Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Shano1919 03-17-05, 10:41 PM	I was just wondering about some tips on how to be a bettter ranger...so far im not doing that good. I'm playing completly out of character and was wondering if anyone could help? P.S. the books didn't help much...
Shurijo 03-17-05, 10:46 PM	Here's a couple links that I have bookmarked for Rangers (my fav class too) Character Class: Rangers with class (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20050210a) (WotC) Roleplaying a scout (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=368699) (WotC forum message) Also a ranger needs love from the DM. If your party only stays in dungeons, then the ranger won't get to use a lot of their skills. You also need to talk with the DM, try to get the DM to tell you about where you are heading and going before the game begins (or when you take a break in the game), so that your character can rp the surroundings like describing the terrrain, plants, weather, etc. I think you need to act like a scout and outdoorsman and focus on animals, plants, scouting. Being a ranger (and having fun) requires a really good DM, too. If your DM doesn't give you any help, then you will have an extremely hard time being a ranger. (You might have better luck with fighter/rogue combo, if you are always in dungeons/cities, etc.)
PurdueDave 03-18-05, 01:19 PM	Rangers are pretty fun. You get a lot of skill points and good class skills. From experience, I've always felt more comfortable with the archer path. I find it a lot more difficult making a ranger that can survive toe-to-toe all the time.
Myst_the_Moonscout 03-18-05, 02:20 PM	What edition are you playing? I find I quite like the 3.5 but the rangers in 2e and 3e are better suited for combat. Rangers are good skill oriented characters and are easily customizable. It helps to use that when deciding how to role play one. I have gone for the stealth/archer combo, maxing out move silently and hide skills and it fits well with my character as the (relatively) quiet member of the party. There's nothing that says rangers must be woodsy. Both my rangers characters have forgone animal oriented skills, one in favour of diplomacy and charisma skills (she's half bard) and the other in favour of healing (we have a very martial cleric who isn't always conscious).
Shano1919 03-18-05, 02:38 PM	I fight more then the cleric in my party...is that good or bad? thaanx alot Shurijo for the links i bookmarked them. I make my ranger go in to the battle more than shooting because all the other characters in my party are..scared...they all follow me when i go in though. my ranger has the two handed combat style. i cant imagine being another character, this guy is my fav out of the few I've made. But i think im gonna keep my ranger woodsy Myst. P.S. im from bc to myst
Myst_the_Moonscout 03-18-05, 03:04 PM	I don't think it matters how much you fight, that's up to the character in question. Sound like your the leader type. Nothing wrong with that. Is there anyting specific that you weren't sure about when roleplaying?
Shano1919 03-18-05, 08:27 PM	Well we had a dispute when i started going about being a leader like you said, he said it was very out of character and he got a lil mad. so i let him take over but our characters still quarel. gives it a bit of a story. P.S. *he * is our paladin
trapspringer 03-18-05, 09:19 PM	'He' is a jack ass. Your a clearly playing with a new group. That is cool. Here are a few points: 1. You are not a ranger, you are playing a ranger (minor wording thing). 2. You are not playing OOC by leading the group as a ranger, because some rangers are leaders, just like some fighters and some wizards.There is no law stating that paladins lead. 3. Until you establish who your character is, you can't actually play out of character. Your alignment is the biggest guide, but even then it should actually be a measure of your actions, not a dictation. I think most new players just behave like they would. This is generally a decent guideline, because the first few characters you will make will probobly be exactly like what you would want to be if you were thrust into a high-fantasy renessance setting. If you are trying to be someone different, I would suggest picking a world view to go from, and a general level of 'outgoing-ness.' For example, if you decide to play a neutral-good ranger, you would do everything in your power to hinder evil and help the good. If you chose to be somewhat meek with regard to your outging-ness, you would likely not jump up to leadership positions, and would make suggestion only after much thought. You would likely be encouraging to most ideas. This character could be a young, nature loving defender of the forest. Another example may include a CG, take-charge battle sorcerer. This character would likely focus on killing evil, and may act before thinking at times. He would have no problems taking a leadership role, and would be quick to give 'advice' to party members. He might like fire. I have found the two best character building questions you can ask about your character are: 1. Who is the players family? 2. What in this characters early life inspired him or her to become a(n) X, where is the characters class. Other good questions are: How did this character learn to be an X, and what affect has this experience had on this character with regard to their view of other classes? (Do they dislike the lack of discipline in sorcerers, or does he disdain the regiment of the paladin?) What was the single most improtant event in this character life prior to becoming an adventurer? Questions like these help you to understand the 'why' of your character, instead of just the how (the how are all those numbers all over the books and your character sheet).
Shano1919 03-18-05, 11:29 PM	Thanx alot guyz ive really got alot of good advice and im gonna put it to use. after the game i just played we had a few disputes about my improved ranger but it all worked out for the best i guess. my character and the paladin still butt heads though lol
ehrin 03-19-05, 09:29 AM	it would not be unusual for a paladin and a ranger to butt heads... while both may have similar goals, the paths they take/believe in to get there are VERY different. The paladin probably believes the world should bend a bit to accomodate him, when needed, because that is the way things should be. Things would be better if everyone just did what they were supposed to do. Your ranger probably believes the paladin is a bit out of the reality loop, and needs to be more open and flexible. He is more structured, you are more loose. A ranger is a fine leader, if the party can be fluid and flexible. GO ahead and butt heads with the paladin, because in character, that's how you build a world.