not have the Ranger's combat skills, so I'm puzzled as to why their defense rating would be better. I'm not sure I understand your last sentence.
Lady Ishtar 05-04-04, 11:02 PM	keep in mind that chain shirt is almost as good as breastplate, and you can afford it at first level. and the idea for the ranger is to be lightly armored wilderness warrior, so light armor/no movement penalty. in my experience as a player and dm, lack of medium armor has never been a problem. but for you it might have been different.
Lina_Inverse 05-05-04, 01:53 AM	Originally posted by mickshrimpton The Druid does not have the Ranger's combat skills. correct he has better,as the druid is the unquestionable best combantent in the game. then is cleric then rogue then barbarian and monk then paladin then ranger then fighter